The Guardian's Science Weekly podcast - 2 November 2018 - What role should the public play in science?

From the podcast comments section

I supppose someone had to bring it up

 

Yeah, I saw that too. But Comments are closed now.

 

Hi @fivetowns, welcome to the forum

 

Sharpe posting under a false name?

(from the Guardian podcast comments section)

 

Fairly bizarre. Perhaps it would have been worth interviewing the man from Cochrane who sent the email in the first place and said 'this is not about patient pressure'.

 

Don't think so. Here's a link to their comment profile: https://profile.theguardian.com/user/id/16774495?page=1

 

Not enough typos to be Sharpe but definitely someone close to them. It takes a special kind of shamelessness and conflict of interest to argue that it is the patients causing harm to patients by working to retract harmful guidelines that have no objective evidence. Not sure what those false allegations and abusive comments are supposed to be, but to leave them implied without citing anything shows this was not in good faith.

 

My feeling is Sharpe has no problem with using his name for comments.

 

Reads more like everyone's favourite concern troll from twitter.

 

Maybe he misspelled his name.

 

Of course it is, just the same as it is legitimate for the PACE proponents to refute such claims with solid scientific debate, which they do not because they cannot.

Good reporting never excludes interviewing people from an opposing viewpoint for such reasons! Attempts to suppress such reporting, by whatever means, says much about those who seek to do it.

All reasonable people, with or without ME, must surely be able to see through this rubbish.

 

Early morning waking so at least got to see ISS! Didn't want to wake OH at 5am so catching up on Twitter and came across this:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1059100820908752902


So I just had to reply, I usually manage to reduce information to farce...

https://twitter.com/user/status/1059700393960226816

 

Was just reading a Guardian article from link posted on another thread and at the end of it (usually there is a paragraph asking people to subscribe) it now says:

"Thanks to all the readers who have supported our independent, investigative journalism through contributions, membership or subscriptions, we are overcoming the perilous financial situation we faced."

"Sustained support from our readers enables us to continue pursuing difficult stories in challenging times of political upheaval, when factual reporting has never been more critical.

The Guardian is editorially independent – our journalism is free from commercial bias and not influenced by billionaire owners, politicians or shareholders. No one edits our editor.
No one steers our opinion. This is important because it enables us to give a voice to the voiceless, challenge the powerful and hold them to account. Readers’ support means we can continue bringing The Guardian’s independent journalism to the world."

really?

 

I am afraid with the new editor any pretence of independent investigative work has gone from the Guardian.

 

https://twitter.com/user/status/1059712952507531264

 

A good interviewer will also ask the difficult questions rather than ask question after question that sets up the next bit of propaganda from the interviewees.

 

Prof Sharpe has just deleted his tweet where he said ME patients are surely too ill to produce so many complaints and FOI requests. So now in the many replies, his tweet is missing. A few folks had already screenshotted it, though, such as:
https://twitter.com/user/status/1058820931655737344


And also such as Lucibee's post #77 earlier in this thread https://www.s4me.info/threads/the-g...ublic-play-in-science.6474/page-4#post-118253.

Oops, cover-up attempt not entirely successful!

 

I don’t know if it’s been mentioned but the lady dr Kimberly interviewed is tweeting that she’s trying to get a research project off the ground with trudie Chalder and Rona Morris so right in the thick of CFS researchers with a huge interest in defending PACE and behavioral treatments

 

Hubris breeds contempt.

Contempt only works as long as the target population remains vilified.

Once people understand how severe and disabling this disease, such public displays of contempt will be ridiculously damning. They managed to control the messaging for 2 decades but reality has a way of asserting itself. Often too late, but they are going way too far with the vilification. There is just too much public record that nothing they say about us is true.

Makes me think of Trump and his campaign to create fear and discord out of a small village of refugees weeks away. Punching down is always very ugly to watch when it is laid bare.

 

I read Sharpe's tweet about patients being too ill to do FOIs etc, as a sly way of suggesting that they cant be that ill if they're going to all this trouble - a la Rod Liddle. We need to be careful that we dont play into it.
The unaware will not understand that a bedbound person spending an hr a day on the internet is only able to do that because they do it in 5-10 min chunks spread throughout the day & not only is it ALL they are able to do, but likely sacrifice having a wash (for example) to do so, because it is one way of feeling less hopeless in the face of suffering & powerlessness & therefore worth the sacrifice. He knows perfectly well that many of the online protesting patients are bedbound & would like to draw attention to it if you ask me - as a way to suggest that they not as ill as they say.
But the thing is that a person equivalently ill with an organically understood condition would have no need to fight, they are well looked after &relatively speaking entirely safe within the healthcare system.... so they have the luxury of being able to spend their limited energies on more enjoyable things that arguing/fighting against the BPS BS juggernaut, because it isnt crushing them
.