Video: The PACE trial: a short explanation, Graham McPhee

Thanks again all.

Those are good quotes, but unfortunately far too long for a wall poster. I'll be rambling away in my usual manner while they flash up on the screen, so there can't be too much reading to them.

I could quote just this bit:

but who is it that said it?

Please don't put yourselves out on this. I wouldn't like you to wind yourselves up reading all these horrible quotes, only for me not to use most of them.

 

I couldn't find that quote. Anyone got a reference?

That quote is from Wessely in here: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...d passionate antipsychiatry rhetoric.&f=false

There's also a similar one here:

"Underneath the ME-CFIDS movement (and often on
the surface!) is a strong and passionate antipsychiatry
rhetoric. This rhetoric has not arisen as a result of the
interest shown by psychiatrists in the topic (few have
much knowledge of, or contact with, sufferers). The first
wave of publicity surrounding ME in this country already
showed the suspicion of psychological medicine
that would become its hallmark."

http://www.sjweh.fi/show_abstract.php?abstract_id=239

(I was just saying how I'm sure I remember Wessely self-plagiarises a lot, but I don't thikn that this is much of a problem).

 

That quote came from Chronic Fatigue and its Syndromes-Simon Wessely, Matthew Hotopf and Michael Sharpe @p324 chapter 15.2 Chronic fatigue and the fear of mental illness.

 

@Graham
you might find something suitable on this thread:
https://www.s4me.info/threads/simon-wessely-research-related-quotes.1304/

 

Quite amazing that Wessely can make this all about himself, as if he could not even imagine being wrong and that this opposition had to be irrational since it contradicts what he believes about himself, about being "too good" for psychiatry, which is something someone totally said to him for real.

Hubris is one hell of a drug.

 

I'm currently reading (and re-reading, and re-reading again) the Ciba Foundation Symposium 173 discussions. My original aim was to try to find useful quotes, but I'm realising that this is next to impossible because it is so difficult to summarise where I think these discussions are coming from. The frames of reference are so nebulous that it is hard to pin down any quote with a definitive meaning - you need the whole flow of the discourse to get a sense of it.

The problem with quotes per se is that each reader will take away something different, which is probably different again from what was originally meant (or intended). Which is why they are useful politically (if framed carefully - spun, maybe), and sometimes not so useful.