Search results

  1. A

    Trial By Error: My First Post on the IAPT Program / David Tuller

    You've been very kind to retweet/like my tweets regarding this on Twitter. I feel very strongly about this. I would be astonished if at least one person has not already died as a result of them being seen as an MUS 'type'. This is so going to court.
  2. A

    Forward-ME Group Minutes – 17th July 2018

    Unless Forward can find some sort of propaganda advantage to attempting to meet the SMC (being diplomatic, making them look unreasonable and biased) I wouldn't touch them with a 20ft medicated barge pole belonging to someone else. The SMC have an agenda (to use the cliche) so there's no chance...
  3. A

    Forward-ME Group Minutes – 17th July 2018

    Forward ME was a group which was set up, in no small way, to cut out the 'hoi polloi' attending the APPGs at the time (I was one of the 'proles' turning up to those APPGs back then). Mar, despite her glowing credentials in the field of ME advocacy, does have a tendency to attempt to have her own...
  4. A

    David Tuller: Trial By Error: The CFS/ME Research Collaborative Conference

    Ira Madan attended an ME APPG about a decade ago and she was singularly the worst person I saw in my four years of attending them. And I saw Crawley twice in that time.
  5. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    QMUL themselves, more or less, back up what the MRC told me. More or less: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/funding_of_pace_trial#outgoing-820271 QMUL state the nearly £2.8m (which tallies with what the MRC say) that QMUL received but don't tell us what the CSO and DWP gave. That's...
  6. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    How do you explain this from the MRC FoI reply: "The total funding amount provided by the MRC to QMUL to support the PACE Trial was £2,779,361. This included the contributions from the Department for Work and Pensions (£90k), Department of Health (£134k), National Institute for Health Research...
  7. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    It says to me that various organisations gave money to the MRC/pooled money with the MRC (including the DWP) which was then given to QMUL. The FoI answer clearly states that monies were added to the MRC contribution - not given separately. I'll quote from my email correspondence with the CSO...
  8. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    It's not correct. He's separated DWP and CSO funds from the MRC total but kept the MRC total. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mrc_funding_of_the_pace_trial#incoming-1134199
  9. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    The MRC money included other funds that you have quoted (DWP, CSO, DOH). That information is out there. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mrc_funding_of_the_pace_trial#incoming-1134199
  10. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    Sorry, I'm still not going with it.
  11. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    I'm still not a fan of quoting it *without* some sort of 'health warning'. Even (as far as I know) QMUL don't quote it on their own website. Until it's absolutely verified I'm not going to say '£5m PACE trial'.
  12. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    Yes. My guess is that the sum is either side of £5m but NOT £5m. I may be being pedantic but it is bugging me and we shouldn't necessarily assume that the funding is completely beyond questioning. The lack of transparency here is not giving me confidence, given the PACE results and QMUL's...
  13. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    I honestly don't know where the '£5m' came from but it's reported everywhere without question, even by critics of PACE; I even fell into that trap. However I'm now more cautious. Objectively why should we not question the sum (and who contributed to it) when we have evidence that the results...
  14. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    In that case if the figure was made public by the PACE researchers some time ago it may *possibly* still be available in an archive somewhere. Either way this issue will not disappear. It may just be best to 'come clean' as the momentum is now very much with the PACE critics in general.
  15. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    Personally I'm not entirely convinced that the frequently-quoted figure of '£5m' is the actual figure. At best I think the figure is a round-up/down of the actual figure and given that the results from the trial are highly controversial, I would not take £5m as a total without viewing it with at...
  16. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    My gut feeling is that the DWP contributed £90,000 and no more. I may, of course, be wrong but I see no real evidence to suggest that they contributed any more than that. There however remains a fair old question mark over the Department of Health and, obviously, QMUL. I would find it hard to...
  17. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    £90,000. Answer was given in 2004, if I remember correctly. <Checks notes>. Ah, here we are....Lord McKenzie of Luton, 24th March 2010: "A sum of £90,000, authorised by the Department for Work and Pensions, was made available as a contribution from the department to the PACE study. It has not...
  18. A

    A series of PACE funding FoI requests

    I've submitted a new request/enquiry regarding the trial funding: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/funding_of_pace_trial#followup
  19. A

    Epigram: Senior Bristol researcher resigns after admitting to research misconduct

    Merged thread The @BristolCMM account on Twitter is currently quite interesting, if anyone may care to have a look....
  20. A

    Were historic 'ME' outbreaks really ME?

    Given that the term 'Myalgic Encephalomyelitis' comes from the RFH in 55 (I've simplified it somewhat) any diagnostic criteria should really come from that. I understand that it's slightly more complicated than that. Obviously certain nameless people subsequently adulterated all that. Just to...
Back
Top Bottom