Search results

Thanks for letting me know. As I am new(ish) here I wasn't aware of the history between the two forums so sorry if all the talk of PR opened up some old wounds. If it helps I was planning on crediting members of this forum for any points made on PR used in the summary anyway (I didn't want...

Yes I was aware that most of the commenters on PR but it's not been discussed on here and when @Esther12 said I thought she meant it would be good to summarise the paper here on S4me. I take it I got the wrong end of the stick?

Excellent point, I wish I'd picked up on it! I'm working on a S4ME thread outlining the problems that PR found with the paper. It's taking a while to do though as they made a lot of valid criticisms of the research.

Thanks @Esther12 ! Look's like the good folks at PR have already critiqued the crap out of the paper! Initially I was interested in finding the paper to double check that Kelland (having already used a single clinical trial registry to imply the number of ME/CFS trials is declining) had not been...

That's embarrassing :oops:! I could have sworn it was new!

Thanks! Clearly I must not have read the amendment.

Just found the piece of research myself its this one: Specialist treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome/ME: a cohort study among adult patients in England Simon M Collin* and Esther Crawley

There is a new section that wasn't in the original piece I've quoted it below. Does anyone know which piece of research they are referring to in the passage?

Probably because that podcast about the Cochrane review was by the Guardian?

Small world.

Is it the author of that article the same Alix Spiegel who was responsible for the Invisibilia podcast?

I'm also sorry for being so harsh in my previous posts. My motivation was to prevent Wessley and co using the wording of the article against us but as I result I got overly focused on what could potentially go wrong that I forgot to mention the many strengths of the article. In particular I...

I'm just trying to be cautious. If they've never stated explicitly that CFS is a form of malingering then technically that bit of the article is inaccurate. If this week has shown us anything it is that the BPS lot fight dirty. I could see Sharpe tweeting that one section as evidence that 'my...

Good article but I'm a little concerned about the use of 'malingering' with respect to the BPS model of CFS/ME. ''Malingering' refers to the fabrication of an illness and though the BPS lot have accused us of mistaking normal bodily sensations for the signs of disease they have never (to my...

This the 'pathetic ego driven games' one: Considering it was a reply on a completely unrelated post by Wessely there's more credence to it being online abuse (it's certainly not mildly worded). But if this was (presumably) one of the worst 'attacks' on Wessely it doesn't say much for the...

Is this the MECFSnews tweet that was classed as abuse?

Thanks for the info! Although I ended up opting for Evernote's webclipping tool for simplicities sake (If it's on their cloud drive there will be some sort of record of when I took it and whether it's the original version). To be honest though so many people have screenshot and discussed the...

@Diane O'Leary I thought this thread/article might be of interest to you.

I think we would be more successful to challenge the factual basis of the articles that preceded Liddle's commentary rather than his column. I don't think the prejudice clause applies here as he's specifically talking about PwME that disagree with Sharpe and other scientists not PwME as a whole.

Anyone know how to archive tweets? I've already made a screenshot of Sharpe's tweet. I think it might be useful reference for any IPSO complaints people are planning. The tweet has already changed as Kate Stein has deleted her replies to Sharpe. Edit: Made a mess of embedding the tweet Edit 2...