Search results

  1. R

    Trial By Error: The Cost of MUS

    Thanks for looking this up. Important to remember that Bermingham et al. calculate the “somatisation-specific costs among working age population in England 2008-2009” as £2.892 billion. So when they say, “This represents approximately 10% of total NHS expenditure on these services for the...
  2. R

    Trial By Error: Professor Sharpe’s Retraction Requests

    I’ve now written to Mr Lamb via the STC to ask this question. I made this point in my email – that the problems with PACE are indicative of institutional failures, and that it is therefore unsatisfactory to rely on those institutions to determine whether the investigators have acted properly...
  3. R

    Trial By Error: Professor Sharpe’s Retraction Requests

    HRA letter to Lamb said: “We have reviewed the concerns about conflicts of interest that were raised with me at the Committee and have found that the declarations were consistent with the contemporary standards.” This reminded me of Fiona Watt’s letter to Jeremy Quin MP (to which Jonathan...
  4. R

    Trial By Error: Professor Sharpe’s Retraction Requests

    @dave30th Do you have any plans to write about your concerns with the HRA assessment and/or write to Norman Lamb to make him aware of those concerns?
  5. R

    Trial By Error: Re-visiting My Questions for PACE Professors

    Interestingly, SW said that he respected Steve Lubet, although, strangely, he didn’t appear to remember having read the article which he had commented on at length. I wonder if this tells us anything about how SW’s selective memory works: It is unclear whether Simon was disagreeing with...
  6. R

    Blog: Changing the narrative #1: exploring a new approach to strategic communications in the ME community, by Valerie Eliot Smith

    Last night I watched US House of Cards series 1, chapter 6. Ambitious congressman Francis “Frank” Underwood is under pressure from the US President to drop his education reform bill because the teachers strike has been going on too long. But Frank doesn’t want to lose face and is determined to...
  7. R

    'Consumer-Contested Evidence: Why the ME/CFS Exercise Dispute Matters So Much' PLOS Blog post by Hilda Bastian

    This could be interesting: From: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/making-science-reproducible-will-this-time-be-different-tickets-56168260780: Note that the event is at Kings College London. Another date for your diary @Jonathan Edwards?
  8. R

    Open letter to the Trustees and Staff of Action for ME about the 'Toolkit for professionals'

    Thank you for taking the time to listen and respond, Clare. As well as answering @Sasha’s important questions, please can you tell us: 1) Why do you believe that AfME keeps making these mistakes? Who is responsible? 2) What measures is AfME taking to ensure that these types of mistakes are...
  9. R

    UK Health Research Authority defends PACE. Answer to MP's question, February 2019.

    It was raised here in the thread about David’s blog on Steve Brine’s troubling claim in the parliamentary debate: https://www.s4me.info/threads/david-tuller-trial-by-error-steve-brines-troubling-claim-in-parliamentary-debate-on-me.7885/#post-139331
  10. R

    UK Health Research Authority defends PACE. Answer to MP's question, February 2019.

    Do we know what information participants were given before they gave their consent? Were they given details about all the treatments, and the theoretical models they were based on, before giving their consent? If so, presumably it would have been clear that the theories behind CBT and APT were...
  11. R

    UK Health Research Authority defends PACE. Answer to MP's question, February 2019.

    I think this is really important. Is anyone working on it? @dave30th? If not, I think we need to try to do this. The other thing I’m wondering is whether we have a right to see the evidence upon which the HRA based its assessment. (Note that it is not described as an inquiry or an...
  12. R

    UK Health Research Authority defends PACE. Answer to MP's question, February 2019.

    HRA only concluded (wrongly IMO) that there are no major concerns within its regulatory remit:
  13. R

    Blog: Changing the narrative #1: exploring a new approach to strategic communications in the ME community, by Valerie Eliot Smith

    Just sharing a comment that @dave30th posted on another thread which is relevant to this thread: (https://www.s4me.info/threads/trial-by-error-some-thoughts-about-an-upcoming-article.7944/page-7#post-140818) Further to my previous post, I would add that I am also very grateful to @Valerie...
  14. R

    Trial By Error: Some Thoughts About an Upcoming Article

    I was really meaning a more general complaint (perhaps to the RCPsych or the GMC) about the issues @Yvonne raised – ie, the unethical behaviour of publicising alleged threats and harassment.
  15. R

    Trial By Error: Some Thoughts About an Upcoming Article

    Isn’t this a good example of what you once referred to as a “circle jerk”? It occurs to me that had The Thing Were Are Not Discussing ever been made public, it would almost certainly have been less effective as propaganda. If keeping it private was a calculated decision, rather than a legal...
  16. R

    Trial By Error: Some Thoughts About an Upcoming Article

    Does anyone know if anyone has ever made a formal complaint about this? If not, is it worth considering, or would it be counterproductive at this stage?
  17. R

    Protocol: Persistent physical symptoms reduction intervention: a system change and evaluation (PRINCE), 2015 onwards, Chalder, Moss-Morris, et al

    Can someone please explain to me how this is classified as an RCT? A + B v A isn’t my understanding of a controlled trial.
  18. R

    Trial By Error: Some Thoughts About an Upcoming Article

    Worth remembering that Prof Chalder and many other authors of BPS studies are not medical doctors.
  19. R

    Trial By Error: Some Thoughts About an Upcoming Article

    When I first read this blog my heart sank. But on reflection I think it could turn out to be a real positive. What has been lacking for so long is public dialogue about the problems with the science - media coverage of the issues and public debate between academics with opposing views. If this...
Back
Top