Search results

Absolutely. I am sure this would not have happened without the Times article. Even the opening phrasing is similar, and the list of universities represented. Coverage generates coverage. This article in BMJ has now made it news not just in the general world but in the medical journal world...

@Lucibee this is very interesting, thanks for pulling the timeline together. Andrew Lloyd in Australia also did a 1993 study that showed no benefits for CBT. Later, of course, he changed his mind on that one.

I would love to have more MPs. I did a big second e-mail blast to them and didn't get any more, but personal appeals would likely be more effective. In terms of the Times publishing the full letter, I would guess they would feel they did their duty by running the article. But I'll check it out...

In re-reading it, I realize I should have made it clear up top that those recovery rates were post-hoc and really just bogus. As written, that's not clear till later down in the post.

Yes, Tom Whipple deserves credit for getting it into the paper.

yeah, I dislike that phrase. The PACE authors don't think that anyway. They genuinely believe people have bad symptoms. They have just insisted the symptoms come from deconditioning, not an underlying organic illness.

I'm not sure how much "worse" it gets. I think it's pretty bad to promote not only recovery rates but bogus recovery rates for an intervention that you're supposed to be testing.

Wow, I don't think I could take that much happiness and joy!

It shouldn't require any subscription.

Yes, it's one-of-a-kind, thanks to Anil! I don't wear it much because I don't want to wear it out. Only for appropriate occasions.

But I don't get that. Is that standard in COPE submissions? Why bother moving dates around by months here or there? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I mean, it certainly sounds like a similar case. But why would they bother to submit it to COPE at all?

I've written about the statement to COPE on the school absence study. I've also seen the COPE statement on the registration issue, and it does sound similar to the LP study. But the dates are off. Maybe they did that to disguise it? It would be excellent to have more groups from poorly...

Yes, of course they do. And I plan to write an open letter to MRC folks. But these enablers have already made it clear they think PACE was fine and done according to the appropriate standards of the time. They're all just engaged in self-protection. I'm hoping that at some point the weight of...

Hey no, I hadn't seen that. thanks for pointing me to it.

It would have been interesting to see Dr. Kahn-Harris take on denialism in the ME domain, since it's a kind of interesting dynamic--use of the accusation of denialism as an offensive weapon. The ones charging denialism are the anti-scientific denialists, who are the scientists themselves. But I...

Hi, just to be clear--I guess sharing the petition could be said to be "supporting" it, but I want to clarify that I'm not specifically endorsing it. It had garnered a fair amount of support and I thought it was newsworthy to share it, in light of the problems with the current situation.

I will believe what Fiona Godlee writes only after she addresses the obvious fraudulence of the SMILE trial and the serious ethical violations of the school absence study.

Thanks, that's not bad.

Hi, how would you have phrased this? I go back and forth on how much one should adjust language for people who are going to make bogus arguments no matter what the reality is.

I go back and forth on this. But not sending open letters and being deferential and polite hasn't worked...so it seems worth a try.