2021 John Maddox Prize, nominations are open until 14th June 2021

[Andy]

Nominations for the 2021 John Maddox Prize are open until 14 June. Find out more about how to make your nomination.

The John Maddox prize is a joint initiative of the charity Sense about Science and the leading international scientific journal Nature. The Prize has been awarded annually since 2012 to researchers who have shown great courage and integrity in standing up for science and scientific reasoning against fierce opposition and hostility. Each year there is one or two winners, and an additional prize for an early career researcher.

The prize brings into the spotlight the difficulty faced by many who fight to share the results of research evidence, and inspires and encourages people the world over to do the same. In 2019 there were over 200 nominations from 38 countries.

https://senseaboutscience.org/john-maddox-prize/

 

[Andy]

I'm tempted to place a bet on Trisha Greenhalgh winning this, given she is friends with the right people and has cast valid criticisms of her work and inaccurate statements on ME as abuse.

 

[Trish]

The prize became a joke when it was given to Wessely.

 

[NelliePledge]

Should be Caroline W and Tom

 

[Kitty]

Or Brian Hughes

 

[Robert 1973]

The prize became a joke when it was given to Wessely.

I sent the following letter to Nature last year but it wasn’t published and they stuck to their policy of not entering into discussion about letters submitted for publication, despite my best efforts.

Letter for publication in Nature Correspondence:

I congratulate Dr Anthony Fauci and Prof Salim Adbool Karim for winning the 2020 John Maddox Prize, awarded by Nature and Sense About Science [1]. However, if Nature wishes to reward those who show “great courage and integrity in standing up for science and scientific reasoning against fierce opposition and hostility,” it would be well advised to acknowledge the mistake it made in 2012 when the prize was awarded to a psychiatrist who developed the now discredited cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) models of ME/CFS [2].

Five years later, the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) dropped CBT and GET as recommended treatments after re-examining the evidence [3]. This year, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published its draft revised Guideline for ME/CFS, which specifically warns against the use of GET and CBT as treatments [4]. As part of its review, NICE commissioned independent experts to assess the quality of 236 outcomes of trials of GET and CBT for ME/CFS. In a damning indictment of thirty years of so-called “biopsychosocial” research, 205 outcomes were graded “very low quality,” and all the rest were graded “low quality” [5].

In 2012, Nature misportrayed those who challenged the quality of GET/CBT research as an extreme, anti-scientific minority. Those critics, many of whom were ME/CFS patients, showed extreme courage and integrity in standing up for science against the muddled and unhelpful thinking of the medical establishment, often at great risk and cost to their health [see, for example 6].

Thankfully, in recent years Nature has been far more helpful in its coverage of ME/CFS [see, for example 7, 8]. As someone who has been severely disabled by ME/CFS for nearly thirty years, I sincerely hope that you will set an example to others by correcting the record and apologising to those who have been wronged.

Robert Saunders

References:

1. Springer Nature (2020) https://group.springernature.com/gp...-of-john-maddox-prize-2020-announced/18672716

2. Nature 491, 160 (2012) https://www.nature.com/news/john-maddox-prize-1.11750

3. ME Association, (2017) https://meassociation.org.uk/2017/0...ecommended-treatments-for-mecfs-11-july-2017/

4. NICE draft guideline for ME/CFS (2020) https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/GID-NG10091/documents/draft-guideline

5. NICE consultation documents for ME/CFS diagnosis and management. Evidence review G: non-pharmacological management (2020): https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/GID-NG10091/documents/evidence-review-7

6. Virology blog (2018): https://www.virology.ws/2020/04/09/trial-by-error-my-visits-with-alem-matthees-reprise/

7. Nature 553, 14-17 (2018) doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-017-08965-0

8. Sci Rep 10, 19620 (2020): https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-76438-y
[/quote]

 

[Sly Saint]

The prize became a joke when it was given to Wessely.

and a few years ago Crawley was commended
https://www.s4me.info/threads/esther-crawley-gets-commendation-at-2017-maddox-prize-awards.1332/

 

[TiredSam]

I like to think of the John Maddox Prize as a satirical annual ceremony on a par with the Golden Raspberry Awards.

 

[rvallee]

I like to think of the John Maddox Prize as a satirical annual ceremony on a par with the Golden Raspberry Awards.

The day they gave that award to Wessely made the award as meaningless as the day the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Kissinger. Clearly more of a celebrity thing, zero to do with science.

 

[Sean]

John Maddox would be turning in his grave at what was being done in his name.