Discussion in 'Health News and Research unrelated to ME/CFS' started by Sly Saint, Sep 8, 2018.
9. If it’s not evidence based it might as well be homeopathy.
20. We should aim not to “raise awareness” but to improve knowledge.
28. False promise increases with the opportunity for profit.
A problem is the BPS lot have made CBT GET superficially seem the only evidence based medicine for CFS
Now there's a sound bite if ever there was .
I really liked Margaret McCartney's column and have respect for her, she seems like a great GP, but sadly she at one time supported the bollocksology of BPS brigade & ME, she wrote a poorly informed article in FT some years ago, in 2008. I guess I was especially disappointed as she is a Glasgow doctor and I spent many years in Glasgow in 1980s/90s, studied there, was dxd there etc...
Her FT article in 2008:
Responses to her article from Neil Riley, Dr Shepherd of MEA - and 25% group::
Yes, I am afraid her list of calling outs looks pretty tame to me. And where it counts, off target.
In 2004 she was also promoting the biopsychosocial work stuff that came to be used by the DWP to justify all their cuts: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2004/nov/02/workandcareers.medicineandhealth
I'm sure I've also seen her posting silly stuff in relation to PACE/Wessely criticism on social media, but didn't find much on a quick search:
She also appeared on this edition of Inside health to talk about outcome switching with Carl Heneghan, Professor of Evidence Based Medicine at the University Oxford: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0901fr4
I wrote to Heneghan after the programme to ask if he had looked into the PACE trial. No reply. And no reply to my follow up. Perhaps @Brian Hughes would have more luck engaging him.
I think I decided against writing to McCartney after reading some of her views on ME/CFS. It’s a shame as she seems to talk a lot of sense in other areas.
[Edited to add link to programme]
Yes, I did try to engage with her - politely, of course - several times on Twitter, but never got a response, so can only think she has made up her mind. She also, I recall, did a radio prog with Edinburgh neuropsychiatrist Dr Carson, whose expertise is in functional disorders and who was also fan of PACE. i am not sure if he has changed his mind on PACE, we clashed on Twitter a long time ago and I don't engage with him any more, I find such exchanges too upsetting. He was I believe trained by Prof Sharpe, so not much one can say or do to change views and when you try you are labelled as militant.
Reminds me of Ben Goldacre - talks a lot of sense, but has a blindspot when it comes to ME/CFS.
from that article in the Independent (2012)
"Dr William Weir, a retired consultant physician,.., called the decision "almost satirical". "If the scientific data is properly examined it will be seen that Professor Wessely's doctrine is wrong and it will be proved to be wrong in about five years' time," he said.
spot on there.
Just spotted a strange quote in that article:
"Sir Ralph Kohn FRS of the Kohn Foundation, which contributed to the prize said: "This is such a well-deserved recognition of John's outstanding scientific work for many years and we are privileged to be associated with this initiative."
This has been noted before. Kohn was so familiar with 'John's' great work that he had forgotten his actual name.
Is this not a reference to John Maddox, since Wessely was joint recipient of the inaugural prize in 2012...?
'The Prize is a joint initiative of the science journal Nature, the Kohn Foundation, and the charity Sense about Science. The late Sir John Maddox, FRS, was editor of Nature for 22 years and a founding trustee of Sense about Science.'
My memory of the original text is that it seems to refer to Wessely. It may be simply that Kohn made a slip in confusing the two names. I don't think it is material.
Separate names with a comma.