Binkie4
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
How could we deal better with the PR issue? The BPSers have the benefit of long time control of the narrative, they have people of influence ( or at least important sounding titles) that they can wheel out; they have a lot of doctors on side and doctors have a reputation of being “ a good thing”.
We have patients and add one word like “ militant”, and we are ignored. What we do have is the science. Maybe people just turn off when they read that. Is there a way we can make it more accessible, not just to knowledgeable patients but to those who are not so immersed in our story?
It seems that people only really engage with the science when they or a family member develop the disease. How can we change this? I post ME news on fb deliberately. I know there will be little response.
How can we make the issue about science?
Ok- wild idea but we need to start somewhere - is there any mechanism for putting in a formal complaint about the Maddox prize being won by Wessely? I am not expecting that we will get the decision overturned ( but I can always dream) but the debate would have to be about science and his scientific credentials.
Or the ethics issue- any mileage in that? Have these studies like Magenta been correctly approved. Unethical and children don’t sit well together.
How do we turn the debate to science?
We have patients and add one word like “ militant”, and we are ignored. What we do have is the science. Maybe people just turn off when they read that. Is there a way we can make it more accessible, not just to knowledgeable patients but to those who are not so immersed in our story?
It seems that people only really engage with the science when they or a family member develop the disease. How can we change this? I post ME news on fb deliberately. I know there will be little response.
How can we make the issue about science?
Ok- wild idea but we need to start somewhere - is there any mechanism for putting in a formal complaint about the Maddox prize being won by Wessely? I am not expecting that we will get the decision overturned ( but I can always dream) but the debate would have to be about science and his scientific credentials.
Or the ethics issue- any mileage in that? Have these studies like Magenta been correctly approved. Unethical and children don’t sit well together.
How do we turn the debate to science?