Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Andy, Jun 11, 2018.
@dave30th is already providing great value for money. Well worth every penny!
I wonder if Bishop will respond. It pisses me off how she says so many good general things about the need to address problems with research, but then with CFS she ignores all the problems, and even helps White/Crawley's attempts to discredit their critics.
Thanks to David for all these.
I think that it's quite handy that these studies have quite 'simple' problems with them that can be focussed on in letters like this. Compared to PACE, this is more about a simple failure to follow quite clear rules.
I wonder if there's any benefit to cc'ing Groves? If not, could it work against us in anyway? I don't know, but just tend to be cautious with anything that could be taken out of context to seem like 'harassment' to the genteel members of the UK medical establishment.
I don’t think trying to argue it is harassment would work @Esther12 its pretty standard to copy people into a letter that refers to them. And TG would no doubt be asked for her perspective by most of these folks anyway before they decide how to reply to DT so will get copies that way.
I think not responding by any of them would be a bad move as it just makes them look complicit in a conspiracy. Most likely replies will be some kind of brief non response. Defensive batting is the hallmark of the establishment cricket style. If DT keeps bowling though he’s going to hit someone’s wicket over.
I have not gone into this in any great detail but was looking on the WHO ICTRP
Under trial registration orgs there is:
UK Research Integrity Office, Code of Practice for Research (3.7.13)
They have a get advice from tab with general contact info.
I noticed on the WHO site that the BMJ is on their list of publishers
don't know if these might provide other avenues for you to pursue(?)
Separate names with a comma.