David Tuller: Trial By Error: My Letter To Fiona Godlee

[Kalliope]

My Letter to Fiona Godlee

Earlier today, I e-mailed the following letter to Fiona Godlee, the editor-in-chief at The BMJ and editorial director of BMJ. I cc’d the Health Research Authority, the CFS/ME Research Collaborative, NICE, Carol Monaghan, etc.

The subject line: BMJ’s failure to address problems with pediatric studies of ME/CFS

 

[Trish]

Excellent. More hard hitting and all the better for it - the time for polite restraint has passed. I'm glad @dave30th spelled out just what LP is this time. Maybe that will shock them into action.

 

[Peter T]

A great letter. Clear, fair, but pulling no punches.

The BMJ can not keep protecting Prof Crawley's scientific malpractice and the PACE apologists' old boy network indefinitely. There must be a point when the BMJ admits they got it wrong.

The BMJ is wholely owned by the BMA, could pressure be put on the BMA to encourage an adequate response?

 

[inox]

"So why are ME/CFS patients constantly accused of being anti-science and irrational and “vexatious” for not accepting findings produced by this kind of data-torturing? When it comes to this domain of research, it is clear to non-biased observers that it is the researchers themselves who are best compared to climate-change deniers, not the patients valiantly challenging their terrible science."

<3

 

[inox]

This bit, of all the things surronding these group of studies, is where I really lost hope in the establishments. It's right there, in the study - or really service evalutation - they went to schools and interviewed parents/children _not attending the clinic_ /flabbergasted

"Remarkably, in its presentation of the issue to the Committee on Publication Ethics, BMJ Open argued that one reason the study qualified as service evaluation was that it only involved anonymized data. Since this statement was clearly at odds with the methodology described in the paper, it created the impression BMJ Open editors had not even read the study they were aggressively defending."

 

[Amw66]

Given that NICE guideline review has highlighted children and the severely affected the timing of this is good. But will it have the desired effect?
For those that tweet effectively, drawing attention to this would be appreciated.

 

[Barry]

It really does make you wonder: What is the hold that the BPS brigade have over these people?

 

[Alvin]

It really does make you wonder: What is the hold that the BPS brigade have over these people?

That is a very important question
If we can figure this out conclusively we can adjust our strategy

 

[Barry]

That is a very important question
If we can figure this out conclusively we can adjust our strategy

It could also be a question with a very obscure answer.

 

[Alvin]

It could also be a question with a very obscure answer.

Thats ok

 

[Daisymay]

Wow! Absolutely love it, go Tuller!

"Really, Dr Godlee, enough is enough. It is time to stop stonewalling, acknowledge and address the issues with these papers, and make a clean breast of it—that is, if children’s health does in fact matter to BMJ. "

 

[Snowdrop]

It really does make you wonder: What is the hold that the BPS brigade have over these people?

I could have it entirely wrong because I'm just guessing here but I see it the other way round.
The BPS group are really just richly rewarded (for doing the dirty work or at least supervising it) handmaidens to people higher up the food chain. I don't really know the structural workings of the system but institutions like the BMA would then be their protectors and something more political calling the shots. Although I see some back and forth mutual advantages--SW had a dream-- a dream of putting psychiatry at the apex of medical care making it more relevant and more ubiquitous. His empire. This fit nicely with some political motives, people who know nothing of science and want sick people to go away. And want to stop having to make huge payouts/investment for anything health related.

That would put the BPS in a position where they are protected (to various degrees) but also on the line as the 'visible' face of the ideological attack on all things rational regarding illnesses of uncertain aeteology.

 

[Sly Saint]

love the comment (Lilpink ?) 'Waiting for Godlee'

 

[Sasha]

love the comment (Lilpink ?) 'Waiting for Godlee'

There's the title for your next blogpost, @dave30th.

 

[Barry]

There's the title for your next blogpost, @dave30th.

Not sure if the joke translates into Americanese, so just in case not, there is an expression re very elderly people "Waiting for God". There was also a popular comedy series of that name.

 

[Trish]

Or the play Waiting for Godot.

 

[chrisb]

I thought it was a reference to the theatre of the absurd.

 

[Barry]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/waitingforgod/

 

[Trish]

From my old friend, the internet:

Waiting for Godot is a play by Samuel Beckett, in which two characters, Vladimir (Didi) and Estragon (Gogo), wait for the arrival of someone named Godot who never arrives, and while waiting they engage in a variety of discussions and encounter three other characters.
Very little happens, and during their long wait the men talk about their lives. Godot never comes, and the play suggests that life has no meaning and is full of suffering.

Seems apt.

 

[Sasha]

Not sure if the joke translates into Americanese, so just in case not, there is an expression re very elderly people "Waiting for God". There was also a popular comedy series of that name.

I took it as a reference to 'Waiting for Godot', the Samuel Beckett play.