Henrik Vogt: IOM review panel biased by patient influence

What a strange person.

 

You are just getting a little taste of the truly absurd ME-debate in Norway. This is the level it's been at, for the last decade or so.

I wrote a rather gloomy post, and deleted it again, because I truly belive things are very, very slowly starting to change. The norwegian documentary shown on national television this summer, combined with Fluge and Mellas research, 50 mill nok to science projects - it's starting to help. Vogt and Landmark are not getting as many hearts/likes on their posts as they used to.

I understand this rhetoric seems laughable from the outside. But both the public and health care workers here have been primed for years by this sort of argument, combined with prejudice - and they've used to buy into it.

It would also be very wrong to think he (and the rest of this lot) haven't read the studies and papers they are commenting on, since the arguments seems almost absurdly disconnected from reality. They have - they are just very good at turning everything upside-down.

 

Edit: I'm sorry, not really sure why I replied to your post, if my answer seems totally unrelated


He has an interest in and is invested in MUS and theories around that, ME/CFS especially. Wrote a paper on “psychoneuroimmunology”, and seems to truly belive our minds are controlling our bodies and biochemistry.


A quote from his rather lengthy presentation at his university (the presention gives a good idea about where he's coming from) :

https://www.ntnu.edu/employees/henrik.vogt

 

That would be so COOL if I could control my entire body with my mind.I'd love to be a real magician. (Believe me, I really tried it.)
Sadly, reality chose to be different from what I told it to be.

Wow, what a fancy word. Sounds much better than BPS.
I am not surprised that there is a certain amount of people who listen to him.

 

His bio literally says history and philosophy of medicine. He literally does not recognize science when he looks at it. How can anyone be so bad at this?

 

https://twitter.com/user/status/1047780033769738241

 

Not sure he would use satire. more likely that he is "two stops short of Dagenham", as they say.

 

Henrik has really been vocal on twitter lately after the publication of the nanoneedle paper.

I thought I’d put his latest tweet here. Lets hope it will come back to bite him in the a** one day. But no doubt he’ll claim ignorance.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1123661540773724162


https://twitter.com/user/status/1123665894591406083


There are many more tweets all of which are offensive as usual.

 

I think poor Henrik has some unhelpful illness beliefs still.
I am not sure how sound Diane's arguments to authority are though!

 

For those not on twitter some more comments:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1123668785054011392


https://twitter.com/user/status/1123668155962933248


https://twitter.com/user/status/1123663147024494592


https://twitter.com/user/status/1123659685540847617


https://twitter.com/user/status/1123515989109481472

 

He's so bad at this. If his reasoning was the norm, peptic ulcers would still be treated as psychosomatic and very likely included in the MUS nonsense. The risks are not even close to be equivalent, one carries 100x the risk of the other, and we already know the consequences of discriminating against diseases, including this one, and they are completely disastrous.

He is arguing that if there is even a tiny, minuscule, chance that it could be an imaginary disease, then it must be assumed to be, which is frankly insane and utterly disqualifying for a medical professional. All based on personal anecdotes of misdiagnosed people. He has no understanding whatsoever of the consequences of discriminating against a severe disease.

Turns out the standards for becoming a medical doctor are actually shockingly low. Uh. That seems... less than ideal.

 

Twitter must feel great if you're trying to peddle bad reasoning. You just find other bad reasoning to match yours against and convince yourself that you're winning. Just make sure to avoid or block all the good arguments. The real trouble is when you look even sillier than the crap you're matching up against...

I think I'll avoid twitter. I'd rather get set back on track when talking nonsense...

 

This guy is worth a study alone. Outrageously angry, bullying all over the place, never ever addressing real concerns, just pushing pseudoscience. What is the pathology behind all this, one wonder?

I have empathy that he was so bad at managing his tinnitus, all the unhelpful beliefs and catastrophizing, but seems the struggle must have gone to his head in some mysterious way.

I really hope this guy don’t see patients at all. And thank God for not interacting on twitter. Must be hell to read all this nonsense.

 

It's normally not a good idea to feed trolls, but in this case it may be worth it just for the entertainment value, and to illustrate what we're up against. A competition seems to have broken out amongst the BPS crew to see who can make the biggest arse of themselves on social media.

 

Agree. He is both a journalist and a medical doctor and has many followers from those professions.
Usually he gets some support, but it's rather quiet now. I don't think any of his followers want to associate themselves with his aggression by liking and sharing. But I do hope they are reading. Thanks everyone who is meeting his tweets with reason and facts. He will never understand, but others might.

Edited for clarity.

 

Ideological dogma, a problem as old as humanity. It's old-style natural philosophy, from before the scientific method was mature, arguing from rhetoric and systems of belief rather than objective reality. Every field of science went through that phase, medicine simply hasn't left it yet.

 

Well, again it's only the mothers that intensify a child's symptons. But, yes, Vogt wrote "mothers/parents", that strictly includes the fathers, somewhere...maybe...

 

Which is completely unexpected. Everyone knows the normal behavior of mothers dealing with a sick child is to pay no attention to them whatsoever and let the law of the jungle take care of things. I mean, seriously, what kind of mother would be concerned by a sick, weakling child? We are Klingons, after all, we do not help the weak! Right? Wait, is that right?

Really amazing how "people reacting normally to bad things" is twisted as evidence of abnormal behavior simply because they don't understand what is happening at all.

I can just imagine Henrik going to a burning person and trying to reason them out of their state of panic rather than extinguishing the flames, because that would make them dependent on help, rather than taking responsibility for their state of burning, no matter the consequences.

If only those professional psychologists and psychiatrists had heard about fundamental attribution error. Oh, well.

 

The 'like' button was insufficient for how much i agree with this.

 

This dude clearly has a personal axe to grind. It would be interesting to hear the backstory. My money is on the mother. He is over invested in his hypothesis and way too emotional and rage-filled to be a disciplined thinker. He should not be involved in this field whatsoever.