Michael Sharpe on Radio 4 Today / Tom Feilden BBC (18th march 2019)

[Barry]

It's interesting to contrast his bristling at criticism with what Ron Davis said at the start of his presentation on the first day that he talked in Australia. I'm paraphrasing here because I failed to record it, but the gist was that it is the job of a scientist to get up everyday and try to prove his hypothesis wrong. That's what he does all day, everyday, until he can't think of any other ways to prove himself wrong. Only then does he entertain the notion that his hypothesis might be right.

I would imagine all good scientists adopt this approach in some form or other. If you don't look for the flaws in your own theories, how the hell are you going to find them, or accept flaws when other spot them? It actually says an awful lot about scientists who do not do that.

 

[dave30th]

Since he uses the word "campaign" 8 times in the course of one short interview, I wonder in how many other public forums he will vigorously speak out against... uh, "campaigning."

Kelland referred repeatedly in our exchanges to my "campaign." I told her it wasn't a "campaign" but an investigative journalism and public health project.

 

[Barry]

Kelland referred repeatedly in our exchanges to my "campaign." I told her it wasn't a "campaign" but an investigative journalism and public health project.

Not sure what is wrong with a campaign that seeks only to expose the truth anyway.

 

[Alvin]

Not sure what is wrong with a campaign that seeks only to expose the truth anyway.

It goes against the established order.
When fat was discovered not to be a villain in human health an entire industry turned against science because it had been built to profit off of the low fat mantra.

 

[rvallee]

It goes against the established order.
When fat was discovered not to be a villain in human health an entire industry turned against science because it had been built to profit off of the low fat mantra.

And vilifying fat happened by turning against science. It was shoddy sugar industry-funded research that promoted it. Next thing you know sugar was added to everything. Since then I have not heard of any interest in pushing for consequences on those who faked and promoted the research.

Bad science has consequences, rarely on those pushing it, however. Did any of the researchers publishing fake research for the tobacco industry get in trouble? Millions died because of this fake research and hardly any consequences. This all basically guarantees that bad science has an unfair advantage, as we painfully know. Enormous gains, hardly any punishment, if at all.

The case is pretty strong that the main motivator being the psychosocial model of ME was the insurance industry and DWP salivating at billions saved. And they sure did. It's good return on investment to sacrifice lives by fabricating a controversy. And we're punished again for pleading for sanity and ending this brutal nonsense.

 

[Sean]

It's interesting to contrast his bristling at criticism with what Ron Davis said at the start of his presentation on the first day that he talked in Australia. I'm paraphrasing here because I failed to record it, but the gist was that it is the job of a scientist to get up everyday and try to prove his hypothesis wrong. That's what he does all day, everyday, until he can't think of any other ways to prove himself wrong. Only then does he entertain the notion that his hypothesis might be right.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself – and you are the easiest person to fool."
Richard Feynman

 

[Sly Saint]

talk about making it up as you go along.......

have you read the paper? have you listened to the interview? have you seen my CV..............

 

[Andy]

talk about making it up as you go along.......

have you read the paper? have you listened to the interview? have you seen my CV..............

Used it before but here it comes again

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty Michael Sharpe said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

 

[chrisb]

There was a revealing article in today's copy of Private Eye for all you football lovers. It's alright. Don't give up yet. You're quite safe.

It concerned bribery allegations involving the 2022 World Cup finals and FIFA.

"....It detailed the work of PR lobbyists for the UAE, Qatar's sworn enemy, in planting material on the British media. The two outlets it cited as being the most susceptible were the BBC and....the Sunday Times."

I have already forgotten why that might be of interest.

 

[Roy S]

This is from the long list of tweets to the BBC.

 

[Alvin]

This is from the long list of tweets to the BBC.

Can someone please add this to MEPedia

 

[JemPD]

This is from the long list of tweets to the BBC.

clicking through to that thread of eskabaduGotME's makes quite good reading although i didnt manage any further down than this vid from Mark Vink which is amusing

 

[Arnie Pye]

clicking through to that thread of eskabaduGotME's makes quite good reading although i didnt manage any further down than this vid from Mark Vink which is amusing

I watched the video but I didn't get what it was supposed to be portraying. Explanations in words of one syllable, please.

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

I watched the video but I didn't get what it was supposed to be portraying. Explanations in words of one syllable, please.

The spoon didn't go back in the soup.

 

[Arnie Pye]

The spoon didn't go back in the soup.

Thanks.

 

[Sbag]

A good resumee re this issue, BBC coverage and media/ Sharpie and friends....

(Claire Fox) the sister of Fiona Fox, the SMC’s chief executive.




"Claire Fox @Fox_Claire
Brilliant interview with @profmsharpe this morning on @BBCr4today Depressing that it was due to the distortion and disruption of scientific research by a particular zealous cohort of intolerant, trolling campaigners (no doubt some of whom I am about to encounter)

BBC Radio 4 Today ✔ @BBCr4today
It's important that science "isn't bent by campaigning" says @profmsharpe. He has stopped his research on chronic fatigue syndrome because of online abuse from campaigners #r4today https://bbc.in/2TOEIcI "

BBC SMC handshttps://mrtopple.com/2019/03/18/the...C6gBC84Ji6xMBgXtuOmp0D7SOoVxQsyCpe_xqjYFOSCkQ

ME, Opinion Articles
The media is waging a coordinated war against chronically ill and disabled people

Posted on 19 Hours Ago by Steve Topple

Just following up the initial tweet to include some interesting responses. I seem to have gone tweeting mad today!

 

[rvallee]

Just following up the initial tweet to include some interesting responses. I seem to have gone tweeting mad today!

View attachment 6515

View attachment 6516

Notable that the substance of their response was not peer-reviewed, with the reviewer roughly saying "this is part of the discussion so I will allow it but I won't comment on the substance". And refusing the premise of criticism is not responding to criticism. Circular illogic, as always.

 

[Barry]

Never seem to twig that merely 'responding' does not cut it ... it's the substance of any response that matters.