Michael Sharpe skewered by @JohntheJack on Twitter

large donner said:
FOR GODS SAKE MAN READ THE PAPER!!
Click to expand...

I hereby nominate @large donner to take over Sharpe's twitter account in the event of Michael falling ill, taking a holiday or being accosted (allegedly) by a woman with a fruit-preparation implement.

As the quoted post demonstrates, large donner has comprehensively grasped the intricacies of Sharpe's main arguments (sic) and is capable of delivering them in a more entertaining and persuasive manner than the man himself.
 
Last edited:
Something interesting in my book=

When the patients were “Crazy militants” they paid articles and the news papers, did the dirty work. For each bad article ME community had about PACE, 5 “good” would come out! They were on top Of it( as if they paid or had friends in line for this crap).
But lately they Are doffending their own work, and I ahve not seen so much news papers articles praising it after something comes about ME. What has changed? Or is it just my perception?
 
Seven said:
What has changed?
Click to expand...

The ICO vs QMUL ruling debunked the crazy militant story.

Various articles in science journals debunked the PACE claims and vindicated patient concerns.

The journalists seem to now understand that the Science Media Center is an unreliable source of information on the topic.

The IOM report may have played a role as well in giving credibility to patients that say it's a serious systemic illness, not a psychiatric disorder involvng false illness beliefs.
 
Carolyn Wilshire said:
We submitted an earlier version of this paper to BMJ. It did not include as much reanalysis detail, it mainly focused on the recovery data and the arguments concerning the interpretation of subjective measures in non-blinded trials. The authors were myself, Tom Kindlon, Robert Courtney, Keith Geraghty, and Alem Matthees.

We had two reviewers, one reviewer recommended publication, describing our piece as a "very well-written and incisive analysis" and made some useful minor suggestions. The other reviewer, who is a Scottish psychiatrist that has previously coauthored publications with the Sharpe/White/Wessely group, was (unsurprisingly) very critical, and pretended that he wanted to see a paper this bad being made available publicly so he and his cronies could fully criticise it! It is worth reading the full rant, to really appreciate what passes for peer review at this journal. I would add that bits and pieces from this diatribe were quoted by the editor as justifications for rejecting the paper. What a shabby excuse for a journal.

Here is the full diatribe:
Click to expand...

As he is someone employed by the Priory group to provide CBT for ME, I hope he declared his interest.
 
Stewart said:
I hereby nominate @large donner to take over Sharpe's twitter account in the event of Michael falling ill, taking a holiday or being accosted (allegedly) by a woman with a fruit-preparation implement.
Click to expand...

I'd forgotten this:
This produced furious attacks on the scientists involved, including Michael Sharpe, professor of psychological medicine at Oxford University. He had already been stalked by one woman who was subsequently found to be carrying a knife at one of his lectures.
Click to expand...
What the article doesn't mention is that it was a paring knife for cutting up her apple wasn't it?

This part of the article is also intriguing:

Crawley has spent years trying to unravel the causes, but her refusal to accept that the condition is a result only of organic external factors has resulted in her being deluged with hate mail from extremists. "You evil bastards … time is running out for you so you have [sic] better start denouncing your flawed inhumane therapy and pray to God for forgiveness," said one.
Click to expand...

"... pray to God for fogiveness" rings a bell somewhere, ... surely not ...
 
TiredSam said:
I'd forgotten this:

What the article doesn't mention is that it was a paring knife for cutting up her apple wasn't it?
Click to expand...

I was extremely disappointed that Trudie Chalder didn't cite this incident when she gave evidence to the Information Tribunal.

"Have you, or your fellow PACE authors, ever been threatened as a result of your work?"

"Well... on one occasion someone peeled an apple in front of Michael Sharpe. Does that count?"
 
Esther12 said:
I don't think that anyone knows the specifics, do they?
Click to expand...

There was an account given on Phoenix Rising by someone who knew the woman in question. She attended one of Sharpe's lectures and started to cut up an apple during the Q&A - at which point the event security got involved. They quickly realised that neither she nor the knife posed a threat though, and no action was taken against her.
 
Stewart said:
There was an account given on Phoenix Rising by someone who knew the woman in question. She attended one of Sharpe's lectures and started to cut up an apple during the Q&A - at which point the event security got involved. They quickly realised that neither she nor the knife posed a threat though, and no action was taken against her.
Click to expand...

Is that right? I remember seeing someone speculating that it could have just been an apple knife, but I don't remember anyone knowing. I could be having a memory failure, but it's always my instinct to be cautious with these things. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Sharpe had spun something utterly trivial like that.
 
Carolyn Wilshire said:
PS I know the reviewer's name, and have chosen not to disclose it, as I think its more powerful as it stands - a ridiculous non-scholarly diatribe by a Wessely crony. It is clear the man has no scholastic ability, but his belief in the righteousness of the BPS crew (of which he is a member) is genuine and unshakeable.

I found this entire enterprise very disheartening, not for me personally, or even for PwMEs (we expected rejection given BMJ's stance, but decided to give it a go), but because it was like the whole psychiatric profession suddenly had no clothes, nothing but the belief in their own authority and righteousness. The fact that we trust these people to care for, and make decisions about, some of the most vulnerable members of our society is chilling.
Click to expand...
A 'review' such as that gives a clear illustration of the relationship between psychiatry and science - extremely tenuous. Absolutely no substance whatsoever, but full on emotive grandstanding. A very good example of some psychiatrists' perception of science.
 
Esther12 said:
Is that right? I remember seeing someone speculating that it could have just been an apple knife, but I don't remember anyone knowing. I could be having a memory failure, but it's always my instinct to be cautious with these things. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Sharpe had spun something utterly trivial like that.
Click to expand...

If we're thinking about the same post - and we may not be - there was definitely someone who was pulled up for having an apple knife at one of Sharpe's speaking engagements. What the poster who gave the account couldn't say for certain was whether or not this is the incident Sharpe was referring to when he spoke to the Guardian.

My personal feeling is that it almost certainly was the same incident given that no other accounts have emerged over the years of anyone seeing a knife at one of Sharpe's lectures (and the fact that Sharpe has never mentioned it again suggests that it was more trivial than he initially claimed). But these are speculations on my part, and you're almost certainly right to emphasise caution when recounting an event that we can't verify satisfactorily. Especially if you're only doing so to make a joke at Sharpe's expense, as I was. Mea culpa.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom