Michael Sharpe skewered by @JohntheJack on Twitter

The context, as supplied by Sharpe, suggests that he is so convinced of the accuracy and veracity of what was written in the PACE paper, and so upset about the allegations of misconduct, that he thinks Carol M is telling porkies to MPs.

At what point will it occur to him that maybe he doesn't understand his own field of research?
 
Last edited:
Oh dear how dare anyone be critical of scientific studies and scientists? Doh!!!

Technically speaking PACE isn't a scientific study anyway it just a jumbled up mess of nonsense with more moving of goalposts than the Scottish football fans attending a match against England at Wembley.scottish goalposts moving.jpg
 
Last edited:
Stewart said:
..."using parliamentary privilege so that they cant respond."

Of course they can respond! He's responding right there with that tweet! The only thing parliamentary privilege prevents him from doing is taking legal action against an MP for slander. But as he's failed so far to demonstrate how he - or any other scientist - was slandered during yesterday's debate, I fail to see how he's been disadvantaged in any way.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the 'can't respond' thing at all either. We've been pushing them to respond for years.


TiredSam said:
Cheshire said:
Click to expand...


Now this is interesting. As well as his "have you really read it?" meme, he also has a "are you really a scientist?" meme. Both just name calling, but interesting.
Click to expand...


This tweet has disappeared now. Anyone got a copy of it?
 
Last edited:
I can honestly say, I don't know what happens next here. These psychiatrists have had the freedom to lead on this disease without accountability for decades. They're used to having access to power and the ear of the media. Working amongst colleagues of a like mind and with the favour of institutions, it's easy to see how they have thrived for such a long time. If Sharpe has a conscience and (strangely) I suspect he does, the weight of reversing his opinion is so potentially damaging to his mental health, that it has become inconceivable.

It has become something of an anthropological curiousity at this point.

I think the Lancet is likely to make some sort of move first. Surely it must smell the foul air after thursday's debate. Wouldn't be the worst gesture to offer to publish Wilshire et al's paper.
 
Sharpe said:
I don't know where 'false illness beliefs' come from. And that is different from unhelpful but accurate activity limiting beliefs of fear of making symptoms worse - as in chronic pain.
Click to expand...
In my experience, up til now, all pain got worse because of activity; I simply ignored it as long as possible to a point where I couldn't anymore, and then, actually, it was too late, i.e. the damage was done and irreversible.

Pretty stupid by the way! Tell a professional athlete to ignore his pain due to injuries; it won't be long and he's no professional athlete anymore. How could one ever believe the "ignore the symptons, they are not meaningful" crap? I can't believe I did somewhere in my life, thinking about it.
 
Nasim Marie Jafry said:
Yes, but PACE was just the distillation of years of Wessely-fuelled ignorance re GET/CBT and unhelpful illness beliefs...
Click to expand...
True!

Skycloud said:
To be fair to Sharpe not all of our problems and the lack of medical research can be blamed on PACE, but PACE and the ideas behind it have been extremely convenient for governments and other insitutions shirking their responsibilities
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is it wouldn't have been (or still be) be nearly so damaging if establishment institutions hadn't failed in their oversight, or colluded with and empowered that model and the Wessely group. It suited them, still does, I should think, until they are shamed out of it. For insurance companies and successive governments it was a gift for their policies. They are culpable for the harm too and they still have the power. BPSers, especially Wessely, have been enabled to have international reach in more than one sector, rather than left as comparatively lowly clinicians, because they had the right idea at the right time, with a veneer of authority, to suit the powers that be. (Not meant to slight clinicians!)

I was referring to PACE and Sharpe as a focus for that point.

eta - probably too off topic
 
Last edited:
I'm about 20 pages behind, but if anyone is interested, putting

from:profmsharpe since:2018-01-01 until:2018-06-22

into the twitter search should bring up tweets from this year for browsing through. Dates can be changed as wanted.

you can add keywords like "trial" to the search to narrow down areas of interest.
 
Lucibee said:
Any legal experts out there?

Sharpe keeps harping on about the context of his accusation to Carol Monaghan. But surely, any accusation of an MP's behaviour being "unbecoming" to their position (ie, that she is "unfit" to be an MP) is in itself libellous, whatever the context? I guess it depends whether the statement was conditional - but he needs to tread very carefully here.
Click to expand...
Not an expert in this realm, and I've never studied English law, however our system in the US is based on English law. The foundation of any defamation action is that the statements were false. Therefore, if the statements are true, there is no defamation. It seems to me, CM was only reiterating what MS had actually stated. I don't see privilege on the grounds it was in letter form between two parties...that is not a de facto source of privilege as far as I'm aware.
 
I've tried to extract all his tweets from 01 Jan 2018, and it collected up to 30 Apr 2018. I've run up against the limit of server requests (i think).

Anyway, it's attached in .txt format.

Pros:
  • text searchable
  • contains twitter 'id's'
  • contains every tweet (i think)
  • better results than using the twitter site search function
Cons:
  • contains lots of Michael Sharpe
  • not the best format, but semi-readale. (Not for people who find blocks of text troublesome)
To find the matching tweet, add the 'id' after status/ in either this format

twitter.com/anyuser/status/

or after his status/ when you are on his twitter page.

In the brainfog this caused, I've managed to loose the script I used, so sorry :(
 

Attachments

SallyC said:
Can you imagine if we had a situation like the David Irving/Deborah Lipstadt trial, where he ruined himself in public trying to deal with his ego?

I wouldn't want Carol, (she's now a saint in my eyes), to have to go through something like that but to see him twist himself in knots trying to explain why he is right in public would be great.
Click to expand...
MS and co have been shouting down PwME and their advocates, with their bullying, coercive, mind trick ways. When now trying the same tactics on a very potent, high-integrity politician, MS completely overlooks a very simple fact: For politicians, dealing with such behaviours is all part of a day's work for them, it's part of the job spec, and part of what they do the job for. They get a buzz from dealing with people like him, and they are very good at it. Quite simply, he has started picking on the wrong people, and especially on the wrong person - Carol Monaghan. One day I'd love to see Esther Crawley in this mix.

Edit: Realise I've been spelling Carol Monaghan's name wrong :oops:.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom