1. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 7th June 2021 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Contribute to feedback on the CDC Evidence Review, for more details click here
    Dismiss Notice

My conversation on twitter with cfs research and prof. Michael Sharpe

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Lou Corsius, Jun 13, 2018.

  1. Lou Corsius

    Lou Corsius Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    418
    Location:
    The Netherlands
  2. James

    James Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    685
    No serious answer from the Professor or his twitter troll ally at cfs research are they just searching for evidence of abusive patients when unable to substantiate claims made at the FOI tribunal.
     
  3. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,864
    Likes Received:
    46,615
    I think what they are achieving is a very good audit trail of some very competent questioning and critiques of their work, interspersed with some very shallow response from themselves.
     
  4. Invisible Woman

    Invisible Woman Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,319
    Likes Received:
    55,157
    Michael Sharpe:
    Poor science is poor science, Michael, regardless of the "results". There are criticisms of the way reports of harms were handled too.
     
  5. Matt (@DondochakkaB)

    Matt (@DondochakkaB) Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    374
    Bias, even if it existed in this case, is irrelevent to a certain extent.

    If you find an irrefutable technical flaw in a study, it is a flaw regardless of the motivation for doing so.

    Also if PACE found CBT+GET to be harmful, but significant numbers of patients were claiming to have recovered after treatment with CBT+GET and the reports of harm on patient surveys were minimal, then I can say with absolute certainty that a similar level of scrutiny would be applied as patients would be desperate for the NHS to support meaningful treatments.
     
    James, lycaena, Lou Corsius and 8 others like this.
  6. large donner

    large donner Guest

    Messages:
    1,214
    Likes Received:
    9,249

    He's missing the point here, they haven't released the true data for harms found. Also CBT was used as a brainwashing tool to illicit a required response. Namely "I'm better cos if I don't say I am I wont get better and wasn't ill anyway."
     
    Lou Corsius, Wonko, EzzieD and 9 others like this.
  7. TiredSam

    TiredSam Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    9,041
    Likes Received:
    44,460
    Location:
    Germany
    Well we don't often see Michael Sharpe shut up and back away, so that's an achievement in itself @Lou Corsius :thumbup:
     
  8. Luther Blissett

    Luther Blissett Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,678
    Likes Received:
    12,944
    Is there such a thing as a reverse Socratic method? :D
     
  9. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,864
    Likes Received:
    46,615
    I think it is generally known as "bullshit baffles brains".
     
    andypants and Luther Blissett like this.
  10. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,081
    Likes Received:
    33,090
    Whenever patients make mistakes in their criticisms of the PACE trial, I can look at these twitter accounts to cheer myself back up again.
     

Share This Page