Patients with severe ME/CFS need hope and expert multidisciplinary care, 2025, Miller et al

Me neither, but it could be more a WhatsApp group than a headquartered corporation.

 

Maybe they sell diplomas that you can slip in to a neuroplastic folder and attach to your CV.

And advertise jobs where: 'Applicants should have relevant neuroplastic qualifications'

 

Nina Steinkopf has pointed out a blatant lie in her recent blog post about this opinion piece:

They write:

14 is this:
Brurberg KG. Severe fatigue conditions and sensory deprivation—literature search. Folkehelseinstituttet (Norwegian Institute of Public Health). 2022.
https://www.fhi.no/publ/2022/alvorlige-utmattelsestilstander-og-sensorisk-deprivasjon/

As pointed out by Nina, this literature review did not find any articles that met the inclusion criteria. Therefore, they have not assessed any evidence. It is therefore dishonest to say that they did not find any evidence in favour of shielding, because by the same logic they also did not find that not shielding is safe.

An honest interpretation would be to say that a literature review did not find any articles about shielding that met the inclusion criteria.

It should also be noted that the NIPH has a history of using too strict or outright illogical inclusions criteria for their literature reviews, notably when they in early 2022 or late 2021 concluded that there were no studies on LC up until that point that could tell you something about the risk of sequelae caused by covid, so they treated it like it didn’t exist when they recommended that the lockdown should be stopped.

 

Or too lax, if it suited them, as in the Cochrane exercise review .

 

Good point. It’s biased in their favour.

 

Looking further. The Swiss study that found suicidality in pwME to be mostly caused by psychosomatic interpretations of the illness. Is quite seriously cited by Miller et al to support this sentence

Urgh the audacity.
And clearly they must have seen the suicidality part since it’s in the abstract…

 

I would be breaking the site rules if I said how this makes me feel.

Instead I'll just invite us all to imagine the state of Miller's reputation in a few years time if the science comes together as predicted...

 

It makes me honestly wonder if some part of their longheld beliefs is straight up malicious and they know it.

 

IMO that is a distinct possibility.

 

Very few intend to cause harm, but many are able to ignore the harm they cause even when they are aware of it.

 

The chilling thing is that statistically, in terms of the numbers of people with ASPD (sociopathy/psychopathy) in high flying fields, there may well be a proportion of these researchers who know they are causing harm and do not give a toss.

 

I don’t doubt that some do, but I don’t think it’s most of them. And I have no idea if it’s any of the ME/CFS ones.

 

No it would certainly be a minority. But it's something that occurs to me sometimes when we see the callousness and dishonesty with which they take the deaths of ME patients and use them to further their arguments.

 

Has anyone else been contacted by Linked In? Mr B has just received the following which is gathering support. Why would Paul Garner be on linked in stating these views?

 

It’s barely getting any attention there, so I wouldn’t bother about it.

PG recently talked about how his way of dealing with «activists» is to continue talking. Apparently, he intends to do that through any available channel.

 

I never though I’d have a list with 10+ names in my head of researchers I wish every day would retire and spend more time with their grandchildren. (I know some of them are technically retired but I mean stop publishing things and speaking at every conference retire…)

But here we are.

 

We now have the concept of 'multidisciplinary people' as if these were some sort of 'magic people', as opposed to 'muggles', with wands. What on earth does Garner think he is taking about. He seems to be auditioning for a part in Woody Allen's much underrated film 'Zelig'.

Would a combination of a plumber, an astronaut and a historian of Persian literature count as 'multidisciplinary'. Presumably a competent academic physician and a specialist nurse would not.

 

Why wouldn't he be??? Doesn't he state these views on every platform??

 

I think the combination of gaslighter and babbler would count!