Paul Garner on Long Covid and ME/CFS - BMJ articles and other media.

Last edited by a moderator:
Adam pwme said:
Paul Garner quoted in Guardian article by By Suzanne O'Sullivan

The number of people with chronic conditions is soaring. Are we less healthy than we used to be – or overdiagnosing illness?


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/mar/01/the-number-of-people-with-chronic-conditions-is-soaring-are-we-less-healthy-than-we-used-to-be-or-overdiagnosing-illness
Click to expand...

I listened to her audiobook 'It's All In Your Head' last year. Truly awful, and read by someone with the most snooty, patronising tone, which really fit the content. I could not finish it. More here: https://me-pedia.org/wiki/Suzanne_O'Sullivan
 
Adam pwme said:
Paul Garner quoted in Guardian article by By Suzanne O'Sullivan

The number of people with chronic conditions is soaring. Are we less healthy than we used to be – or overdiagnosing illness?


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/mar/01/the-number-of-people-with-chronic-conditions-is-soaring-are-we-less-healthy-than-we-used-to-be-or-overdiagnosing-illness
Click to expand...

"He didn’t doubt the virus had triggered the fatigue but felt he had later become caught in a vicious cycle of illness driven by his fear. Viruses cause fatigue in order to make people rest, which promotes recovery. But, in Garner’s case, his recovery had gone awry because he inadvertently conditioned his body to stay tired. Garner realised he had to retrain his brain to react differently to the fatigue if he was to get better."

Or it could be that it doesn't matter what you do, you recover naturally anyway, as Long Covid is often self limiting to two years but in other cases... isn't, and that judging people out of one's own fear is extremely unhelpful and, when done in public with the weight of one's position behind it, victim blaming and keeping them from getting research for the thing that is keeping them stuck and not getting well like you did.

The article, as far as I have got - it is very long - was interesting, as I have friend who is very vocal about "pathologising normal experiences" as I have ME, PTSD, depression and anxiety and am awaiting assessment for very late diagnoses of ADHD and Autism, so I am exactly who this article is talking about.

Or it could be that not being diagnosed as a child led to a cascade of life challenges that meant I have lived with depression all my life and ME is a massive burnout from that, along with medical events that almost killed me?

But sure, let's opt for the narrative that adds victim blaming and makes me feel bad about just not trying hard enough and looking for a label - instead of answers that will help me function, and makes people feel self satisfied about not researching stuff and helping people. Sigh.
 
The whole article seems to me to be based on self righteous judgemental attitudes held by people with the good fortune not to have to struggle with their society's misunderstanding of the wide range of human experience. And people mistaking their own interpretation of one person's experience as truth, applicable to all.

The Garner section in the middle seemed particularly odd, giving yet again a platform to one person's anecdote. I have no idea why his profession has any bearing on the status his anecdote is given. If he had been a carpenter or van driver would the media have given his story such credence and publicity? He might have rated a short piece in a local paper with space to fill, but surely not what must by now be hundreds of repetitions. I don't get it.
 
Trish said:
The whole article seems to me to be based on self righteous judgemental attitudes held by people with the good fortune not to have to struggle with their society's misunderstanding of the wide range of human experience. And people mistaking their own interpretation of one person's experience as truth, applicable to all.

The Garner section in the middle seemed particularly odd, giving yet again a platform to one person's anecdote. I have no idea why his profession has any bearing on the status his anecdote is given. If he had been a carpenter or van driver would the media have given his story such credence and publicity? He might have rated a short piece in a local paper with space to fill, but surely not what must by now be hundreds of repetitions. I don't get it.
Click to expand...
The way in which Garner finds the media every time makes me think there is some kind of publicist behind it. It almost seems like a campaign.
 
Trish said:
The whole article seems to me to be based on self righteous judgemental attitudes held by people with the good fortune not to have to struggle with their society's misunderstanding of the wide range of human experience. And people mistaking their own interpretation of one person's experience as truth, applicable to all.

The Garner section in the middle seemed particularly odd, giving yet again a platform to one person's anecdote. I have no idea why his profession has any bearing on the status his anecdote is given. If he had been a carpenter or van driver would the media have given his story such credence and publicity? He might have rated a short piece in a local paper with space to fill, but surely not what must by now be hundreds of repetitions. I don't get it.
Click to expand...

Very well said @Trish I found your comments incredibly validating..it is hard not wonder if it is me at this point - and I just need to try harder. Or maybe that's just conditioning..:whistle:
 
Chestnut tree said:
The way in which Garner finds the media every time makes me think there is some kind of publicist behind it. It almost seems like a campaign.
Click to expand...

Historically this movement has had connections across academia, academic journals, Health Services and the media, but no formal structure or budget, so they can influence reporting in the press and even highjack Cochrane decision making, but does a publicist imply financial and organisational resources they previously lacked?

There has been a concerted ‘BPS’ campaign since the latter stages of the NICE guideline rewrite, but much of it has been ineffective or even made its advocates look silly. Their take over of Cochrane however has been successful, though whether this will seriously undermine that organisation’s credibility or not remains to be seen, and as said above Garner has managed to very conspicuously repeat his personal anecdote largely unchallenged despite this being the antithesis of actual science.

The media can be lazy and rely on people they already use. A friend is one of the BBC’s preferred climate change commentators, not just because he is articulate but also because his academic base is convenient for a BBC studio so can often be called on at short notice. So it could be that Garner has just got his number into lots of journalists mobiles and now having retired from his full time post is generally available for comment, alternatively something more than this could be emerging.
 
Chestnut tree said:
The way in which Garner finds the media every time makes me think there is some kind of publicist behind it. It almost seems like a campaign.
Click to expand...

You only need campaign if you are in the minority, arguing against the status quo. This is something different, it is the groupthink of the majority amongst the chattering classes. Those promoting it, like editors, probably have no particular vested interest in the content, just in their shared membership of the thinkgroup (which brings in revenue).
 
Trish said:
If he had been a carpenter or van driver would the media have given his story such credence and publicity? He might have rated a short piece in a local paper with space to fill
Click to expand...

Maybe in the Top Tips in Viz comic. (Some examples of the genre on their BlueSky account)

ME/CFS patients. Avoid being sick for the rest of your life by getting better instead.
P. Garner, Liverpool​
 
SNT Gatchaman said:
Maybe in the Top Tips in Viz comic. (Some examples of the genre on their BlueSky account)

ME/CFS patients. Avoid being sick for the rest of your life by getting better instead.
P. Garner, Liverpool​
Click to expand...
This is epic!

I just assumed the Science Media Centre was behind it. Although Garner is very available for media especially as he’s retired, a “rent-a-gob” as it’s known.
 
Jonathan Edwards said:
You only need campaign if you are in the minority, arguing against the status quo. This is something different, it is the groupthink of the majority amongst the chattering classes. Those promoting it, like editors, probably have no particular vested interest in the content, just in their shared membership of the thinkgroup (which brings in revenue).
Click to expand...
Well, I agree about the groupthink. I am just disappointed that journalism is entertaining this so much these days.

To me good journalism is 1) gathering facts/research/ information and write an article on the facts found.

Less and less of that.
 
Chestnut tree said:
Well, I agree about the groupthink. I am just disappointed that journalism is entertaining this so much these days.

To me good journalism is 1) gathering facts/research/ information and write an article on the facts found.

Less and less of that.
Click to expand...
It isn’t journalism. It’s an extract from her book. Incidentally, if you enjoyed that extract you can support the Guardian buy buying a copy via their bookstore.

The Guardian isn’t a newspaper, it’s an advertising vehicle. Journalism only happens on the “news” pages, if at all.
 
Adam pwme said:
Paul Garner quoted in Guardian article by By Suzanne O'Sullivan

The number of people with chronic conditions is soaring. Are we less healthy than we used to be – or overdiagnosing illness?


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/mar/01/the-number-of-people-with-chronic-conditions-is-soaring-are-we-less-healthy-than-we-used-to-be-or-overdiagnosing-illness
Click to expand...
I tried to read it, but it's too meandering and unfocused. Which is ironic, given the prominence this chapter places on ADHD.

In the things I glimpsed, you really have to marvel at the complete lack of self-awareness of talking about 'overbiologizing' of illnesses by citing the "chemical imbalance" myth of depression, when it was explicitly invented by MDs because the psychological model of depression broke down because a lot of people were actually very happy in their lives.

I don't know what steps someone needs to take to have 30 years of experience in a profession and still be so bad at it. The mind boggles, and unfortunately there is no one able to study this, because it's the people who study the mind who are so completely lost in their own delusions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom