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

It's a UK thing!
The Waddell test in relation to pain assessment in personal injury claims

https://www.sleeblackwell.co.uk/legal-articles/waddell-test


https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/v/viewthread/15425/#72988
Information and advice resources - Age UK
7 January 2016

In preparing this paper we systematically went through the 2010 publication looking for the evidence that Waddell and Aylward used to underpin their claims and found many other examples where the citation seems to be inappropriate. For example, when Waddell and Aylward assert that the common health problems (low back pain, mental health, cardio-respiratory) are ‘often “nominal”, existing in name only, not real or actual, they are simply labels’ (2010, 7), they cite in support a review of ‘functional somatic syndromes’ by Barsky and Borus (1999). Yet the original paper discusses Gulf War Syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity, sick building syndrome, repetitive stress injury and chronic whiplash (Barsky and Borus, 1999, 910), which are mostly not the ‘common health problems’ under discussion.
 
Suffolkres said:
It's a UK thing!
The Waddell test in relation to pain assessment in personal injury claims

https://www.sleeblackwell.co.uk/legal-articles/waddell-test


https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/v/viewthread/15425/#72988
Information and advice resources - Age UK
7 January 2016

In preparing this paper we systematically went through the 2010 publication looking for the evidence that Waddell and Aylward used to underpin their claims and found many other examples where the citation seems to be inappropriate. For example, when Waddell and Aylward assert that the common health problems (low back pain, mental health, cardio-respiratory) are ‘often “nominal”, existing in name only, not real or actual, they are simply labels’ (2010, 7), they cite in support a review of ‘functional somatic syndromes’ by Barsky and Borus (1999). Yet the original paper discusses Gulf War Syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity, sick building syndrome, repetitive stress injury and chronic whiplash (Barsky and Borus, 1999, 910), which are mostly not the ‘common health problems’ under discussion.
Click to expand...
Such common chicanery of these people. Claiming evidence of one thing also counts as evidence for another, supported by nothing but supposition, prejudice and axe grinding.
 
Barry said:
Such common chicanery of these people. Claiming evidence of one thing also counts as evidence for another, supported by nothing but supposition, prejudice and axe grinding.
Click to expand...
All of which is common out there in the real world. People are whiny and petty all over.

The big question is how all of this is normal in medicine? Encouraged, even. Promoted, praised, rewarded, funded, beloved. Petty charlatans exist everywhere, only in politics, business and medicine are they richly rewarded for it.

How, of all places, is medicine on this list? And if people point out how broken it is, all it does is bring foaming at the mouth about how perfect and infallible it all is.
 
Could PG be held accountable in some way from the harm he is promoting on social media?

Just recently the Ontario's College of Physicians and Surgeons temporarily suspended a physician whose social media comments promoting misinformation during the pandemic landed him before a disciplinary committee.
He had 40,000 followers on Twitter and also had his Twitter account suspended.

I don't see this as any different from what PG is doing. He holds a level of responsibility in his position.
 
Last edited:
Mij said:
Could PG be held accountable in some way from the harm he is promoting on social media?

Just recently the Ontario's College of Physicians and Surgeons temporarily suspended a physician whose social media comments promoting misinformation during the pandemic landed him before a disciplinary committee.
He had 40,000 followers on Twitter and also had his Twitter account suspended.

I don't see this as any different from what PG is doing. He holds a level of responsibility in his position.
Click to expand...
As best as I can see, fault is almost always over compliance, harm doesn't actually factor into consideration. It's physicians who deviate from what they're told to do who get blamed, unrelated to the nature of what they're promoting. If complying is harmful, it can't be faulted. If not complying avoids harm, it's still at fault because it doesn't comply with the script.

So his advice to think happy thoughts and exercise, which is the paradigm the UK healthcare system recognizes, would be compliant. So even if it's harmful, as long as it complies with instructions it probably can't be considered harmful, as this would acknowledge the current paradigm, and what the NHS is doing, is harmful.

The main impact I have see of how "do no harm" is interpreted is simply: if we're doing it, it can't be harmful, because we don't do harm, therefore nothing we do is harmful.
 
Definitely not a recommendation:

From:
NeuroCOVID-19: a critical review
NeuroCOVID-19: uma revisão crítica
Bruno Fukelmann GUEDES
https://www.arquivosdeneuropsiquiat...s/2022/05/ANP-2022.S136-final-normalizado.pdf

[..]

Psychiatric syndromes showed a much less robust association with acute disease severity . A study by the HCFMUSP COVID-19 Study Group showed a composite of ‘mental and cognitive impairment’ was very common in hospitalized patients after six months, but was not related to baseline disease severity81. The partial dissociation between acute disease and neuropsychiatric symptoms suggests contextual psychological stressors play a major role. These include social isolation, confinement, post-traumatic stress, and regional characteristics, including a response to the striking neglect of the pandemic promoted by the Brazilian government84. This contrasts with fierce claims of universal organicity from journalists85 and patients online, as clearly demonstrated in an enlightening episode: in January 2021, Paul Garner, a professor of infectious diseases at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, reported his own experience in overcoming Long COVID. He emphasized the similarity between Long COVID and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), the role of self-help groups, refraining from seeking disease information on the internet, and “by retraining the bodily reactions with my conscious thoughts, feelings, and behaviour”86. The blog post and an accompanying tweet were met with intense discussion and overwhelmingly negative reactions from Long-COVID patients. One user wrote: “It’s a great shame that Prof Garner, who was a beacon in the early days of covid last Spring, when no-one of any note was validating the experience of ‘long covid’ sufferers, has chosen now to suggest it can all be cured by positive thinking”86. Several comments criticized Gardner’s comparison of Long-COVID and ME/CFS, frowning upon a possible suggestion of Long-COVID sharing the status of non-organic disease that many attribute to ME/CFS55. This explains why some skeptical doctors fear vilification as “medical gaslighters”87.
 
Dolphin said:
Definitely not a recommendation:

From:
NeuroCOVID-19: a critical review
NeuroCOVID-19: uma revisão crítica
Bruno Fukelmann GUEDES
https://www.arquivosdeneuropsiquiat...s/2022/05/ANP-2022.S136-final-normalizado.pdf

[..]

Psychiatric syndromes showed a much less robust association with acute disease severity . A study by the HCFMUSP COVID-19 Study Group showed a composite of ‘mental and cognitive impairment’ was very common in hospitalized patients after six months, but was not related to baseline disease severity81. The partial dissociation between acute disease and neuropsychiatric symptoms suggests contextual psychological stressors play a major role. These include social isolation, confinement, post-traumatic stress, and regional characteristics, including a response to the striking neglect of the pandemic promoted by the Brazilian government84. This contrasts with fierce claims of universal organicity from journalists85 and patients online, as clearly demonstrated in an enlightening episode: in January 2021, Paul Garner, a professor of infectious diseases at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, reported his own experience in overcoming Long COVID. He emphasized the similarity between Long COVID and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), the role of self-help groups, refraining from seeking disease information on the internet, and “by retraining the bodily reactions with my conscious thoughts, feelings, and behaviour”86. The blog post and an accompanying tweet were met with intense discussion and overwhelmingly negative reactions from Long-COVID patients. One user wrote: “It’s a great shame that Prof Garner, who was a beacon in the early days of covid last Spring, when no-one of any note was validating the experience of ‘long covid’ sufferers, has chosen now to suggest it can all be cured by positive thinking”86. Several comments criticized Gardner’s comparison of Long-COVID and ME/CFS, frowning upon a possible suggestion of Long-COVID sharing the status of non-organic disease that many attribute to ME/CFS55. This explains why some skeptical doctors fear vilification as “medical gaslighters”87.
Click to expand...
Interesting PG calls out physicians as patients and never reflects on his own LP conversion…
 
Merged thread

Event: A valedictory by Professor Paul Garner: Truth not Triumph: backstage at Cochrane Infectious Diseases - 8th Sept 2022

Register via Eventbrite (link is external)(opens in a new tab)
With experience as a doctor in the UK NHS and in Papua New Guinea, Paul Garner was part of the team that set up Cochrane. This organization successfully mainstreamed systematic reviews globally as a method and has been highly influential in institutionalising their use in formal guideline development at the World Health Organization.

The journey, mostly while Paul has been at LSTM, has been incredibly exciting. Cochrane Infectious Diseases Reviews provided evidence that led to the introduction of insecticide treated bed nets, and underpinned the roll out of artemisinin-based combination treatments. At times the Group have challenged global health dogmas, and Paul has been subject to aggressive, quite personal attacks for highlighting the fiddles, tweaks and perversions by people intent on triumph over truth in their field.

Paul became a professor some years ago, and wants to give a final valedictory with stories of intrigue arising out of the hundreds of author teams he has worked with seeking the “truth”.

Professor David Lalloo, is the host, and Professor George Davey Smith, Professor of Clinical Epidemiology in Bristol, will give a personal commendation.

The lecture will be followed by a drinks reception in the Nyunkunde Room

This event will be live streamed and recorded.
Click to expand...

https://www.lstmed.ac.uk/news-event...arner-truth-not-triumph-backstage-at-cochrane
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I assume that Garner is stepping down from his position with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine? I wonder if he will continue to have a role in Cochrane?
'Truth not Triumph' - there's certainly irony and melancholy in the title.

It's interesting to read that blurb from LSTM closely, to see what is not said. There's a comment about what Cochrane has done, but, with respect to Garner, the statement is only that he helped to set Cochrane up. Nothing positive is said about his personal achievements or his contribution to LSTM.
Professor George Davey Smith, Professor of Clinical Epidemiology in Bristol, will give a personal commendation.
Click to expand...
If I recall correctly Davey Smith was going to be involved in MEGA, the proposed genetic study of ME/CFS that had backing from BPS proponents.

Registering for the event is straightforward, click on the red 'Eventbrite', and choose 'in-person', or 'online'. Even if no questions are allowed, I think just being present is worthwhile, so that Garner knows, as he delivers his presentation, that there are people in the audience that he has harmed with his inability to face truth.
 
Last edited:
Hutan said:
I assume that Garner is stepping down from his position with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine? O wonder of he will continue to have a role in Cochrane?
Click to expand...
I saw him described recently as emeritus (retired) professor and here it's talking about a farewell address.

Realistically, he's probably as retired as Wessely is. But it would be nice not to hear from him again, though I doubt it.
 
His Twitter account describes him as Professor Emeritus, which suggests he has already retired from his professorship. I think he's about 65 years old, so that is likely to be a straightforward age related retirement.

No idea whether he will also step down from Cochrane editorship.

I guess it's possible he was a good tropical diseases specialist, and Cochrane editor in his field of expertise.

It's both sad and appalling that he has gone completely off the rails with Long Covid and ME/CFS evidence, and is finishing his career in medicine by making such a fool of himself and in the process doing so much harm to others.
 
JohnTheJack said:
Straight after the news: Garner being Garner.
[edited with correct link - Paul Garner]
At 1:05 here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001bb8m
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. I have listened. It's clear he (Paul Garner) is still selling the message of stress and anxiety being a major factor in perpetuating long covid. Though mixed in with it also the need to rest and that most people with LC will gradually recover. It seemed pretty clear from the way he was talking that he's no expert on LC. He talked of brain fog as part of tiredness/fatigue.
 
Last edited:
JohnTheJack said:
Sorry. At 1:05 here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001bb8m

@Lou B Lou
Click to expand...


Thank you John. And no thank you. Garner says 'Brainfog' is tiredness, and a fear response. Garner misinforms the interviewer so much that the interviewer ends up defining brainfog as "A primitive response in the brain" - a fear response. People believe Garner's disinformation because he's at the Liverpool School of Tropical Diseases. He's told the country that brainfog is trivial, fear induced, and not a disabling part of any biomedical disease.

Garner's trivialising, gaslighting disinformation is pure poison for LC and ME patients. His disinformation is monstrous.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom