Discussion in 'PsychoSocial ME/CFS News' started by Tom Kindlon, Mar 22, 2018.
Avery interesting read. Thanks to the person who wrote of their experience of PACE. Lots of food for thought.
Response from Sharpe, Goldsmith and Chalder to Wilshire et al. paper
S4ME thread there.
Trial By Error: The 2018 PACE Reanalysis and the SMC’s Expert Appraisals
It sometimes feels that what at the time felt like dramatic steps forward, in retrospect overall progress is very painfully slow.
To facilitate sharing:
When the history of this saga is written there will be two eras: Before Alem's FOI win, and after it.
That was the turning point where it became untenable to deny the fatal problems with PACE and the CBT/GET model.
and untenable to continue to claim that the only people opposing the BPS paradigm were a handful of irrational and violent patients.
(Not to ignore the many things that were done by many before and after to change how PACE is viewed, but it does feel as though the FOI win was the watershed moment.)
Yes, there have been a bunch of other very important factors, like the P2P and IOM reports.
But Alem's FOI result, and its role in taking down PACE, was absolutely critical in starting the process of reining in the UK branch of the profession, which is the epicentre of this catastrophe.
I think Alem's result has greater implications - that citizens, or citizen scientists are worth listening too and have valuable contributions to make.
Of course @Tom Kindlon & our much missed Bob have made great and undeniable contributions, but I see Alem's FOI as the thin end of the wedge.
We need to keep hammering that home.
Separate names with a comma.