1. The 'News in Brief' post for w/c 4th Nov can be read by clicking here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Rethinking the treatment of CFS — a reanalysis and evaluation of findings from a recent major trial of GET and CBT (2018) Wilshire et al.

Discussion in 'PsychoSocial ME/CFS News' started by Tom Kindlon, Mar 22, 2018.

  1. Daisymay

    Daisymay Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    426
    Likes Received:
    4,771
    Excellent, thanks so much to all involved, to the healthy authors for coming to our aid and standing up for science and to the ME authors for giving so much of your limited energy to write this. Thinking of Bob x
     
  2. Sasha

    Sasha Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,048
    Likes Received:
    19,409
    Location:
    UK
  3. Awol

    Awol Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    1,627
    I appreciate the clarity in the writing of the research article itself as it gives some great quotable quotes to give busy doctors etc.
    Thanks and congratulations all round.
     
  4. Andy

    Andy Committee Member & Outreach

    Messages:
    7,868
    Likes Received:
    57,583
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    https://www.actionforme.org.uk/news/​pace-update-latest-analysis-and-comment/
     
  5. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,581
    Likes Received:
    30,273
    Location:
    UK
    For comparison with the MEAs post
     
  6. Daisymay

    Daisymay Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    426
    Likes Received:
    4,771
    Quite so, it's clearly and simply written, not trying to bamboozle readers any more than is necessary with scientific jargon.
     
  7. Luther Blissett

    Luther Blissett Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,678
    Likes Received:
    12,897
    Congratulations and thanks all round.

    If readers wish to promote the study, an excellent way to do so is to link to the paper in posts on websites adding a little text to accompany the post. Use keywords like PACE, ME, CFS etc.

    This creates a web leading to the paper, and is taken into account in search engine rankings. The higher the 'quality' of the site linking to the paper, the more likely it is to boost the rankings. (what 'quality' is, is generally unknown as is hidden by the search engine companies to avoid 'gaming' the results.)

    It's a pretty good way to do activism in a way that is available to most.

    If you need help in linking, reply to this post and I'll try to help out.
     
    WillowJ, Awol, Tom Kindlon and 18 others like this.
  8. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    24,111
    Location:
    Norway
  9. Cinders66

    Cinders66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,063
    Likes Received:
    6,521
    I found it more a regurgitation of the paper than a condemnatory personal comment in the way the Jon stones and comments usually are.
     
    Luther Blissett likes this.
  10. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    24,111
    Location:
    Norway
  11. Sasha

    Sasha Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,048
    Likes Received:
    19,409
    Location:
    UK
    The Wilshire et al. paper is also covered in the print edition of today's Times – on page 2!

    It's different to the online coverage. It's written by Tom Whipple, the science editor:

    Findings of £5m ME study 'worthless'

    A landmark £5 million study that formed the basis for NHS treatment of ME sufferers has been heavily criticised for its "troubling" use of data, in new research that claims its recommendations were largely worthless.

    Since 2011 the estimated 250,000 Britons with ME, also known as chronic fatigue syndrome, have been offered treatment based on exercise and cognitive behavioural therapy, after a study known as the Pace trial was published in The Lancet and seemed to show this approach improved symptoms.

    Now, after a freedom of information request forced the scientists behind the 2011 study to release their raw data, other researchers have performed their own analysis. They said their study, published in the journal BMC Psychology, raised "serious concerns about the robustness of the claims" made about exercise and therapy.

    Keith Geraghty, from the University of Manchester, said at the very least the £5 million trial represented wasted resources. "I would argue it could have been spent more wisely," he added.

    The authors of the original Pace trial stood by their findings.
    Very good, I think, especially considering the space restrictions - and I'm very pleased to see something like this so prominent in the paper.
     
  12. strategist

    strategist Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,004
    Likes Received:
    19,821
    Thanks to the authors.
     
  13. Cheshire

    Cheshire Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    2,265
    Likes Received:
    15,445
    The Daily Mail:
    Findings of chronic fatigue study `not reliable´
    No mention of the SMC 'facts'.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-5532233/Findings-chronic-fatigue-study-not-reliable.html
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2018
  14. Diluted-biscuit

    Diluted-biscuit Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    391
    Likes Received:
    2,410
    Yep, mainstream media stories shouldn’t be scientific essays or no average member of the public will ever read any of it. Having these stories planting the seed of doubt out in the British mainstream media is fantastic and a huge achievement. Well done to everyone who got this out there!
     
  15. strategist

    strategist Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,004
    Likes Received:
    19,821
    The SMC's credibility on CFS has run out :D.
     
  16. Mithriel

    Mithriel Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    6,378
    I saw the article on the BBC news front page at 9.45am and was surprised (astounded!) as I thought it would be another attack on ME patients. I went back at 10.15 to check some wording and discovered it had been removed to the health pages. Obviously the story that had run for 3 days about "Claire's Accessories and your childhood" was of more pressing importance.
     
  17. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,581
    Likes Received:
    30,273
    Location:
    UK
  18. adambeyoncelowe

    adambeyoncelowe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,769
    Likes Received:
    12,227
  19. Cheshire

    Cheshire Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    2,265
    Likes Received:
    15,445
    The Canary (the tittle is a bit over the top IMO)

    The mainstream medical community just declared war on people living with ME
    https://www.thecanary.co/discovery/...y-just-declared-war-on-people-living-with-me/
     
    Awol, janice, Tom Kindlon and 23 others like this.
  20. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    17,169
    Likes Received:
    90,819
    Location:
    UK
    Wow, that Canary Article really hits hard - bringing in the whole Wessely, Aylward, DWP UNUM conflict of interest stuff too. Good for them. Does anyone know what kind of readership it has?
     

Share This Page