1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

SMC: Advice for Researchers Experiencing Harassment

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS news' started by Three Chord Monty, Oct 3, 2019.

  1. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    26,529
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    And chronic fatigue syndrome/ME is a high-profile subject? :confused: I think those BPS researchers might have delusions of grandeur. As important as the subject is to us, I haven't seen 'climate-change equivalently sized' marches in the street for, or against, GET yet.
     
  2. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,574
    Location:
    UK
  3. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,819
    Location:
    Australia
    Yes, the timing seems to be forming a bit of a pattern now.
     
  4. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,299
    Location:
    Canada
    Pretending to be the real victim is a hallmark behavior of bullies. It doesn't necessarily mean that, as we are definitely victims of bullying and harassment and claiming so rightfully. Difference is nobody believes us because of bullies who force their ideology into actual medical malpractice from a position of absolute power.

    But in the case of the blatant misuse of the SMC's role and influence, it absolutely is a case of projecting their behavior onto their own victims. This is such clear abuse of a position of authority and public trust in the pursuit of self-interest it could serve as a case study. The claims are so laughable with the made-up threatening letters and 4 tweets, which are actually accurate, leading to "woe is us, our life is over, we are silenced" on an international platform. And the absurd claims of "powerful lobby", unnamed of course because they don't exist whereas the lobby group BACME does just that.
     
    Sisyphus, Sarah94, alktipping and 8 others like this.
  5. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,299
    Location:
    Canada
    Just like it's a "high priority" subject at the MRC. High priority, unless you expect any credible research to be funded, of course.
     
    ukxmrv, WillowJ, alktipping and 2 others like this.
  6. Anna H

    Anna H Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    241
    Location:
    Sweden
    :rofl::rofl::rofl:
    "cold water is actually hot compared to ice" :laugh:.
    Thanks @Hutan! This made my day:)
     
  7. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    [my bold]

    Actually, scientists continuing to promote highly misleading results of their deeply flawed research into a human illness, is about as extreme as it gets. As it is for highly influential media organisations to deliberately and actively foster that.
     
  8. Forbin

    Forbin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,581
    Location:
    USA
    8. Recommend that those affected jump onto a paper circle and yell out "HOT!"
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2019
    Sisyphus, WillowJ, Anna H and 15 others like this.
  9. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,602
    Prhaps the SMC could use their medical knowledge to tell us how one might cure a bad case of the trots.
     
  10. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    Indeed ;).
     
    ladycatlover likes this.
  11. NelliePledge

    NelliePledge Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,145
    Location:
    UK West Midlands
    or more specifically a case of the bad ex trots
     
    ladycatlover and ukxmrv like this.
  12. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    I suspect that was embedded in @chrisb's post ;).
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2019
  13. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    Oh yes! No 'might' about it. Else they'd have the chance of being real scientists.
     
  14. ukxmrv

    ukxmrv Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    847
    We haven't been included in this as yet but my concern is that they would use it in the future

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...lamists-government-advisers-say-a4255756.html

    "But it says that those who aggressively hound others who question their world view should also be be targeted in a new drive against hateful extremism.

    It says they include some hardline animal rights activists, anti-Semites, environmental campaigners and some members of the hard Left.

    Others in the category — to be determined by a person’s behaviour rather than their beliefs — include misogynist trolls who persistently vilify women online.

    Sara Khan, who heads the commission, said the Government’s existing approach was “insufficient” and allowed the spread of hatred."
     
  15. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    21,810
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
  16. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    The leaflet has one overriding omission: Are those objecting to your research right? Are their objections scientifically sound.

    They seem to gloss over this rather important point. Providing strategies for researchers to counter these upstarts. This one for example, which is clearly a #1 strategy for providing sound scientific rebuttal:
     
    Arnie Pye, Annamaria, Anna H and 9 others like this.
  17. Snowdrop

    Snowdrop Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,134
    Location:
    Canada
    I can't see the tweet this is based on but based on Barry's comment it would seem that this group of strategies has been around a while and is just now being put out there. The irony of this is that the problem the strategies address is of their own making (SMC). When it suits them they are easily capable of promoting lies to further political masters ends or just blind support of authority. Trust is broken.

    At no point is there any critical thinking-- just promotion of authority. The whole point of journalistic reporting of science is to provide independent analysis and translate jargon into layman's understanding.

    We saw strategy #1 in action when Wessely tagged Mike Godwin for support to show that PwME who were tweeting about PACE were just unhinged.

    It didn't work. Their problem of course (as we well know) is that while the Wessely group may feel 'harrassed' they seem to forget that this strategy works best to protect researchers who stand for actual science when clearly the BPS group are frauds and influential people may end up checking the facts and calling them out.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2019
    TiredSam, Annamaria, Anna H and 3 others like this.
  18. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    Anna H, Sean and alktipping like this.
  19. Snowdrop

    Snowdrop Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,134
    Location:
    Canada
  20. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    21,810
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    <sarcasm> Oh, what a surprise...
    Screenshot 2021-03-23 22.09.51.png
     
    Michelle, rvallee, Mithriel and 10 others like this.

Share This Page