adambeyoncelowe
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
In case it needed to be clarified: I'm definitely not a royalist.
-
New Forum Software Installed (Still a few issues but reopening the forum) More details.
Telegraph front page: Wessely photo wth Duchess of Cambridge & BPS back pain treatment
JemPD
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
I'm no particular fan of the royals. At all. But this is a science forum & imho we need to be careful about making claims without evidence.... So I'm interested to see any evidence that she knows all about PACE & the issues surrounding it?
He may well have told her that he's been under attack & that his work is controversial because 'patients don't want to accept the stigma of mental illness' etc, & buttered her up how glad he is that she & Prince William/Harry are working with him to try & change that stigma etc etc (ugh
). But you've got to be pretty suspicious & dogged to do the research to get at the facts behind his spin.Goodness me, he is a master manipulator - charming, affable, self effacing, etc. She'll have heard all her info on ME/CFS from him, & unless you know all the facts, everything he says sounds perfectly reasonable.
She'll have seen his maddox prize, his knighthood, his tenure at the PCP etc, not forgetting all his work with the military - for which he is also lauded. Most people i know would take his word on most things if i didn't educate them to the facts.
I don't think we have any evidence that she has seen both sides of the story, not sufficient to assume she/they are 'in on it' to the extent you seem to be implying. Do we? Am I mistaken?
I'd have thought that if anything, what she will have seen will have been a selective presentation of the evidence from a manipulative 'friend' who has successfully portrayed himself as hero/victim for many yrs, & i think it's unfair to expect her to be suspicious enough to do the job that so called investigative journalists cant even manage to do.
I think the worst we can say is that she's likely to have accepted the 'authority/establishment view', which is what the vast majority of the medical profession & the public have done. I don't think we can say what would happen if her eyes were opened to the facts.
Unless you have evidence to the contrary?
Melanie
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
I have sent the ALL the Royals and their "people" the information and I have done so for years. Don't underestimate me.
And it is my opinion that all the ME organizations in Britain and any country that comes under the "crown" should be informing her of Simon Wessely by writing to her. Just get a return receipt (which her people will sign for) making sure you keep copies of the letter and receipt and put in the Reference Line on the letter the number on the receipt before sending it. "cc" it to the BBC and The Times and even the Daily Mail making sure everyone has a copy and sees the Queen and other Royals all got a letter. Will they ignore it and Wessely plead his case? Of course they will but that does not mean you don't do what you must do.
Those scumbags also accepted the 'authority/establishment view' of Jimmy Seville even though rumors swirled for years and years. The BBC was too afraid to do anything about a Knight and the Queen turned up her nose at such heanous talk. Scandalous! How could SHE make such a moral misstep?
Everyone in Britain just sat around when the papers printed the headline that a 12-year-old had 5 boyfriends. How scandalous. It was, in fact, a child trafficking ring that had this young girl and many, many children for years and years and the police were in on it. The police captain was from a foreign country where taking 12-year-old girls is practiced. All of Britain saw this headline and other headlines for years about the children and teens that were having sex and you all sat around with all the media doing nothing. I don't think the Queen missed all those headlines.
The patients and ME Organizations in Britain should be writing to the Royals and informing them or are you just going to sit around doing nothing about this when you KNOW all about him. Not doing anything makes all British patients and UK ME Organizations complacent and part of the problem. The Queen needs to be informed about her Knight whether they care to hear it, disbelieve you, or think you are just militant patients and vexatious.
Last edited:
Luther Blissett
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
The BPS school lurking around back pain has been going on for years (1980's?). Mansel Aylward and Gordon Wadell were at the forefront. Guess why Aylward was picked for the DWP post?
Melanie
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Here, just write a 2 sentence cover letter introducing a printout of this PDF: https://www.s4me.info/threads/science-for-me-pace-briefing-document.3140/
JemPD
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
I didnt mean to underestimate you Melanie, apologies if it came over that way, i was simply asking what your evidence was, that she "knew all about the PACE trial & issues surrounding it". Thank you for telling me.
And for your suggestions about how we might ensure they are better informed in the future, whether they choose to believe/disregard it or not.
Personally i feel that writing to Kate criticising Wessely himself would be a tactical own goal (people who slag off my own friends have a harder job of convincing me of the merits of their position/P'sOV). But sending them S4ME's new PACE doc as you suggest might be a good idea, thanks for the suggestion.
Edited (straight away) for clarity
Next step, remove the "barrier" to the BPS encroachment pre-school, even better, before birth.
“Rather than start with the physicians, which might be quite a difficult task,
we could make a start with youngster in schools.
My experience is that they are much easier to educate.
The only barrier is the parents.
Once we have the child on our side we are in a very good position”.
Professor Trudie Chalder, 2002.
(from: http://www.margaretwilliams.me/2016/proof-positive-revisited.pdf)
“Rather than start with the physicians, which might be quite a difficult task,
we could make a start with youngster in schools.
My experience is that they are much easier to educate.
The only barrier is the parents.
Once we have the child on our side we are in a very good position”.
Professor Trudie Chalder, 2002.
(from: http://www.margaretwilliams.me/2016/proof-positive-revisited.pdf)
I'm not a royalist, and I applaud your attempts @Melanie, to inform people about our situation, but I very much doubt the members of the royal family actually read many of the probably thousands of communications sent to them every day. They wouldn't have time to do anything else. I expect their staff read and discard anything that is not seen as officially coming from and relevant to the particular charities they support.
JemPD
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Wow that's creepy
Melanie
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
That is why you show proof and keep proof you sent a letter. They cannot discard any communications and at the very least microfilm it or scan into computer files. And that is also why you "cc:" to the media. "cc:" to QMUL and any number of culprits. And don't underestimate what they would brief them on especially when there is a "cc:" going everywhere.
As a matter of fact, you can use Twitter and send it to the Royal handle putting it into various royal name hashtags and send it to media Twitter handles at the same time. That's a very good record of information being sent to them.
TigerLilea
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Am I the only one who can't find the news article that this thread is about?
Sly Saint
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Not from the OP link no but there is something here on some site called 'what kate wore':
https://whatkatewore.com/category/clothing/coats/
Wessely looking rather sad and 'tired'
quite a full article that doesn't actually get around to talking about Kates attire,
"a minty green coat and dress evocative of spring and perhaps Easter eggs", until the very end.
JemPD
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
sorry all the link in the OP were broken & the back pain one was wrong anyway, i was so goofy that morning but i just had to try to post about it it was just such a horrible way to start my day seeing that! the OP links are both working accurately to the stories now.
The photo of them both is the second one down on the link page. On the front page the photo was directly above the back pain/BPS bit, it just thought it was, ugh, well you know....
ladycatlover
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Strewth the weasel is dwarfed by her! I know she's wearing high heels (not very sensible when you're that preggie) but even if you subtract them from her height he's teeny tiny
And the one where he's gawping at her bulge is just creepy and
ladycatlover
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Urmmm...
How best to start children off in life is to keep them well away from certain psychiatrists!
In one of her last engagements before beginning her maternity leave, the Duchess announced she was setting up a steering group to explore how best to provide children with the best start in life.
The Duchess of Cambridge arrives to make her speech CREDIT: PA
How best to start children off in life is to keep them well away from certain psychiatrists!
Forbin
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
I like how at the new link to the Telegraph article SW isn't even mentioned in the caption to the photo, making him look like some random, wacky guy. Ultimately, he's mentioned at the very end of the article, but, if you don't already know what he looks like, you still don't know who that wacky guy in the photo is. 
[ETA: It's actually a slightly different photo at the new link. I thought it was just cropped, but it's from almost same moment at a slightly different angle.]
[ETA: It's actually a slightly different photo at the new link. I thought it was just cropped, but it's from almost same moment at a slightly different angle.]
Last edited:
Barry
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Yeah, I like that tooI like how at the new link to the Telegraph article SW isn't even mentioned in the caption to the photo, making him look like some random, wacky guy. Ultimately, he's mentioned at the very end of the article, but, if you don't already know what he looks like, you still don't know who that wacky guy in the photo is.
[ETA: It's actually a slightly different photo at the new link. I thought it was just cropped, but it's taken just a moment before/after the original ]
. Looks like someone the police are just out of shot, and storming in to whisk him away. Well, we can dream can't we? 
