The i newspaper: CFS how online abuse is halting research

Jst scanning the front pages this mornin, to be sucker punched with this. i cant find the story online but i not too good so maybe someone ese can track it dowm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-47701676

scroll down to see it, bottom thumb nal on the i front page

 

I took a look at that link but couldn't find it, not in the thumbnails at the bottom nor even by doing a search. Strange, could it have been removed (she asked hopefully)?

 

https://twitter.com/user/status/1110457654118367234

 

Is it usual for the I to pick up stories two weeks late and a week after anyone else? Presumably this is a straight syndication, but it would be interesting to see whether it has incorporated amendments to the initial version.

The i isn't on the usual list of SMC suspects, is it? Makes one wonder who we have yet to hear from.

EDIT having said that I suspect that a former science editor of the Independent was involved with them.

 

I happened across a copy in my dentist's waiting room and took photos. Not had chance to read it yet, but looks like it is pretty much the Reuters piece

 

Interesting. So far as I can see the original article was amended to include a reference to @dave30th 's article being hosted by a Columbia University website. Reference to this seems to have disappeared. One would not want to give any impression of wider support.

Where@s that Reuters' Handbook of Journalism, again?

EDIT the implication seems to be that it's ok to mention where the work is published if one can seek to diminish its value by insinuating that it was on the website of a university colleague. If it is shown that it is on an external, objective and valued site then it is better not to mention it. Wouldn't wish to add to the credibility.

 

Disgraceful this concerted campaign of abuse of pwme continues.

Just had a heartbreaking email from a severely affected pwme, ill since teens in early 80s, isolated with no friends, living alone on benefits after parents died, disbelieving family and neighbours, unhelpful struggling care company.
She is in despair after seeing this, having tried GET and CBT years ago but they all blame her for not recovering, and she has to face alone family, neighbours and carers with their views further hardened by this campaign.
And this is just one pwme among so many.

I do wonder if the perpetrators of this media campaign ever give a thought to the untold suffering they cause.

 

Of course they do - that's the point of them doing it.

 

https://inews.co.uk/?s=cfs how online abuse

 

Haha! Wonko, no!...

I don’t think that’s quite true. They’re not sadists trying to inflict pain on vulnerable individuals.

The problem is they don’t think about anyone other than themselves. It’s all a bit me, me, me and not enough M.E.

The charges are that they’re egotistical, narcissistic and lacking empathy or insight into the effect of their actions on others. They’re not intentionally setting out to hurt people, they just don’t particularly care.

 

There is a new section that wasn't in the original piece I've quoted it below. Does anyone know which piece of research they are referring to in the passage?

 

Just found the piece of research myself its this one:

Specialist treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome/ME: a cohort study among adult patients in England Simon M Collin* and Esther Crawley

 

That was in there:

http://archive.fo/V9WTA#selection-713.0-713.372

 

That was in an early amendment published by Reuters which included the original correction about Columbia University, so it is not specific to the I article.

 

Thanks! Clearly I must not have read the amendment.

 

I think that the section @fivetowns quoted was always in there (with the slight edit made for the more UK-centric the I), which was not related to the 'correction' removing information about where Tuller's work was released.

 

That's embarrassing ! I could have sworn it was new!

 

Don't worry about it. I find that things never look the same twice.

 

There's a lot of nothing in that article. Impossible to remember it all!

There was discussion of the paper cited here: https://forums.phoenixrising.me/thr...-adult-patients-in-england.52845/#post-875674

 

@EspeMor @JaimeS can we assume that the i will be in receipt of a copy of the ME Action letter?!