Trial By Error: And Another Prebuttal…

How low is the bar for harassment to go?

http://www.virology.ws/2019/02/05/t...ggHEg5ko90qnvcOEKGrEfYTPPqMUC3Q7kFt6OlRuyD2J4

David Tuller on the upcoming article.

 

Do the paper's lawyers and editors know about this potential manipulation yet?

 

But the lawyer is probably the bigger fish here, editors are just as susceptible to institutional and political pressure otherwise we would not have a dearth of bothsiderism in mainstream media where they fear not giving alternative facts the same press as facts.

 

I’m not sure if This is supposed to silence David, re establish the bps lot when they feel under challenge or both

 

As low as the bar for recovery apparently . They are playing word games.

 

Indeed, i also hope for internal questioning and hopefully internal action that bends towards reality

 

Smearing anonymous patients with a stigmatized illness is easy. Let's see how easy it is to do the same to David whose comments are in the public domain.

 

''In some ways, it feels like I’ve been engaged in a weird kind of academic performance art.''

 

Yes, I think this journal is setting themselves up for a potential lawsuit, when you look at recent developments in Academic institutes, Parliament, The CDC, NICE, medical journals, scientists and statisticians with large numbers of MPs and such like waking up over the the abuse of health policy carried out by people like Esther Crawley, Sharpe and Wessely.

Just as the tide is turning massively on the truth it seems a foolish time to do a hit piece on the wrong person.

It's so 2011. How boring.

 

Well you have been going on about being promiscuous in theatres or something...... I think .....

 

No, David, Art is the Lie that tells the Truth.
You are just telling the Truth.
On the other hand if performance art is't really art (I have wondered) you may qualify.
The methodology certainly has a degree of artistry to it.

 

I think it hints at how much there is invested in these forms of treatment . CBT is the panacea for all ills and underpins IAPT and MUS.

Professionally, personally, financially and nationally it is a huge house of cards.

 

Let’s see what this will be, but if you’re about right in your predictions, which I find reasonable, then it’s good night to mankind.

But I really hope this piece draws attention way beyond the ME community and engages scientists, media and all kinds of people all over the place.

Great read in so many ways @dave30th

(quote from
http://www.virology.ws/2019/02/05/t...ggHEg5ko90qnvcOEKGrEfYTPPqMUC3Q7kFt6OlRuyD2J4
paragraph 6)

 

I am glad that the first commentor EV on the blog points out what I was thinking about in relation to journalists having problems understanding why we/DT continue to point out the many methodological flaws of PACE. By using such lax criteria these studies are really not all that relevant to people with ME although they are used to direct policy with regards to our illness. A person with chronic fatigue maybe will benefit from GET a person with ME will not. The lines have been thoroughly blurred and we suffer as a result.

It is telling that journalists will validate those stories of recovery but pay no heed at all to the stories of people whose lives have been made worse by trying to get back to health using the authorised treatment. No, recovery is the only story worth telling (read--they are the deserving). And our plight is set against the fact that exercise IS touted as good for a whole range of health issues (although I expect some of the evidence is not as robust as is made out). We are programmed to think in terms of exercise benefit so any other narrative seems wrong.

Anyway, I thought it was a rather good and clear prebuttal. Hopefully any article that materialises will help direct traffic to the Virology blog.

 

Tbh in the context of ME/CFS which will be painted as extreme and illogical as animal rights often is , I don’t think they would have gone to the press unless they thought it was to their advantage. If you don’t understand the bizarre ME world and few do , even patients just Challenging the lancet and nice guidelines sounds crazy. Worst case scenario They mighy just regurgitate the past harassment story and then say there’s a new level where patients are now even doing this bla bla bla to try to block science they don’t like, cochrane could feature too.
Best case scenario it’s presented as a fierce debate with both sides presented fairly but ...

 

I wonder whether the journalist has the specific agreement of EC or her advisors to mention her. It would seem a very risky plan on her part. I suspect that there will be two recordings which she might prefer not to have reemerge.

However the timing of all this does look as though it might have had something to do with those episodes.

 

Historically I don't think that enough has been made of the 'dustbin diagnosis' element of this group of patients by the patients themselves or the organisations representing them. This has arguably led to infighting and confusion and has been caused, to a large extent, by the medical profession. This bunching together - and its consequences - must be made more prominent by campaigners as it is not their fault but has made everything much worse for them.