1. Guest, the two part 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 9th May 2022 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Trial By Error: Professor Sharpe’s Retraction Requests

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS news' started by Andy, Feb 18, 2019.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    16,269
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    http://www.virology.ws/2019/02/18/trial-by-error-professor-sharpes-retraction-requests/
     
    Woolie, Esther12, Inara and 40 others like this.
  2. inox

    inox Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    514
    Location:
    Norway
    Huh...? That's - bold...?

    Did he think the recivers of the requests wouldn't read the HRA-report? Did he not read it himself.....? :confused:
     
    Woolie, Esther12, Dolphin and 17 others like this.
  3. inox

    inox Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    514
    Location:
    Norway
    Quote from Sharpe's letter:

    That's telling. He sent complaints about at least two articles, from 2017 and 2016, the very same day the HRA-letter was published.

    So he either/or knew beforehand what their conclusions where (and could prepare), and/or have kept a list of articles at hand that he have issues with. Surely, he did not jump into action starting to read up on all the material that have been published about PACE in the years since that very day?

    Edit: an important, forgotten not added :p
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2019
  4. Alvin

    Alvin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,309
    He thinks he can throw his weight around and prevent the truth from gaining traction
     
  5. Peter Trewhitt

    Peter Trewhitt Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,627
    Given it is one of his Sharpe's standard responses to accuse critics of not having read what they obviously have read, this would seem an appropriate response to him.

    Ideally one would wish to send him a list of things to read and insist he comments no further on anything to do with ME/CFS until he demonstrates he has read and understood them.
     
    Woolie, Dolphin, MSEsperanza and 16 others like this.
  6. Alvin

    Alvin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,309
    But thats censorship. People who believe themselves righteous are entitled to double standards.
     
  7. Adrian

    Adrian Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,926
    Location:
    UK
    It makes me wonder if we should be asking the HRA to speak out about the misuse of their report.
     
    sea, Dolphin, Binkie4 and 27 others like this.
  8. EzzieD

    EzzieD Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    422
    Location:
    UK
    That's excellent to hear.
     
    Woolie, Dolphin, MSEsperanza and 12 others like this.
  9. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    7,411
    Location:
    UK
    I wonder how many people SW forwarded/mentioned the report to?

    Just in case anyone hasn't read this ( :emoji_hand_splayed: hi Prof Sharpe)
    "
    The HRA report does not exonerate the PACE trial, it merely confirms that its Research Ethics approval was in order"
    https://notthesciencebit.net/2019/0...at-its-research-ethics-approval-was-in-order/
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2019
    sea, Inara, Dolphin and 17 others like this.
  10. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,374
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
  11. Robert 1973

    Robert 1973 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    948
    Location:
    UK
    @dave30th Do you have any plans to write about your concerns with the HRA assessment and/or write to Norman Lamb to make him aware of those concerns?
     
  12. inox

    inox Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    514
    Location:
    Norway

    On the same note, a link to the letter in question.

    https://www.parliament.uk/documents...Research-Authority-to-Chair-re-PACE-trial.pdf

    Also - when looking for this I first went to the SMC, their 'expert' opinions did not have any convenient direct link to the letter itself. That might have been 'convenient' for others


    Edit: my bolding
     
    Dolphin, Lisa108, Chezboo and 9 others like this.
  13. Sean

    Sean Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,441
    Location:
    Australia
    I can smell the desperation from here.
     
    Dolphin, Lisa108, MEMarge and 9 others like this.
  14. Cheshire

    Cheshire Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,461
    Binkie4, Lisa108, Lidia and 10 others like this.
  15. Sasha

    Sasha Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,636
    Location:
    UK
    Good idea. What do you think, @dave30th?
     
    Dolphin, MEMarge, DokaGirl and 6 others like this.
  16. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,197
    I think this is a wonderful and very public example of how the PACE authors seek to suppress valid scientific critique by falsely accusing their critics of Ad hominem attacks. Clearly shows their attitude to genuine scientific debate.
     
  17. Snowdrop

    Snowdrop Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,128
    Location:
    Canada
    I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to open a new thread to discuss the failings that happened with the PACE trial prior to starting. Since the HRA letter from Montgomery is out there the failings that happened in the process of approving the trial have come to the fore. I think what happened and how might be fruitful to consider.

    I don't want to start this thread because I have absolutely nothing to offer by way of insight into the process.
    So I'm hoping others here might.
     
    MeSci, DokaGirl, andypants and 3 others like this.
  18. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,634
    Location:
    Canada
    And that weight outside the UK is basically nil.

    That's the problem with mutual admiration societies. As soon as you step out of the circle jerk, nobody's jerking back.
     
    Dolphin, Lisa108, EzzieD and 5 others like this.
  19. Alvin

    Alvin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,309
    I see where your coming from but science is a worldwide endeavour, so while he can't as easily bully organizations outside the UK since his power does not extend there keeping PACE on the books allows them to influence the overall ME debate in their favour. Technically its still on the books in a prestigious journal and has influence.
    Their greatest fear is probably that a biomarker or treatment will be found, if they can't prevent biomedical research someday we may have a drug that treats ME and their house of cards will collapse. Though i expect more spin at that point, see we were right but like "antidepressants" treat depression this new drug treat the psychological disease thats ME...
    Then they will be laughed out of the room
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2019
    Inara, EzzieD, rvallee and 4 others like this.
  20. dave30th

    dave30th Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,663
    I have made my concerns known to Carol Monaghan. She's on the committee with Norman Lamb.
     
    Sly Saint, Inara, Dolphin and 27 others like this.

Share This Page