1. Guest, the two part 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 16th May 2022 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

United Kingdom: Science Media Centre (including Fiona Fox)

Discussion in 'News from organisations' started by Esther12, Dec 10, 2017.

  1. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,237
    The science media centre has played an important role in stigmatising CFS patients, and anyone critical of PACE and related work, so it's always interesting to look at how they present themselves.

    Someone sent me this old report recently, and while it's not that interesting or relevant to us, I thought I'd post up my notes on it:

    https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/...-Centre-mental-health-consultation-report.pdf

    The intro talks about the important role Til Wykes played in setting up the role of a mental health specialist at the SMC. When the tribunal ordered the release of PACE data, Wykes was alongside Sharpe and Moss-Morris at the SMC's 'CBT – does it really work?' talk where they addressed questions like "What about issues like placebos and double-blind RCTs – does it matter if we don’t have the same level of rigour as for drugs?" [no sceptics invited]:

    http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/cbt-does-it-really-work/


    Maybe, if journalists don't have time to properly investigate a story, they should just not write about it, rather than farm it out to an untrustworthy organisation like the SMC?

    There's been a push to change this, but the MH research charities I've seen seem completely thoughtless, and happy to channel money to poor quality research.

    Wessely comments:

    Luckily, the SMC found a way to evade discussions involving troublesome patient groups:

    Concern about the poor reputation of psychiatry, and the desire to improve it:

    The SMC claims this with regard to different views from psychology and psychiatry:

    Guess who came to fill this role?:

    They love to seize an opportunity:

    Looks like the author of this report, and the first Head of Mental Health at the SMC had "chonic fatigue" from 16-19, and wishes she had access to the FITNET trial Crawley was hyping.

    "I wish this treatment was around for Chronic Fatigue when I had it at 16 to 19 - the brilliant Esther Crawley Bristol Uni on @BBCr4today CFS"

    https://twitter.com/user/status/793367972127596545


    Simon Wessely liked her tweet.
     
    Hutan, MSEsperanza, MEMarge and 9 others like this.
  2. large donner

    large donner Guest

    Messages:
    1,214
    On one hand they do want to hype bran scanning as proof of evidence based psychiatry but on the other they will be worried that they cant just be pronounces of subjective nonsense allowing them to own as many as possible conditions with their gods presiding over them with voodoo and quackery.

    They love to be incontrol of the "in between" areas of medicine which would no longer be so once they have diagnostic tests and the understanding of the mechanisms.

    They lose control of things like MS etc when scanning improves to show neurological damage instead of themselves owning such conditions with "weak mind" interconnected mind body nonsense.
     
    MEMarge, Viola and EzzieD like this.
  3. Cheshire

    Cheshire Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,461
    They're not giving up yet...
    Don't know why they're doing that right now. Could it have something to do with the paper to be released in the next days? (meaning they're freaking out?)

    http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/cfsme-the-illness-and-the-controversy/

    And still the same good old bullshit about CBT and GET:
     
  4. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    11,212
    Location:
    London, UK
    That looks to me as if written by Michael Sharpe. He is desperately trying to hold on to his position by pulling rank.

    The international ME research community is almost unanimously fed up to the back teeth with NICE guidelines and want them changed. The Americans and the Dutch have already said so officially. Somebody is living in a goldfish bowl.
     
    andypants, alktipping, Inara and 52 others like this.
  5. Indigophoton

    Indigophoton Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    849
    Location:
    UK
    Looks like a desperate rearguard action. The Collins definition seems particularly apt: "if someone is fighting a rearguard action or mounting a rearguard action, they are trying very hard to prevent something from happening, even though it is probably too late for them to succeed".
     
    andypants, alktipping, Inara and 27 others like this.
  6. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,679
  7. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,217
    Location:
    Norway
    I was going to add more quotes from the text which I found unbelievable, but it was impossible to choose just a few.
     
    alktipping, MEMarge, Simone and 23 others like this.
  8. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,455
    I am not sure I like that definition of a rearguard action. It can also be an action by small forces to delay an attack to enable the bulk of the forces to get away and fight another day on their own terms.
     
    alktipping, Allele, Barry and 6 others like this.
  9. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    16,332
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    An attempted pushback due to all the success we've been having recently, I would say, possibly even some attempted revenge for being ousted from the CMRC. One useful aspect of this is that it makes it even clearer how biased the SMC is, and to which side.
     
    alktipping, MEMarge, James and 26 others like this.
  10. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    11,212
    Location:
    London, UK
    However, experts from the medical community, including independent statisticians, trial design specialists, and other researchers have stated that it is a good quality trial

    I would love to know who these independent statisticians and trial design specialists actually are. They never seem to stand up and be counted. Maybe because someone will point out they are being dumb. When was an unblinded trial with subjective endpoints worth row of beans? But of course the problems with the trial are about psychology and not statistics and presumably nobody asked a trial psychologist.

    I am sorry that I do not tweet, but I never will.
     
    alktipping, Inara, Woolie and 37 others like this.
  11. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,679
  12. Sasha

    Sasha Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,636
    Location:
    UK
    Perhaps someone can tweet a link to your post. :)

    Such as @Tom Kindlon?
     
    alktipping, MEMarge, Simone and 6 others like this.
  13. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    11,212
    Location:
    London, UK
    I think Tom has his own fish to fry @Sasha
     
    alktipping, MEMarge, Barry and 9 others like this.
  14. ladycatlover

    ladycatlover Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,458
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    Well I'll happily quote this :wtf: (Grrrrr! :banghead: )

     
    alktipping, MEMarge, Allele and 9 others like this.
  15. ladycatlover

    ladycatlover Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,458
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    Will happily tweet anything you like with your permission. Or links to posts here?
     
    alktipping, MEMarge, Simone and 7 others like this.
  16. Sasha

    Sasha Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,636
    Location:
    UK
    @Cheshire - would it be good to maybe change your title to 'SMC factsheet for journalists: 'CFS/ME - the illness and the controversy' so people realise what it is?

    This factsheet looks pretty desperate to me.
     
    alktipping, MEMarge, Simone and 9 others like this.
  17. Adrian

    Adrian Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,927
    Location:
    UK
    I think they are reliant on Cochrane as a verification these days. I do wonder if they are trying to get a pre-emtive strike in over this paper
    https://twitter.com/user/status/975812420273876993
     
    MEMarge, Simone, EzzieD and 13 others like this.
  18. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,455
    We shall await tomorrows Today programme with expectation.

    What would an SMC campaign be without the BBC?
     
    MEMarge, Simone, Allele and 14 others like this.
  19. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    7,430
    Location:
    UK
    "This is a Factsheet issued by the Science Media Centre to provide background information on science topics relevant to breaking news stories. This is not intended as the ‘last word’ on a subject, but rather a summary of the basics and a pointer towards sources of more detailed information. These can be read as supplements to our Roundups and/or briefings."

    No mention of the JHP special edition on PACE:
    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1359105317722370

    eta: have just emailed David Marks with the link to the SMC
     
    MEMarge, EzzieD, Allele and 10 others like this.
  20. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,217
    Location:
    Norway
    Here's an explanation for that, and a new one
    Those who disagree with this body of evidence cite review articles and reanalyses of trial data published in low impact factor journals such as The Journal of Health Psychology and Fatigue: Biomedicine, Health & Behavior
     
    alktipping, Simone, Allele and 11 others like this.

Share This Page