1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. 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. Lou B Lou

    Lou B Lou Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    429


    Where did Fiona Fox write that @Adam pwme ?

    Fiona Fox appears to have written a universal get-out clause for anything she wrote in her book. On page 13 of 'Beyond the Hype' Fox writes:

    "This book is not intended to be an objective record of science in the media during the 21st century: it is my account of my time in it. Or to put it another way - this is my book, and all the things in it are what I remember"

    In the Acknowledgements section Fox says she had help with fact checking, and writes
    "If the book is wrong in places that is my failing"
     
  2. Adam pwme

    Adam pwme Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    624
    The quote was at the top of page 78.

    Thanks I'd not seen that. Wow, quite the disclaimer...
     
  3. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,269
    Location:
    London, UK
    Yes, well, we can see that, since nobody who had checked the facts at all would have written chapter 3.
     
  4. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    Not sure if this is related or not ...

    https://me-pedia.org/wiki/PACE_trial

    [my italic]
     
  5. Adam pwme

    Adam pwme Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    624

    Thanks Barry that's really helpful. It looks like Fox is probably referring to the Countess of Mar but got the details wrong saying it was an MP during a parliamentary debate.
     
  6. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    Good heavens - she got a point of detail wrong ... I find that so very hard to believe! :rolleyes::p:D

    Probably confusing with Carol Monaghan, who described PACE as possibly the greatest medical scandal ...
     
    bobbler, alktipping, Missense and 7 others like this.
  7. Adam pwme

    Adam pwme Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    624
    Haha, so out of character :)
     
    bobbler, alktipping, Missense and 4 others like this.
  8. FMMM1

    FMMM1 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,593
    Can someone post on social media re the claim about "fraud" - Hansard is the official record but I'm not sure if you can e.g. check for "PACE" & "fraud" - used together.
    Or simply ask her when this occurred? Might be interesting if it turned out they were self identifying!
     
  9. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    51,865
    Location:
    UK
  10. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,237
    Location:
    Norway
    Trial by Error by David Tuller Science Media Centre Chief Compares Patient Advocates to Nazis

    quote:
    In a widely hyped new book–“Beyond the Hype: The Inside Story of Science’s Biggest Media Controversies”–Fox recounts her escapades as the head of this purportedly neutral science communications agency. As anyone who has followed events in the ME/CFS world knows, the SMC, founded two decades ago, has played an influential and unfortunately negative role in shaping how the British press has regarded and covered the ME/CFS saga. Chapter 3 of Fox’s book involves what the subhead calls “the bitter row over ME/CFS research.”

    The title of this chapter–“First They Came for the Communists”—leaves little doubt about Fox’s perspective.
     
    MSEsperanza, rainy, ukxmrv and 21 others like this.
  11. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    51,865
    Location:
    UK
    Thank you @dave30th. And thanks also to those adding reviews on Amazon, including an excellent one by @Caroline Struthers. It's interesting that there are so far no positive reviews of the book, just a few 5 star ratings without reviews.
     
    MSEsperanza, rainy, dave30th and 18 others like this.
  12. Wyva

    Wyva Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,368
    Location:
    Budapest, Hungary
    Probably for the same reason why brand new movies, often before their actual release have a rating of 9/10 on IMDB, then once widely released in cinemas, the rating drops to 6.3. Mysteries, mysteries everywhere. :angelic:
     
  13. Hoopoe

    Hoopoe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,234
    The book has an Amazon rating of 2.6 out of 5 at the moment.

    I'm not sure how someone who did any research at all could believe that opposition to CBT/GET is a fringe movement among patients when researching this for 10 minutes should make it very clear that major patient organizations in the US, UK, Netherlands, France, Australia, Spain, Germany, Austria, Norway, Canada are strongly against CBT/GET. The only answer is that she never researched this at all, naively believing everything she was told by the PACE authors. For a journalist who claims to be working against misinformation this is an embarassing failure.

    Or perhaps she sees her role more as supporting the perceived authorities against those with different opinions than anything to do with finding out what is true and what is false.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2022
    MSEsperanza, rainy, bobbler and 16 others like this.
  14. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
    Sharpe mentions "false allegations about the trial", including of fraud, in the briefing document he sent ahead of the Westminster Hall debate on 21 June 2018.

    He also emailed Carol Monaghan to tell her that her behaviour was "unbecoming of an MP" before the WH debate, but I can't remember what this was in relation to. It might have been something she had said in the HoC previously (in the run up to the debate), but I can't track down exactly what.

    [eta] She did say, in the earlier February 2018 WH debate that, "From the very start the PACE trial was flawed."

    [eta2] Or maybe it was this article in Politics Home on 18 June 2018 - "flawed and unreliable"
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2022
  15. cfsandmore

    cfsandmore Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    USA
    In the US the book has a 3.4 rating. 61% are 5 stars and 39% being 1 star.

    One review is positive.
     

    Attached Files:

    • smc.jpg
      smc.jpg
      File size:
      186 KB
      Views:
      18
  16. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    51,865
    Location:
    UK
    That positive review is from someone sent an 'advance reader copy' so likely to be someone selected as likely to give a glowing review.
     
  17. JemPD

    JemPD Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,915
    I have tried once again to leave a star rating for some thing i bought - a book and another item, without leavinbg a written comment. Its not possible so one does wonder how those 5 star ratings got there
     
  18. Adam pwme

    Adam pwme Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    624
    Thanks Lucy.
     
  19. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
    Thinking more about this, and trying to recall the order of events at the time (tricky). Things have got somewhat conflated here.

    What I think we know (maybe):

    Sharpe emailed Monaghan about the upcoming debate, presumably to include his briefing doc.

    Monaghan mentions the email, and that Sharpe said her conduct was unbecoming etc. (or maybe he warned her not to say anything that might be unbecoming? I'm trying to be charitable)

    Sharpe then takes to Twitter to say that what he said was misrepresented, and that she used "parliamentary privilege" to do so.

    https://twitter.com/user/status/1010171101148844032


    and...
    sharpe_monaghan_21jun18.png

    I don't think anyone actually mentioned that the trial was fraudulent - that was all in the briefing doc (that he provided), and not in the debate.
    MPs tend to be careful about that sort of thing.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2022
    MEMarge, bobbler, Ariel and 5 others like this.
  20. Adam pwme

    Adam pwme Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    624
    I think you're right. The only mention of fraud appears to be from the Countess of Mar mentioned earlier in the thread.
     
    MEMarge, Ariel, alktipping and 2 others like this.

Share This Page