Video: The PACE trial: a short explanation, Graham McPhee

Thanks all for the kind words. It's hard work trying to shear off all the complications and just to focus on the raw essentials in a language that most can follow. I'm glad you think it is working.

I'm hoping that the forthcoming Westminster Hall debate may trigger more interest in the issues. I'm currently part-way through video 2, which is going to cover the "recovery" fiasco. Then in the third I hope to 'encourage' folk to take a more active part in bringing the issues into public notice.

Getting the lighting right so that the viewer isn't dazzled by the reflected glare off the top of my head was a real challenge. I thought of having George on my lap to distract them from it, but he's too old to sit there for long.

NotGotME.png
 
It is absolutely brilliant, @Graham. I actually thought the lighting was a touch of genius. There is a bright spot on the background to the left of you which somehow takes the piss out of all these arty farty lighting engineers. (Not that I am suggesting that any other aspect of your video takes the piss out of anyone else of course but ...) It sort of says 'No this is not a slick video trying to persuade you of something, it is Graham talking sense. And you only noticed this bright spot because you wanted to know how he did it so brilliantly and the answer isn't in the bright spots or even the fetching T shirt. It is Graham talking sense. And his sense of timing is worthy of Dave Allen.
 
Can someone link this video in to the twitter threads involving @Mike Godwin, Wessely and Sharpe? I'd love to be a fly on the wall and watch Sharpe, Wessely, Chalder, White and co. watch Graham quietly and clearly demolishing their £5 million trial.

I wonder whether Carol Monaghan can show it at the debate on Thursday. I think it would be a brilliant way to show the MP's (most of whom aren't scientists and assume medical trials involve high level science) just what a pile of crap the PACE trial is. Is anyone in touch with her?
 
Jonathan Edwards said:
How did we miss that it was so simple?
Click to expand...

We didn't miss it. Various people here have been saying for a while that CBT/GET are designed to alter perception of one's health and thus questionnaire answering behaviour. I don't remember who expressed it first.

Graham did an excellent job expressing it in simpler terms though, and showing that you don't even need any sort of therapy. The bias is so easy to introduce.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top