joshualevy
Senior Member
- Messages
- 158
I was reading the various responses to the Ampligen trials and the PACE trial, and something really jumped out at me:
The basic argument for the Ampligen study was this "there is anicdotal evidence that some people have been helped, so therefore it should be approved so those people who can be helped, will be". The basic aregument for the PACE study is this "there is anicdotal evidence that some people have been hurt, so therefore it should be shut down immeadiately and no more research like this done".
The double standard is very clear.
Someone without emotional attachments would either say "If anyone was helped by PACE we should make it widely available, just like the argument for Ampligen", or they should say "If anyone is hurt by Ampligen, we should stop it quickly, just like PACE". Those would at least be consistent standards.
As it is, it's pretty clear that people are NOT reacting to the results of the study, but the suggestion by Ampligen that ME/CFS is immune based and the suggestion by PACE that it's psychological.
A similar double standard is that PACE has published data showing cure rates (based on their definition of a cure) which everyone attacks immediately, but Ampligen has never published any cure data at all, and everyone loves that! Of course the situation is worse with Rituximab vs. PACE. Rituximab has zero objective measures of improvement, while PACE has one such measure. Everyone complains about PACE's one but no one says anything about Rituximab's weaker study.
Again: the key to support in this community is not strong science: support for "ABP" Anything But Psychiatry!
Joshua (not Jay!) Levy
The basic argument for the Ampligen study was this "there is anicdotal evidence that some people have been helped, so therefore it should be approved so those people who can be helped, will be". The basic aregument for the PACE study is this "there is anicdotal evidence that some people have been hurt, so therefore it should be shut down immeadiately and no more research like this done".
The double standard is very clear.
Someone without emotional attachments would either say "If anyone was helped by PACE we should make it widely available, just like the argument for Ampligen", or they should say "If anyone is hurt by Ampligen, we should stop it quickly, just like PACE". Those would at least be consistent standards.
As it is, it's pretty clear that people are NOT reacting to the results of the study, but the suggestion by Ampligen that ME/CFS is immune based and the suggestion by PACE that it's psychological.
A similar double standard is that PACE has published data showing cure rates (based on their definition of a cure) which everyone attacks immediately, but Ampligen has never published any cure data at all, and everyone loves that! Of course the situation is worse with Rituximab vs. PACE. Rituximab has zero objective measures of improvement, while PACE has one such measure. Everyone complains about PACE's one but no one says anything about Rituximab's weaker study.
Again: the key to support in this community is not strong science: support for "ABP" Anything But Psychiatry!
Joshua (not Jay!) Levy