Creepy posts by James Coyne to Jeanette Burmeister

[Wildcat]

@JES ...... Coyne made it clear that he was critiquing the UK medical establishment..... and that he believed that the US medical establishment would not engage in such underhand reconstructing of a physical disease as a psychosocial disorder in the way the UK medical establishment has done.

Coynes views on that were made clear on social media and in private communications in late 2015

Coyne expressed views that US medicine was not as low as the UK Wessely/White/Sharpe/Chalder etc etc shennanigans in reconstructing ME as a psychosocial disorder

It was when both US and UK activists criticised the US government funded NIH study employing blatantly Psychosocial researchers ...... that Coyne became abusive , first towards individuals who objected to the psychosocial researchers involvement in the government funded study .... then indiscriminately having a go at patients on two uk based ME facebook groups...... facebook groups used by large numbers of patients who had not personally engaged with Coyne

So Coyne's behaviour appears to be political....at least for him .... and then he threatened a large number of patients, that if they did not apologise to him, thst he would withdraw his political support to them as ME sufferers.

Talk about manipulative!

.



And his targets? ..... Are supposed to shut up 'for the greater good' .... or because its boring that a supposed hero should try to silence experienced and astute activists about a deeply political matter... ....
.

 

[flybro]

Some of the history that so many have existed through in the UK, written on 14/sept/2016
http://www.margaretwilliams.me/2016/proof-positive-revisited.pdf

 

[JES]

It was when both US and UK activists criticised the US government funded NIH study employing blatantly Psychosocial researchers ...... that Coyne became abusive , first towards individuals who objected to the psychosocial researchers involvement in the government funded study .... then indiscriminately having a go at patients on two uk based ME facebook groups...... facebook groups used by large numbers of patients who had not personally engaged with Coyne

So Coyne's behaviour appears to be political....at least for him .... and then he threatened a large number of patients, that if they did not apologise to him, thst he would withdraw his support to them as ME sufferers.

Talk about manipulative!

Maybe he has some psychologist buddies in the US, otherwise I don't understand why he would be supportive of psychologist involvement in US CFS/ME research, but meanwhile criticize Wessely & Co and the GET/CBT approach. He seems to be very skeptical about applying CBT for "physical" diseases in the posts he makes on Twitter and he clearly stated that CFS/ME was a physical disease in another blog post.

 

[Dx Revision Watch]

Maybe he has some psychologist buddies in the US, otherwise I don't understand why he would be supportive of psychologist involvement in US CFS/ME research, but meanwhile criticize Wessely & Co and the GET/CBT approach. He seems to be very skeptical about applying CBT for "physical" diseases in the posts he makes on Twitter and he clearly stated that CFS/ME was a physical disease in another blog post.

Yet he has given a platform to and repeatedly promoted Edward Shorter, Edward Shorter's book "From Paralysis to Fatigue" and Edward Shorter's blogs on the Psychology Today blogger platform.

Has Coyne actually read "From Paralysis to Fatigue"?
Has Coyne read Shorter's blogs?

If he has, did it suit his agenda to haul in Shorter to oppose Suzanne O'Sullivan's book, irrespective of Shorter's views on CFS, ME?

That takes some understanding, too.

And when challenged on his rationale for promoting and defending Shorter as "funny and informative" and "[Shorter] makes, good points demolishing 'psychosomatic' illness" he claims:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/747738282939781120

Note, he has also held back comments on his blog posts concerning his decision to promote Shorter.

Given his position as a professor emeritus and his background as a psychologist (at one time in the field of relationship counseling), I consider his "does it make your husband jealous" comments to Jeannette grossly unprofessional and as weird, ill-judged and disturbing as his promotion of Shorter.

 

[adreno]

Someone told you to "fuck off" on the Internet? Or said "isn't your husband jealous"? I suggest everyone move on.

Go to any schoolyard and see what happens there. My 5 year old kid is regularly addressed much worse than that, and seems to handle it fine.

If this is truly so disturbing to you, there are ways of addressing online harassment:

http://www.report-it.org.uk/bullying_and_harassment
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/d...iscrimination/taking-action-about-harassment/
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/stalking_and_harassment/

 

[Dx Revision Watch]

Someone told you to "fuck off" on the Internet? Or said "isn't your husband jealous"? I suggest everyone move on.

Go to any schoolyard and see what happens there. My 5 year old kid is regularly addressed much worse than that, and seems to handle it fine.

If this is truly so disturbing to you, there are ways of addressing online harassment:

http://www.report-it.org.uk/bullying_and_harassment
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/d...iscrimination/taking-action-about-harassment/
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/stalking_and_harassment/

The issue isn't confined to his aggression it is his attempts to shut down the activity of key advocates and encouraging other patients/advocates to shun them.

 

[adreno]

The issue isn't confined to his aggression it is his attempts to shut down the activity of key advocates and encouraging other patients/advocates to shun them.

Here's the rub: he can't make anyone shut up. He can only call people names.

 

[Dx Revision Watch]

My 5 year old kid is regularly addressed much worse than that, and seems to handle it fine.

Your 5 year old isn't a psychologist with academic institution affiliations who has been attempting to close down long term international advocates and encourage other patients and advocates to remove their support for them.

 

[adreno]

Your 5 year old isn't a psychologist with academic institution affiliations who has been attempting to close down long term international advocates and encourage other patients and advocates to remove their support for them.

You totally missed the point. My kid is not doing any harassment. Go back and read my post again.

 

[Stewart]

Maybe he has some psychologist buddies in the US, otherwise I don't understand why he would be supportive of psychologist involvement in US CFS/ME research, but meanwhile criticize Wessely & Co and the GET/CBT approach. He seems to be very skeptical about applying CBT for "physical" diseases in the posts he makes on Twitter and he clearly stated that CFS/ME was a physical disease in another blog post.

I don't think he behaved the way he did because he supports psychologists being involved in US ME/CFS research. He made it clear at the time that he strongly disagreed with what he felt was an unhelpful over-reaction by some advocates to the appointment of Wallitt. Lots of people were - and are - concerned about Wallitt, but some prominent advocates took it much further than others, claiming that his appointment was proof that the entire study was a trick by the NIH, and their real intention was to secretly reinforce the ideas of the BPS school under the cover of performing biological research.

Coyne thought these claims were far-fetched, and said he was going to write a blog explaining why differences between research in the US and UK made this scenario highly improbable - but then sadly he decided his energies were better spent swearing at people who'd never even made the claims on Facebook...

Yet he has given a platform to and repeatedly promoted Edward Shorter, Edward Shorter's book "From Paralysis to Fatigue" and Edward Shorter's blogs on the Psychology Today blogger platform.

Has Coyne actually read "From Paralysis to Fatigue"?
Has Coyne read Shorter's blogs?

If he has, did it suit his agenda to haul in Shorter to oppose Suzanne O'Sullivan's book, irrespective of Shorter's views on CFS, ME?

That takes some understanding, too.

I think one thing we can probably all agree on is that when Coyne leapt into ME advocacy he didn't bother to take the time to fully learn about the history, the current situation or the personalities involved, with the result that he keeps making stupid, unnecessary mistakes. When he screws up he won't admit it, and when people try to help educate him, he throws their offer of assistance back in their face (which is more than a little ironic, given that one of his complaints about Jeannette was that she wasn't open to being corrected when she was wrong)

(Having said that, I'd far rather have Shorter critiquing O'Sullivan's book than endorsing it.)

The issue isn't confined to his aggression it is his attempts to shut down the activity of key advocates and encouraging other patients/advocates to shun them.

People keep making this claim, but no-one seems able to offer any evidence to back it up. Can you provide any proof that Coyne has been continuing in his efforts to 'shut down the activity of key advocates' since his outburst in February?

 

[Dx Revision Watch]

Here's the rub: he can't make anyone shut up. He can only call people names.

He can and does do a lot more than that...

He blocks those who challenge his views, opinions or behaviour (sometimes publicly announcing that he is blocking them) - and thereby denies them a wider public platform.

He encourages others to also block them and to shun them - thereby potentially restricting their reach.

He holds back comments on his posts that oppose his views and thereby denies them a public platform.

He is not just "name calling". He is attempting to control opinion that does not suit his agenda.

And he is a hypocrite:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704611674448400385

(That's Prof Michael Sharpe and a patient "Liking" Coyne's announcement.)

 

[Dx Revision Watch]

You totally missed the point. My kid is not doing any harassment. Go back and read my post again.

No I haven't missed your point - I have missed a couple of words.

Your 5 year old [is not the target of] a psychologist with...

 

[Dx Revision Watch]

Can you provide any proof that Coyne has been continuing in his efforts to 'shut down the activity of key advocates' since his outburst in February?

I've not claimed that - you will have to address that Q to others. I am referring to his MO between November and February and the fall-out from that.

 

[adreno]

He can and does do a lot more than that...

He blocks those who challenge his views, opinions or behaviour (sometimes publicly announcing that he is blocking them) - and thereby denies them a wider public platform.

He encourages others to also block them and to shun them - thereby potentially restricting their reach.

He holds back comments on his posts that oppose his views and thereby denies them a public platform.

And this is his prerogative, his choice. This is how social media works. We can all agree that being democratic and open to criticism is better, but in many cases people are not so. Media narratives are about power and influence.

The best we can do in this situation is set a good example, by being cool headed and open to debate, instead of blocking and harassing or engaging in flame wars. We cannot decide the behavior of others.

 

[Stewart]

I've not claimed that - you will have to address that Q to others. I am referring to his MO between November and February and the fall-out from that.

Okay. So he behaved very badly six months ago, he was roundly chastised by the community for his behaviour and there's no evidence that he's repeated it since. So tell me - why are we having this conversation half a year later?

He can and does do a lot more than that...

He blocks those who challenge his views, opinions or behaviour (sometimes publicly announcing that he is blocking them) - and thereby denies them a wider public platform.

He encourages others to also block them and to shun them - thereby potentially restricting their reach.

He holds back comments on his posts that oppose his views and thereby denies them a public platform.

He is not just "name calling". He is attempting to control opinion that does not suit his agenda.

And he is a hypocrite:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704611674448400385

Just to be clear - you're attacking him here for nothing more than blocking people he disagrees with on twitter and moderating blog posts.

 

[adreno]

Your 5 year old [is not the target of] a psychologist with...

Psychologists do not have special mind control powers.

 

[Mrs Sowester]

Blocking people and removing comments he doesn't like from his blogs are completely acceptable and common behaviours.
Everyone can do that to whomever they please on Twitter, Facebook and their own personal blogs, they can silence any opinion they dislike or disagree with on their own pages. It is their right. It is not abuse.
The PMs he sends people when he believes their advocacy damages his own efforts are invasive and unpleasant, but the recipient doesn't need to take any notice of them or even read them - there is a delete button.

If people are receiving PMs from him that are abusive or cross any lines that could be considered harassment then report him to the relevant authorities.

But remember that two wrongs don't make a right - if you make allegations on public platforms or incite people to ostracise or attack him then you are as bad and as hypocritical as he is.

 

[Cheesus]

This is an argument about whether or not we should be having an argument. There is even an argument about whether or not we should be having an argument about an argument.

It seems to me like a massive waste of energy (yes, I am joining the argument about whether or not to have an argument about an argument).

The word argument has lost all meaning.

 

[TiredSam]

There is even an argument about whether or not we should be having an argument about an argument.

No there isn't.

 

[lansbergen]

Since when does one not have the right to remove people from ones property?