Julie Rehmeyer's 'Through the Shadowlands'
Writer Never Give Up talks about Julie Rehmeyer's new book "Through the Shadowlands: A Science Writer's Odyssey into an Illness Science Doesn't Understand" and shares an interview with Julie ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Fight fire with fire - why not slam PACE academically?

Discussion in 'Action Alerts and Advocacy' started by Hutan, Jul 20, 2016.

  1. Hutan

    Hutan Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes:
    6,427
    New Zealand
    Some recent posts on PR have got me thinking about how to make the problems with PACE that are so obvious to us clear to a wider audience. For example, @Valentijn's recent post:

    It's the same story when trying to communicate with national authorities about flawed treatment guidelines for ME/CFS. They point to Cochrane reviews of published papers. End of story.

    David Tuller's blogs and his interview are great. The letter signed by all sorts of eminent people is too. But I think what we need is a paper published in a major journal (the Lancet :)) picking PACE apart. I know, there is so much to be said, it would be hard to fit it all in a single paper. But still.

    And I don't mean arguing around the edges as to whether the economic benefit of CBT was calculated correctly. I mean making it clear that there was no long term benefit from the interventions by any objective measure, major lapses in proper scientific process and no proper evaluation of harms. I don't think we have to wait for the data before a formal critique can be published.

    The article that @worldbackwards posted in this thread
    http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/more-data-sharing-high-jinks.45759/
    is worth a read. The story is of how a junior researcher found a major error in the papers of established researchers. It was only when the established researchers realised that a paper written by the junior researcher exposing the errors was going to be published that they finally issued a correction.

    Too much to hope for that the psychobabblers would change their story now. But, having a well written published academic paper setting out the errors of PACE in our arsenal when we next try to point out the problems of PACE and GET and CBT might give others pause for thought.
     
    Jan, trishrhymes, matt3n and 18 others like this.
  2. Lindberg

    Lindberg

    Messages:
    35
    Likes:
    105
    In addition to what is said above, has anyone been in contact with UKRIO regarding PACE? It seems like charities involved can turn to UKRIO and ask for investigation about fraud and misconduct.
     
    Ritto, panckage, Bob and 6 others like this.
  3. A.B.

    A.B. Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,751
    Likes:
    23,188
    The PACE authors know how to play the political game. Patients have been too naive in that regard.

    In particular, we should attack the fact that the results are more consistent with placebo effects being documented than anything else, and then attack the presumed cost effectiveness, then suggest that the money spent on CBT/GET services be invested into biomedical research instead.

    If the results had been accurately reported, PACE should have been the end of the psychosocial illness paradigm.
     
    Jan, trishrhymes, Justin30 and 10 others like this.
  4. Hutan

    Hutan Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes:
    6,427
    New Zealand
    UKRIO - indeed looks useful.
    http://ukrio.org/about-us/

     
    Jan, barbc56, Ritto and 9 others like this.
  5. Lindberg

    Lindberg

    Messages:
    35
    Likes:
    105
    Swedens counterpart to UKRIO has looked into Macchiarinis research and among other things expressed concern about him not releasing rawdata...
     
    Jan, barbc56, Invisible Woman and 6 others like this.
  6. Lindberg

    Lindberg

    Messages:
    35
    Likes:
    105
    Are either of you, Hutan or AB, from the UK? Would be good if someone from the UK could look into UKRIO more to see if it would be a good idea to get in contact with them. Perhaps Dr Charles Shephard or someone from ME Association?
     
    Jan, barbc56, Invisible Woman and 7 others like this.
  7. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,449
    Likes:
    28,522
    I think that there are lots of attempts at things like this, but the more people having a go the better imo! UK academia seems pretty resistant to acknowledging the problems with PACE, but the more people we have raising concerns in different way the more likely we are to get lucky with one of them.
     
    Jan, barbc56, Woolie and 7 others like this.
  8. Keela Too

    Keela Too Sally Burch

    Messages:
    900
    Likes:
    3,985
    N.Ireland
    That looks an interesting site. However it seems they are rather more aimed at pre-emptive actions, rather than retrospective investigation?

    Also I wonder how they are funded?
    Would the advice be something the individual seeking their advice would have to pay for?
     
    Invisible Woman and Bob like this.
  9. Lindberg

    Lindberg

    Messages:
    35
    Likes:
    105
    Perhaps UKRIO would be a good place to express concern about MAGENTA trial which is underway? And from there go to PACE?

    But if someone with good insight into the UK politics and people connections first could take a look at the UKRIO board? That might give a hint if it could be a fruitful way to go or not...
     
    Jan, barbc56, Justin30 and 8 others like this.
  10. Yogi

    Yogi Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,131
    Likes:
    6,885
    Jan, barbc56, Invisible Woman and 4 others like this.
  11. Keela Too

    Keela Too Sally Burch

    Messages:
    900
    Likes:
    3,985
    N.Ireland
    Jan, barbc56, Ritto and 3 others like this.
  12. Hutan

    Hutan Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes:
    6,427
    New Zealand
    Sorry, I'm from New Zealand. I agree that this is something someone like @charles shepherd would be well placed to do.
     
  13. lnester7

    lnester7 Seven

    Messages:
    2,392
    Likes:
    3,437
    USA
    I thought the same, best is to publish paper highlighting the issues " formally" we can write papers using the same data and conclude the right things
     
    Jan, barbc56, Dolphin and 1 other person like this.
  14. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,486
    Likes:
    35,023
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    This has indeed been done, several times now. Its not easy to get them published in major journals though, and considering possible issues with reviewing and the editor at Lancet its extremely unlikely they will ever consider it. What typically happens is it winds up being published in some obscure journal and very few doctors will ever see it.

    Considering how many methodological issues there are with PACE it would be very hard to write them all up in a single paper to an academic or scientific standard. Tuller had to gloss over things and it was still very long, and his article was then published in Virology blog. A great number of papers, each looking in depth at a single methodological flaw, while briefly mentioning others in the discussion section or introduction, might be a way to go.
     
    Jan, barbc56, Invisible Woman and 5 others like this.
  15. slysaint

    slysaint Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,124
    Likes:
    11,463
    Canadian Consensus Criteria (CCC)

    SELF-HELP STRATEGIES (SHS)
    A hypothesis underlying the use of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy(CBT) for ME/CFS is based
    on the premise that the patient’s impairments are learned due to wrong thinking and
    “considers the pathophysiology of CFS to be entirely reversible and perpetuated only by the
    interaction of cognition, behaviour, and emotional processes. The patient merely has to
    change their thinking and their symptoms will be gone. According to this model, CBT should
    not only improve the quality of the patient’s life, but could be potentially curative”
    Supporters suggest that “ideally general practitioners should diagnose CFS and refer patients
    to psychotherapists for CBT without detours to medical specialists as in other functional
    somatic syndromes”.
    Proponents ignore the documented pathophysiology of ME/CFS,disregard the reality of the patients’ symptoms, blame them for their illness, and withhold medical treatment. Their studies have often included patients who have chronic fatigue but excluded more severe cases as well as those who have other symptoms that are part of the
    clinical criteria of ME/CFS. Further, their studies fail to cure or improve physiological impairments such as OI, sore throat, IBS, etc.
    Dr. A. Komaroff, a Harvard based world authority, stated that the evidence of biological process “is inconsistent with the hypothesis that (the syndrome) involves symptoms that are only imagined or amplified because of
    underlying psychiatric distress. It is time to put that hypothesis to rest”. Some physicians,
    who are cognizant of the biological pathophysiology of ME/CFS, teach patients coping skills but call them “CBT”. We urge such doctors to use the term “Self-Help Strategies” and avoid using the terms “Cognitive Behaviour Therapy” and “Cognitive Retraining Therapy”.
     
    Jan, MEMum, barbc56 and 2 others like this.
  16. Dr Speedy

    Dr Speedy

    Messages:
    91
    Likes:
    228
    Using the conclusions from the following excellent review more will help: The PACE Trial Invalidates the Use of Cognitive Behavioral and Graded Exercise Therapy in Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/ Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Review doi http://dx.doi.org/10.16966/2379-7150.124
     
    Invisible Woman and Keela Too like this.
  17. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,449
    Likes:
    28,522
    That reminds me - you mentioned saying that some of the errors in that paper others had pointed too were, in fact, not errors. I don't think I ever got details of that, and when I started looking through it did seem that there were problems weith the paper.

    Some details here:

    http://forums.phoenixrising.me/inde...t-in-me-cfs-a-review.43937/page-2#post-714894

    What do you think?
     
  18. Dr Speedy

    Dr Speedy

    Messages:
    91
    Likes:
    228
    It's obviously clear that many people are not aware that I'm severely affected which means I do not have the power to counter the things all the time etc. There are a number of people on this forum who criticize not only this 1 but many other papers, without valid arguments even though they do not see that themselves; but if scientists and professors known for critical analyzing papers and winning awards for publishing them call it an excellent paper which will be used as a reference by many than that says it all.

    I think it's more than time that people start to use the fact that the review showed that the PACE trial had a NULL effect and also that the PACE trial proved again that ME/CFS is a physical disease.
     
  19. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,449
    Likes:
    28,522
    It showed that the PACE researchers are dodgy , but I don't see how PACE proved that ME/CFS is a physical disease.

    Lots of people are seriously ill here but we still try to discuss one another ideas, probe and explain our arguments. Lots of scientists and professors said PACE was an excellent trial that led to excellent papers.
     
    Jan, panckage, JaimeS and 4 others like this.
  20. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,652
    Likes:
    5,006
    I would certainly hope not. I think it goes beyond that.

    It doesn't mean that there are many scientists who passively accept a published paper. It probably means that other scientist are agreeing with the methodology used in the PACE study which is different.
     
    Invisible Woman likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page