Welcome to Phoenix Rising!
Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.
To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.
I think you are misrepresenting the situation. It has nothing to do with liking or disliking you personally, and I daresay most if not all appreciate most of what MEA does. But the MEA's attitude toward any point of disagreement is highly dismissive. You don't seem interested in representing patient interests if they diverge with what you think is best. And it's offensive to suggest that such opinions are invalid and unwanted if they do not come from your paying members.I am obviously well aware that there is a small and very vocal group of people on PR who do not like me or the MEA
I am obviously well aware that there is a small and very vocal group of people on PR who do not like me
I am obviously well aware that there is a small and very vocal group of people on PR who do not like me or the MEA
After CMRC meetings @charles shepherd , do you enjoy a few drinks and laughs with Esther & Stephen?
As the joke in Private Eye said, "Treples all round!"
I am at a loss to understand what on this thread or others makes you think this? I am quite shocked actually.I am obviously well aware that there is a small and very vocal group of people on PR who do not like me or the MEA
PS: I think this is rather obvious by now. The whole thing was set up by Wessely. Holgate defends Crawley. Davey Smith calls PACE critics "anti science". MEGA was promoted to patients without disclosing crucial details. The MEGA patient advisor group seems to be powerless. Crawley called criticism of her work "libel" and "anti-science". Do you really think these people have our best interests at heart?
I think you are misrepresenting the situation. It has nothing to do with liking or disliking you personally, and I daresay most if not all appreciate most of what MEA does. But the MEA's attitude toward any point of disagreement is highly dismissive. You don't seem interested in representing patient interests if they diverge with what you think is best. And it's offensive to suggest that such opinions are invalid and unwanted if they do not come from your paying members.
Currently you're the best game in town, and I think you do a very good job. But I think you could do better in listening to patients, and patients deserve to have you do better in that regard. Ideally, it would be nice to have a new patient charity which really does prioritize what patients want. Until then, the MEA is a decent compromise, since what you want generally is in accord with what most patients want.
I have not come across anyone here on PR who does not like you or has said anything to suggest they do not like you, and most people here including me appreciate most of what you do.
Please do not paint a disagreement about one aspect of the what the MEA does as a personal attack on you.
I and others have been careful not to attack you personally in this thread, simply to put our case for disagreeing with you on this one issue. As you say yourself this is only a small part of what you and the MEA do, the rest of which is highly commendable and appreciated.
I can't help wondering to whom you are referring.
…….a very small group of people who do not seem to like anything that the MEA does and their comments do sometimes get very close to being personal attacks
Do not misrepresent me and my concerns in this way please. If you really want to get into Crawley territory where raising concerns is wilfully misinterpreted into being personal attacks then I will withdraw my support for the vast majority of your and the MEA's efforts.I am obviously well aware that there is a small and very vocal group of people on PR who do not like me or the MEA
There might be a desire to avoid being seen as too militant and play the role of the calm rationalist, which could be important in an environment with researchers that might be put off by politics
Do not misrepresent me and my concerns in this way please. If you really want to get into Crawley territory where raising concerns is wilfully misinterpreted into being personal attacks then I will withdraw my support for the vast majority of your and the MEA's efforts.