Relevance of Wessely quotes related to Coyne's critique of PACE

[Ecoclimber]

I strongly recommend to stay on task by focusing on the science or the lack thereof concerning the Pace Trial. Take out PACE, you take out Wessely. Do not be drawned in to rebutting hit pieces about us via Wessely. It is a trap. Let Coyne deal with it.

 

[eafw]

I'll say it again; his views are irrelevant.The facts matter.

You are living in la-la land if you think that the only thing that matters is to present the raw science.

That's assuming that this is what you mean by "facts" rather than the fact of the ongoing campaign that is being waged against us, and the whole rest of the package.

The science has been available for years, including proper crticisms of PACE. Shall we just keep doing the same old thing and yet magically expecting different results ? At what point, using soley your "facts" do you think everybody is suddenly going to turn round and go "whoops yes, we should have looked at that graph when you asked up ever so nicely 100 times ago. Thanks science" ?

 

[Sidereal]

You are living in la-la land if you think that the only thing that matters is to present the raw science.

Maybe so, but the reason we have threads on PR is so that discussions can be organised around specific topics. I started this thread to encourage a discussion about Jim Coyne's takedown of the crappy PACE science, not Simon Wessely's philosophical musings on "all in the mind". Off-topic posts began with post #105 on page 6. Perhaps these posts should be moved to the Wessely quote thread or a new thread.

 

[eafw]

Let Coyne deal with it.

Exactly what I am saying. (It's what I said in my first post on this) Coyne has chosen to engage Wessely on twitter, give him some information that he can look at and use if he sees fit.

I'm just going to note as well, that I think Coyne will soon get bored of this, or at least focus more on his other interests and we cannot rely on him to carry this for us. It has to be a multi-front approach, and there is a lot to do to get PACE/CBT/GET refuted in a way such that we see a real practical change to they way ME is treated in the UK , and everywhere else that uses this "model".

 

[Undisclosed]

Please note -- this new thread was split from -- http://forums.phoenixrising.me/inde...coyne-tackles-the-pace-follow-up-paper.40864/

 

[Aurator]

@Aurator - Wessely stating that an hypothesis exists is not the same as Wessely endorsing it. If you want to nail him, you need to do it with statements he does clearly endorse, or that clearly originate from him.

I apologise if I gave the impression I believed finding a statement to "nail" him on this specific matter was easier than it actually is; that was not my point. My point is that doing so is both futile and unnecessary; futile because to deflect criticism from his worthless science he will engage in puerile logomachy over semantics until Hell freezes over, and unnecessary because it's abundantly clear from even a small cross-section of his collected pronouncements on ME that he regards it as a mental health issue - period. If he didn't, it's unlikely PACE would ever have come into being in the first place, and it's certain we wouldn't now be having this conversation.

Going into that blurry world of lexical nuances, you just play the game according to Simon's rules, and he is a master at it.

If he is, he's a master of something you don't have to be of a high intellectual calibre to be a master of in the first place. Quibbling is scarcely an advanced science.

 

[SOC]

If he is, he's a master of something you don't have to be of a high intellectual calibre to be a master of in the first place. Quibbling is scarcely an advanced science.

What makes him a master is his skill in manipulation and his willingness to use it. That doesn't take brains, either, but it does take a certain kind of mind (and personality), and years of honing the skill to a very sharp weapon. He has all that. He is a master manipulator and propadandist. If we don't take that very seriously, we will find ourselves on the downside of his game. Right now he makes the rules and controls that game, so we need to step very, very carefully being fully aware of the minefield (@^%$# pile?) we're walking in.

 

[chipmunk1]

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/185/2/95

what about this one?

There is only one functional somatic Syndrome

Functional somatic symptoms and syndromes are a major health issue. They are common, costly, persistent and may be disabling. Most of the current literature pertains to specific syndromes defined by medical subspecialties. Indeed, each medical subspecialty seems to have at least one somatic syndrome. These include: irritable bowel syndrome (gastroenterology); chronic pelvic pain (gynaecology); fibromyalgia (rheumatology); non-cardiac chest pain (cardiology); tension headache (neurology); hyperventilation syndrome (respiratory medicine) and chronic fatigue syndrome (infectious disease). In 1999, Wessely and colleagues concluded on the basis of a literature review that there was substantial overlap between these conditions and challenged the acceptance of distinct syndromes as defined in the medical literature (Wesselyet al, 1999). They proposed the concept of a general functional somatic syndrome.

A general functional somatic syndrome can be consistent only with psychogenesis, since it is difficult to conceive of a pathophysiological mechanism that would be common to all functional somatic syndromes.

 

[Esther12]

The second quote comes from the White response though, so they're not both from Wessely.