Phoenix Rising supports the Millions Missing global day of protest
Phoenix Rising is delighted to support the demands being made in the ME/CFS community’s first-ever global day of protest …
Discuss the article on the Forums.

S. Wessely - Death threats, abuse, smear campaigns - Standing up for Science: 29 March

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Yogi, Mar 19, 2017.

  1. Cheshire

    Cheshire Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes:
    9,003
    Some elements of Wessely's talk:
     
  2. Snowdrop

    Snowdrop Rebel without a biscuit

    Messages:
    2,896
    Likes:
    10,092
    Why is there no smilie face indicating someone's deluded? "Millions recovered from ME (cfs) after CBT" Uh Huh.
     
    MEMum, Solstice, Laelia and 2 others like this.
  3. Gijs

    Gijs Senior Member

    Messages:
    643
    Likes:
    1,303
    Andy Lewis wrote " continiously" can he proof his statement? No. And Andy Wessely is a very bad researcher you didn't know that. Wessely isn't a victim he is a sadist for very sick people.
     
  4. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,449
    Likes:
    28,523
    I don't think he's a sadist. I don't think he takes pleasure in the harm he's done. I just think that his own comfort and career is more important to him than being honest about how badly he's got things wrong.
     
  5. user9876

    user9876 Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes:
    18,184
    I think he has a lot of company in the UK scientific community thinking his comfort and career are more important than the science. In discussing open data a lot of UK academics were saying yes but we must have sufficient time first to ensure we can publish everything possible before sharing -- basically to boost their career rather than helping scientific advances by sharing data.
     
  6. Kati

    Kati Patient in training

    Messages:
    5,466
    Likes:
    19,595
    2 tweets of interest:



     
  7. RogerBlack

    RogerBlack Senior Member

    Messages:
    891
    Likes:
    2,890
    MEMum, Mary and Invisible Woman like this.
  8. slysaint

    slysaint Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,124
    Likes:
    11,464
    our chum @harveythecat
    I was hoping someone from our community might have gone................

    edit: thanks for attending and asking questions...........and keeping your cool..........(having read your tweets).I think I would have screamed and been dragged out of the building:aghhh:
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2017
    MEMum, Mary, rosa and 8 others like this.
  9. Gijs

    Gijs Senior Member

    Messages:
    643
    Likes:
    1,303
    So Wessely said that he has no problem with subjective reported improvement of fatique, but when patiënts reports deterioration he said that there is no objective evidence for this claim.... MMM... funny professor.
     
  10. user9876

    user9876 Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes:
    18,184
    There are some interesting tweets from Janet Eastham concerning questions she managed to ask




    Sounds like Wessely is defending bad practice and the audience is lapping it up with the facilitator ensuring he doesn't have to answer difficult questions.

    His comments on recovery are really quite outrageous in terms of saying we want recovery so we set thresholds to give it.
     
    MEMum, mango, Mary and 18 others like this.
  11. slysaint

    slysaint Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,124
    Likes:
    11,464
    Rigged or what?
    This wasn't a debate.
     
  12. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,449
    Likes:
    28,523
    The more we hear from Wessely, the worse he seems. We want to get him on the record, talking about this stuff, as much as possible imo.
     
    MEMum, Mary, Invisible Woman and 16 others like this.
  13. Gijs

    Gijs Senior Member

    Messages:
    643
    Likes:
    1,303
    SW: ''we are in a world of patiënts reported outcomes'', not objective outcomes Wessely doesn't have any problems with that. Mmm interesting. So if patiënts reported positive findings they use it , and if they reported harm, they ignore it because there is no objective proof for these claims in reviews. Look a little bit silly to me.
     
    MEMum, flybro, Mary and 18 others like this.
  14. Chrisb

    Chrisb Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes:
    5,360
    SW seeks to distinguish between criticism and abuse, and says that criticism is fine. One would have thought the distinction was often so apparent that one would not need to mention, in passing, comments of the Lord Chief Justice.

    Perhaps you can help me. Is it criticism or abuse of patients to say, to anyone prepared to listen, that patients' symptoms are perpetuated by false illness beliefs?

    I tend to think it depends upon where you are standing.
     
  15. TreePerson

    TreePerson Senior Member

    Messages:
    233
    Likes:
    1,046
    U.K.
    The Andy Lewis guy seems very keen to defend Wessley and overly critical of the ME community. He describes the Twitter thread (beneath the tweet quoted above) as evidence that the arguments are abusive. I'm relatively new to all this but I couldn't see anything abusive in the Twitter thread. It was highly critical but actually quite moderate considering what can happen on Twitter. Is Andy Lewis known for defending Wessley and being unfairly critical of ME patients? It crossed my mind that someone who is interested in debunking quackery might rather enjoy the idea that there is a large group of people who imagine they are ill. It would appeal to a certain cynical mindset.
     
  16. PDXhausted

    PDXhausted Senior Member

    Messages:
    254
    Likes:
    341
    NW US
    If you spend your whole career getting hate mail, that might be a clue that you're doing it wrong...
     
  17. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,449
    Likes:
    28,523
    I didn't see that ... is there more transcript available?
     
  18. Chrisb

    Chrisb Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes:
    5,360
    Its only a passing reference in the tweets of JE posted by User9876 at #70 above.
     
    Esther12 likes this.
  19. Large Donner

    Large Donner Senior Member

    Messages:
    866
    Likes:
    3,864
    Except they dropped all the objective measures and the subjective measures provided a null result once the data was released after they changed the recovery definition because "they realised no one would have recovered otherwise", and people could be defined as recovered yet still ill enough to enter the trial at the same time.

    Laughter from the scientific community worldwide.

    Real objective laughter.

    Except Wessely is still living in the subjective wherby he can just ignore the rest of the scientific community worldwide because, well, "thats what we do in the world of psychiatry".
     
  20. Large Donner

    Large Donner Senior Member

    Messages:
    866
    Likes:
    3,864
    Actually Wessely is being very clever here in his usual play with words. He actually says...

    And he keeps reminding people that did not play any part in this trial so he can at any time go back to any previous statement he desires if things go wrong for the BPS crowd.
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page