- Messages
- 2,087
It's quoted above.and I think she said that was the maximum from her, so if we're under $55k we still have more money to raise].
The problem is it doesn't add up.
It says the triple matching campaign will end when 10k is reached.
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 (FM), 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.
It's quoted above.and I think she said that was the maximum from her, so if we're under $55k we still have more money to raise].
It's quoted above.
The problem is it doesn't add up.
It says the triple matching campaign will end when 10k is reached.
That is very generous of Erica. But one does need to ensure as many people as possible know about the offer to ensure it has the most impact.
Here again are some lists of support groups in the UK and Ireland people could write to:
http://www.meassociation.org.uk/information-and-support-line/find-a-local-support-group/
https://www.mesupport.co.uk/index.php?page=uk-republic-of-ireland
I feel I have already done my fair share of highlighting with maybe 200 messages posted around.
$51,875
I think we're about $800 away assuming the tripling funds haven't been added yet.
I suspect the tripling means if, for example you give $100 she will give $200 so the total given is $300, in other words your original $100 has been tripled to $300.
This means a maximum of $5000 given by other people will be matched by a maximum of $10000 by Erica. Total maximum achieved, $15000.
Yes, it would be amazing if the total ended up even higher than 60 000. As Tuller wrote himself:If the total end up higher than 60000, David Tuller will use the extra for travel and other expenses.
I'm sure it includes all donations to Crowdrise and that ProHealth was just used to help spread the word of the matching offer rather than as a referral link.I wonder if you have to access Crowdrise via the Prohealth.com website to ensure the trebling. That's the way I'm going.
I can't speak for them but my gut feeling is that as IiME have so much else on at this time after the conference, on top of the usual charity work, that the total for the crowdriser will be reached by the time they could organise or manage earmarked donations coming in and it might just complicate matters. $52,790 and rising..Would IiME be able to accept gift-aided donations for him, or towards expenses travelling over here etc? to maximise donations. @Jo Best
Thanks for the explanation of the numbers @trishrhymes. I wonder if you have to access Crowdrise via the Prohealth.com website to ensure the trebling. That's the way I'm going.[/USER]
Actually, having read the Prohealth site again, I think I may have got the numbers wrong. The main thing is we keep donating.
OK, I have just sent 149 emails to the email addresses in the first link.*
It would be good if somebody else could do the second list. There are likely to be quite a lot of duplicates but that is less of a problem if a separate person is writing so I don't think people need to compare the lists before writing.
* I didn't do Republic of Ireland and overseas. It would be good if somebody also did the overseas ones. If you search around, you can probably also find a lot more than those that are on this list.
View attachment 21959
Trial by Error, Continued: University of Bristol Responds, Sort Of
19 JUNE 2017
By David Tuller, DrPH
Last week, I e-mailed a letter to Sue Paterson, director of legal services at the University of Bristol, to express my concerns about Professor Esther Crawley’s false claim that I had libeled her in reporting on her research for Virology Blog. On Friday, I received a two-sentence response from Ms. Paterson. She addressed it to “Mr. Tuller” and wrote this:
“Thank you for your email of 14 June. Your comments have been noted.”
I wasn’t sure what to make of this terse reply. Was that all that Bristol’s director of legal services had to say about the fact that a well-known faculty member issued an absurd allegation during a high-profile event sponsored by this august institution? Had she simply noted my concerns herself, or had she actually conveyed them to Professor Crawley, as I’d requested? Did the university feel any sense of responsibility for what had occurred? Would Ms. Paterson’s “noting” of my comments be followed by any further missive or perhaps even an apology after the university investigated the event? Who knows?
I responded at somewhat greater length but prefer for the moment to keep the exact phrasing private. My tone was what I would describe as very pointed but within bounds, although I have come to realize that the British tend to interpret “within bounds” somewhat more narrowly than Americans.
Here’s the first paragraph:
“Thank you for your response. (For the record, it should Dr. Tuller, not Mr. Tuller. I have a doctorate in public health, as I indicated in the sign-off to my letter. However, please feel free to call me David.)”
I have a feeling the pro-PACE camp might have difficulty with the “Dr” thing because my behavior—like tearing up Lancet papers at public events—does not fit their preconceived notions of how people with advanced academic degrees should act. However, this group apparently thinks it’s fine to accuse patients of being “vexatious” just because they want to know the actual answers that the PACE investigators promised to provide in exchange for five million pounds of public funds.
Last week, I e-mailed a letter to Sue Paterson, director of legal services at the University of Bristol
Huge fan of David Tuller, but he might like to have a chat with one of his legal friends about how these things work.