• 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.

Cure: A Journey into the Science of Mind Over Body by Jo Marchant

A

Aurator

Senior Member
Messages
625
I'd like to be able to read the sentence at the bottom of the left-hand column of the second page that starts: "Medical authorities now agree that...".
Unless it finishes with "...there is disagreement over the cause of ME/CFS" or similar, I'm thinking the statement must be a bit of a lie.

I think we can see what this article (and possibly the book) is worth from the statement; "one of the most robust scientific findings regarding chronic fatigue is that when patients are convinced that their condition is biological and untreatable, and fear that engaging in activity will be harmful, they are much less likely to recover."

The speaker and the scientists who came up with the "robust" findings were clearly a little confused. Let me rephrase things for them:

"One of the most robust scientific findings regarding chronic fatigue is that when patients, in spite of their best efforts to keep going and get well, find they have been ill for a very long time and not recovered, they often come to the not unreasonable conclusion that the condition is untreatable".

If inanities like this are typical of Marchant's general level of intellect, we could take sweets off her all day.
 
Esther12

Esther12

Senior Member
Messages
13,774
I'd like the bit from the middle column of the third page that goes on from: "even though their fitness is".

Thanks for what is there to whoever is responsible.

This piece is hilariously shoddy. One of those things which is so bad it's good, assuming anyone ever good a venue to point out her inaccuracies.
 
Last edited:
Luther Blissett

Luther Blissett

Messages
724
Location
Yorkshire, England
Aurator said:
If it stopped at skepticism it wouldn't be so bad; it's when flow chart and bad faith arguments seamlessly transform themselves into scientific theory and government-sponsored treatment policy that the problems really begin.
Click to expand...

I agree. I'm starting to think that Professional Skepticism is little more than a form of applying for a job as a courtier for the powerful.
 
W

worldbackwards

Senior Member
Messages
2,051
Esther12 said:
I'd like the bit from the middle column of the third page that goes on from: "even though their fitness is".

Thanks for what is there to whoever is responsible.

This piece is hilariously shoddy. One of those things which is so bad it's good, assuming anyone ever good a venue to point out her inaccuracies.
Click to expand...
I'll take requests for extra bits tomorrow.
 
U

user9876

Senior Member
Messages
4,556
The comment I made on this guardian story has been censored by moderators. It is critical but this is not the first time they have censored my comments for daring to criticise the PACE trial

Its interesting that Jo Marchant has written a book in this area and yet has not examined or chooses not to report criticism of the PACE trial.

She quotes a recovery figure of 22% but this was achieved by ignoring the definition of recovery in their published protocol and redefining recovery to such an extent that someone could have entered the trial deteriorated slightly and been classed as recovered. The reasons given for deviating from the protocol also involve statistical mistakes and it is unclear whether the trial steering committee approved the changes.

There are so many flaws within the PACE trial many documented by David Tuller (a journalist).

However, there has been a campaign to dismiss patients criticisms rather than to address them by accusing patients of harassment and irrational behaviour. This story falls into the camp of dismissing patients very valid concerns without asking and belittling them.

Given the lack of critical analysis applied to PACE I wouldn't trust any of the book that this article is an advertising feature for.
Click to expand...
 
S

Sidereal

Senior Member
Messages
4,856
It is now two years since Samantha Miller recovered. “I do more than a lot of women my age,” she says, dipping a strip of pitta bread into her hummus. “I cycled here. I manage to co-ordinate my accessories!” She has to be careful – a challenging bike ride, or getting too stressed at work, can trigger her symptoms. “You have to step back mentally and physically,” she says.
Click to expand...

Doesn't sound "recovered" to me.
 
W

worldbackwards

Senior Member
Messages
2,051
user9876 said:
I've had comments censored on the guardian before when I pointed out that QMUL were running a campaign to remove academics from the FoI act and that they were suppressing the PACE trial results. So I think there is a moderator there who is pro-PACE and anti patient.
Click to expand...
Does still seem to be a fair bit of anti-PACE there though. Perhaps they didn't like you having a go at the author, though it's hardly ad hominem stuff.
 
U

user9876

Senior Member
Messages
4,556
worldbackwards said:
Does still seem to be a fair bit of anti-PACE there though. Perhaps they didn't like you having a go at the author, though it's hardly ad hominem stuff.
Click to expand...

I've seen other articles where people have a go at the author and in this case I think she deserves criticism for basically following their press releases in an unquestioning manner. She is not a journalist writing a quick story she is someone who has written a book on the subject and should be well aware of all the research, different view points and methodological issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.