Norwegian Study makes UK news at last - BBC

[Boule de feu]

Too bad they had to put the article on the guy who is holding his breath to beat his chronic fatigue... (Daily Mail)
It might work, but readers will think this is not serious.

 

[jace]

Good comments Sasha & Laurie, I've green arrowed them both!

Me too, and it was before I read this thread

 

[jace]

Good comments Sasha & Laurie, I've green arrowed them both!

Me too, and it was before I read this thread. I did wonder who Alexandra was

 

[urbantravels]

I think the holding of the breath has the potential to cure *all* diseases, if it is applied rigorously enough.

 

[Valentijn]

Too bad they had to put the article on the guy who is holding his breath to beat his chronic fatigue... (Daily Mail)
It might work, but readers will think this is not serious.

I get the feeling that both Daily Mail and BBC are trying to temper reality with the BS psych stuff When they list symptoms, there's a lot of psychiatric and subjective symptoms, and nothing about PEM or OI.

But I think they're just making themselves look stupid by including things like "hold your breath to cure CFS" in the article. Will the readers listen to the highly educated Norwegian science people, or the self-diagnosed idiot pinching his nose for the glamor shots? (That's self-diagnosed with CFS, not with idiocy. I gave him the idiocy diagnosis.)

 

[Valentijn]

I think the holding of the breath has the potential to cure *all* diseases, if it is applied rigorously enough.

The trick is to ignore your body when it tells you to stop, and push through your false suffocation beliefs.

 

[Jenny]

On 'holding your breath' - the Buteyko treatment seems to help some people, and for good reason.

Some have too little CO2 in their tissues (see Peter Julu's research) and practising shallow breathing can restore these levels to normal, leading to better metabolism. This takes an awful long time though, and its a difficult technique so some doctors have been using a rebreather mask to create the same effect.

Jenny

 

[Min]

letters to editor:

letters@dailymail.co.uk

should include address and phone no. (they have oncephoned me before publishing a letter)

 

[Boule de feu]

I get the feeling that both Daily Mail and BBC are trying to temper reality with the BS psych stuff When they list symptoms, there's a lot of psychiatric and subjective symptoms, and nothing about PEM or OI.

But I think they're just making themselves look stupid by including things like "hold your breath to cure CFS" in the article. Will the readers listen to the highly educated Norwegian science people, or the self-diagnosed idiot pinching his nose for the glamor shots? (That's self-diagnosed with CFS, not with idiocy. I gave him the idiocy diagnosis.)

The reader will remember the holding breath article and they will make jokes about it in the office.
"Oh, yeah. I've heard you can cure yourself by holding your breath..."

(I'm pretty sure it works for some people and it probably worked for this guy, but it is unfortunate that they had to post something like that with the Norwegian Study.)

 

[Sasha]

The reader will remember the holding breath article and they will make jokes about it in the office.
"Oh, yeah. I've heard you can cure yourself by holding your breath..."

(I'm pretty sure it works for some people and it probably worked for this guy, but it is unfortunate that they had to post something like that with the Norwegian Study.)

Thanks for pointing that out, Boule - I've just posted a comment pointing out that the guy himself in the interview said "Possibly it was chronic fatigue syndrome (ME), but my GP couldnt say." I've asked them to remove the link.

 

[max]

I take it the 2 pieces of UK journalism (Ha!) were released by Wessely's Science and Media outlet for the government - both articles are pretty much the same and both include the terms "fake" and "sham" when referring to the placebo group. Is this normal terminology for reporting research papers or is this just Wessely getting his enjoyment for the day.

Sign the e petition.

:victory: Go Norway

 

[Enid]

I wonder if moderation is holding up comments now - I've tried to post twice from 2pm today (very civilised) and nothing has appeared by 6pm.

Sorry - third attempt just gone in.

 

[Sasha]

They updated the article at 5pm though I can't see any changes - they've left in that silly link to the story about the man who doesn't have ME holding his breath, the reference to ME possibly lasting "weeks" etc.

 

[Sasha]

By the way, guys, keep letting the Daily Mail know about any errors, politely and with references if you can - Tuesday is their health pages day so they might carry a print feature on this tomorrow.

I read in a book on investigative journalism (Flat Earth News) that much of the UK media use the Daily Mail to source stories because the other papers can't afford to pay for journalists to research stories, unlike the DM, which is loaded - so what the Daily Mail gets right, other papers might get right.

 

[Enid]

Something odd going on at the Mail Site - my comment went in as 33 but coming out and going back in stops at 29. Perhaps they are updating the article. A fresh look tomorrow should resolve.

 

[Sasha]

Something odd going on at the Mail Site - my comment went in as 33 but coming out and going back in stops at 29. Perhaps they are updating the article. A fresh look tomorrow should resolve.

I can see your comment, Enid - I've just "green arrowed" you - great comment!

 

[max]

By the way, guys, keep letting the Daily Mail know about any errors, politely and with references if you can - Tuesday is their health pages day so they might carry a print feature on this tomorrow.

I read in a book on investigative journalism (Flat Earth News) that much of the UK media use the Daily Mail to source stories because the other papers can't afford to pay for journalists to research stories, unlike the DM, which is loaded - so what the Daily Mail gets right, other papers might get right.

.....Flat earth news ........... "the difficulty for the Mail is that in its relentless pursuit of that commercial agenda, it has developed a striking willingness to cut the corners of journalistic integrity, to inject the facts with the falsehood and distortion which will please its readers."

In the Epilogue of Flat Earth News, it reads, "Journalists used to question the reasons for War and expose abuse of power. Now, like toothless babies, they suckle on the sugary teet of mis-information and poop it into the diaper we call the 6 o'clock News."
.......written by Kent Brockman, TV News reader, The Simpsons.

The Daily Mail proves time and time again it is a worthless waste of paper and bandwidth in merely passing on stories from AP and the government - years of assistance from our "free press" has resulted in key words becomming accepted by the public, "Yuppie Flu", incorrect illness beliefs, WMD's, benefit scroungers, "we're all in it together".

The media are there for a reason - and its not for the benefit of the public. They will only tell the truth (whatever that is) if they have no alternative.


Are "sham" and "fake" scientific terms worthy of a "health reporter" - or are they the words of Wessely.

 

[Sasha]

Are "sham" and "fake" scientific terms worthy of a "health reporter"

Hi max - I don't think they're problematic terms in this context - placebos are often referred to as sham treatments, which is exactly what they are designed to be. I've seen those terms used by reporters in other stories who want to use a non-technical term for a lay audience. If they were calling Rituximab a fake treatment that would be another matter!

I think the Daily Mail piece is overall a good thing, from our point of view, despite the errors it makes (and I'm really not a Daily Mail fan). I particularly like them leading with the very positive quote from Dr. Shepherd.

 

[max]

Hi max - I don't think they're problematic terms in this context - placebos are often referred to as sham treatments, which is exactly what they are designed to be. I've seen those terms used by reporters in other stories who want to use a non-technical term for a lay audience. If they were calling Rituximab a fake treatment that would be another matter!

I think the Daily Mail piece is overall a good thing, from our point of view, despite the errors it makes (and I'm really not a Daily Mail fan). I particularly like them leading with the very positive quote from Dr. Shepherd.

Hi Sasha - as you rightly say, overall it wasn't all bad.

- the problem I am having is with struggling to believe anything until I witness it firsthand. I have seen a couple of references to the Norway 'apology' - (hope the translaters got it right), and even that bothers me - how could they fold so quickly? Is the rest of the world now saying Norway is wrong? What do the Norwegian government know that made them 'move' so fast? Have they informed the UK government or any other for that matter - they appear to be reacting to scientific objective opinion. Surely scientific objective opinion that is strong enough to make a government about face over a weekend rather ridicules the subjective opinion of shrinks that advise and hold court with the UK government.

The evidence must be there, it must have been presented to the Norwegian Health Dept, and it must have been very convincing.

- how does a trial involving so few patients change the mind of a government?