Scientists post open letter to Lancet on Virology Blog - call for independent re-analysis of PACE

[Jonathan Edwards]

What instrument did you play? I'll bet it was brass - a baritone horn perhaps?

(I used to play bari sax - I would very much like to do that again someday)

Oboe in fact. I would have preferred to play my tenor sax in a Glen Miller type band but life is unpredictable.

 

[BurnA]

at the very least could get something in the university newspapers about it

Yes, great idea. I am sure there must be some budding student journalists eager to report on a medial scandal this big that calls into question the reputation of their University.
Failing that, I was wondering about a full page open letter style advertisment in the students newspapers ?

 

[TiredSam]

Good old Richard Horton talking the talk again today on the BBC website in an article about the Royal Institution:

Trust
It was a view echoed by Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet, in an essay published to coincide with the BSA's relaunch.
"A reduction in trust can be beneficial for those involved. In medicine, decades of activism and the prevalence of health information online is forcing greater transparency and improvements in medical practice. Can this approach be extended to the rest of science? Could we have a citizenship that critically questions all of the UK's public institutions, including science?"

Nice to hear that he appreciates activism and patients informing themselves online.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34699008

 

[SOC]

"A reduction in trust can be beneficial for those involved. In medicine, decades of activism and the prevalence of health information online is forcing greater transparency and improvements in medical practice. Can this approach be extended to the rest of science? Could we have a citizenship that critically questions all of the UK's public institutions, including science?"

Egotistical moron. This HAS been going on in the rest of science from the very beginning. It's medicine that has developed a major problem with transparency and refusal to accept public criticism.

Medicine is not leading the way, idiot, it's lagging far behind the rest of science and damaging the reputation of sound science in the eyes of the public.

But no, We Doctors Are Superior to the Rest of the World. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

 

[worldbackwards]

Could we have a citizenship that critically questions all of the UK's public institutions, including science?

It must be a very fine line between "critically questioning" science and hijacking the agenda and distorting the debate. But I'm sure he'll tell us if we overstep, he's such a trustworthy source.

I love using that line. I could hijack the agenda and distort the debate all day.

 

[harveythecat]

Yes, great idea. I am sure there must be some budding student journalists eager to report on a medial scandal this big that calls into question the reputation of their University.
Failing that, I was wondering about a full page open letter style advertisment in the students newspapers ?

Yep so me and a current student are working on something now...

 

[harveythecat]

Can someone please clear up for me what is happening right now with regards to releasing (or not) the data. I know the ICO demanded Queen Mary release data and gave them 28 days, I also know Kings College refused the FOI request...are these two separate things?

 

[worldbackwards]

Can someone please clear up for me what is happening right now with regards to releasing (or not) the data. I know the ICO demanded Queen Mary release data and gave them 28 days, I also know Kings College refused the FOI request...are these two separate things?

There are two separate requests. The QMUL request was for the main trial data. QMUL launched a last minute appeal. We should be hearing about that sometime never.

The KCL request was made by James Coyne for data involved in a cost effectiveness paper for the trial treatments based on PACE. This was not an FOI request because, crucially, the paper was published in PLOS, which has strict rules about releasing data to all who ask for it. It has however been treated like one for reasons best known to KCL and the trial authors. It has also been refused and the ball is now in PLOS's court. They would be within their rights to retract the paper.

Hope this helps!

 

[harveythecat]

thanks @worldbackwards - really helpful. So the QMUL was a FOI?

 

[worldbackwards]

thanks @worldbackwards - really helpful. So the QMUL was a FOI?

Yes it was/is.

 

[Yogi]

UPDATE:

Richard Horton asked it to be sent as an official letter and has refused to publish the letter by the experts after months of delay.

Dr Ranciello has written another letter.

http://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-403/

Time:00.17.38- 00.23.57

Found this great website about Richard Horton

"The wisdom of Richard Horton
Officially, Richard Horton edits the Lancet. Mainly, however, he jets around the world writing incredibly pompous tweets and sharing his juvenile, flat-pack left-wing opinions. His Twitter byline is "Welcome to a Permanent Attack on the Present". Oh, to be 17 again."

It is very funny... recommended to read it here at:

https://storify.com/cjsnowdon/horton

https://twitter.com/cjsnowdon

Can Chris Snowdon be sent the press release from last week ? He may write up something about the Lancet/Horton/PACE/ as he is also a health journalist writing for Health Spectator and Spiked.

 

[JaimeS]

Can Chris Snowdon be sent the press release from last week ? He may write up something about the Lancet/Horton/PACE/ as he is also a health journalist writing for Health Spectator and Spiked.

I sent him a quick tweet, hopefully will get him interested; feel free to send him other docs, but check his Twitterfeed too, to see what has been sent, before you give him something he's seen already. I linked to the #MEAction petition because it was what described the stuff to do with The Lancet best, but I'm sure he'd appreciate links to more primary sources.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/768431979427659776

FWIW

 

[Sasha]

Well said, @JaimeS.

 

[JaimeS]

Ty @Sasha I am still learning of the Twitter.

 

[Yogi]

I sent him a quick tweet, hopefully will get him interested; feel free to send him other docs, but check his Twitterfeed too, to see what has been sent, before you give him something he's seen already. I linked to the #MEAction petition because it was what described the stuff to do with The Lancet best, but I'm sure he'd appreciate links to more primary sources.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/768431979427659776

FWIW

@Jaime you are a and so is everyone else at MEAction.

Some day I will join the big world of twitter too!

 

[Deepwater]

I sent him a quick tweet, hopefully will get him interested; feel free to send him other docs, but check his Twitterfeed too, to see what has been sent, before you give him something he's seen already. I linked to the #MEAction petition because it was what described the stuff to do with The Lancet best, but I'm sure he'd appreciate links to more primary sources.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/768431979427659776

FWIW

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but is Christopher Snowdon really the sort of person we want to be trying to engage on our side? for example, http://www.tobaccotactics.org/index.php/Christopher_Snowdon
It's not that I'm expressing a political viewpoint of my own here, or commenting on the truth or otherwise of these allegations, but speaking as a UK PwME, we simply can't afford to have our advocacy hijacked by one side or another in the larger political debate. I could say more.

 

[JaimeS]

we simply can't afford to have our advocacy hijacked by one side or another in the larger political debate. I could say more.

I understand that his broader politics may be a concern, but I do think that more light shining on The Lancet is all to the good.

 

[Snow Leopard]

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but is Christopher Snowdon really the sort of person we want to be trying to engage on our side? for example, http://www.tobaccotactics.org/index.php/Christopher_Snowdon
It's not that I'm expressing a political viewpoint of my own here, or commenting on the truth or otherwise of these allegations, but speaking as a UK PwME, we simply can't afford to have our advocacy hijacked by one side or another in the larger political debate. I could say more.

I agree. After the Coyne fiasco, we need to choose our allies a little more carefully.

 

[Sean]

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but is Christopher Snowdon really the sort of person we want to be trying to engage on our side? for example, http://www.tobaccotactics.org/index.php/Christopher_Snowdon
It's not that I'm expressing a political viewpoint of my own here, or commenting on the truth or otherwise of these allegations, but speaking as a UK PwME, we simply can't afford to have our advocacy hijacked by one side or another in the larger political debate. I could say more.

Yeah, I am wary of this character too. Anybody who has been associated with Spiked, – with who Wessely has links, and who have not been friendly to us – should not be given the benefit of the doubt.

www.spiked-online.com

 

[Yogi]

Sorry I had not researched Chris Snowdon as you have @Deepwater @Sean . Thanks and Agree we have to be careful.

Horton appears not to be neutral with PACE trial and he is showing some allegiance to the PACE psychs. Very odd for a lefty socialist to be in bed with these psychs and insurance co's I must say.

Must be a Champagne Socialist.!!

Horton is probably going to be our enemy soon if he does not retract or publish the letter or issue correction.

No harm done by one tweet. As they say our enemies enemy is our friend.