• 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.

Wall Street Journal article on PACE Trial and data-sharing

adreno

adreno

PR activist
Messages
4,841
BurnA said:
ETA I love the irony in that you felt you need to complain about the complaining.

Ps it was more of a critique than a complaint, but I'm sorry if it upset you
Click to expand...
As has been said by others, the article is not an analysis of the methodological faults of PACE, but an attempt to provide insights on the debate of data sharing, with PACE being a hot example. This general debate on data sharing is ultimately a political one, and there is no one "truth" to report, only viewpoints. The reporter has reported the viewpoints of both sides, without getting the subject overly complicated. This is as good as it gets in mainstream papers. It is not the reporters job to take sides, or come to his own conclusion on the matter; this is not an editorial or opinion piece. Intelligent readers will reach their own conclusion.

In sum, I feel the article (and therefore the journalist) is helpful to our cause, and calling the article 'poor' is taking aim at people who are supportive of us, rather than going after our enemies. And yes, I feel there has been too much of this on the forum lately. If you think this article is 'poor' I can show you some others that will make you vomit.
 
S

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
worldbackwards said:
Horton's still out to get you - presumably he wouldn't comment if you got to hijack the agenda and distort the debate :)
Click to expand...

I'm sure Horton doesn't know I'm born and isn't in charge of moderation but I'd like to have got some points across to the audience. :(
 
BurnA

BurnA

Senior Member
Messages
2,087
adreno said:
In sum, I feel the article (and therefore the journalist) is helpful to our cause, and calling the article 'poor' is taking aim at people who are supportive of us, rather than going after our enemies. And yes, I feel there has been too much of this on the forum lately. If you think this article is 'poor' I can show you some others that will make you vomit.
Click to expand...

Is this a case of not being allowed to critique an article because the author isn't our enemy?
Journalists who write articles like this are neither friends nor enemies they are journalists who are doing their job. And I respect them fully, for not being friends or enemies.

If you compare everything to a rod liddle or daily mail article of course most articles will appear wonderful. However, if we want better quality we have to be free to critique fairly which is what I did.

I judge things on the own merit and not based on who wrote them. If you don't agree with the points I mentioned of course you are entitled to your opinion however to suggest I am taking aim at someone is disingenuous.

If you read my post I stated it is a positive for patients. That doesn't necessarily make it an excellent article though. These can be two separate concepts.
 
Ecoclimber

Ecoclimber

Senior Member
Messages
1,011
Sasha said:
My comment still didn't make it through. :(
Click to expand...
As it was pitched, perhaps they were't to hear comments from others in the community on open access, datasharing and unconvering research errors among researchers and not just from the principals. It wouldn't hurt for other advocates to give it go and make comments on the article.

As to
Lewandosky's remarks, it has been address for those who do not follow twitter by CJ to ​
AmyDMarcus
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/707062506892738561

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/707144788215271424

You can view the article and comments on iPhone and maybe able to comment without being a subscriber. There are 13 comments mostly from Lidia Thompson who linked to all of Tuller blogs articles on virology blog, Ron Davis open letter to researchers and links to Pubmed articles on harmful effects of CBT/GET. WSJ is the second largest weekly U.S. newspaper in circulation.

The more comments and traffic to the article, the more likelihood that a future article could be written concerning this controversy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.