AfME's New Principal Medical Adviser: Dr Miller (who promotes CBT and GET)

Orla

Senior Member
Messages
707
Likes
1,457
Location
Ireland
Just to point out (for clarification), that Miller was appointed Afme medical advisor last May, but the comments I posted yesterday were recent, about the PACE Trial. I just thought this thread was a good place to put it as it can be useful to have the evidence (so to speak) in one place. In this case it shows a continuity of attitude on his part.
 

Bob

Senior Member
Messages
16,455
Likes
34,041
Location
England (south coast)
Just to point out (for clarification), that Miller was appointed Afme medical advisor last May, but the comments I posted yesterday were recent, about the PACE Trial. I just thought this thread was a good place to put it as it can be useful to have the evidence (so to speak) in one place. In this case it shows a continuity of attitude on his part.
Thanks for posting, Orla... It was very helpful.
 
Messages
1,026
Likes
146
Location
Essex, UK
Just to point out (for clarification), that Miller was appointed Afme medical advisor last May, but the comments I posted yesterday were recent, about the PACE Trial. I just thought this thread was a good place to put it as it can be useful to have the evidence (so to speak) in one place. In this case it shows a continuity of attitude on his part.
Yes- thank you for these Orla and for highlighting the connection. That's been very useful.
 

redo

Senior Member
Messages
869
Likes
153
My emphasis below, by quakery he doesn't mean CBT and GET.

Quackery in the 21st Century: Unproven Treatments for Unexplained Symptoms
Alastair Miller MA FRCP DTM&H

Summary
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) otherwise called Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) is a medically unexplained syndrome. That is, it is a well defined complex of symptoms that add up to this diagnosis but with no biomedical explanation at a physiological, anatomical, biochemical or molecular level to give a basis for these symptoms. However, there are well established therapeutic approaches (Cognitive Behavior Therapy and Graded Activity programmes) that are evidence based and approved by NICE (the National Institute for Clinical Excellence). Regrettably, because these approaches are behavioural rather than pharmacologic there is much dissatisfaction with them in the patient community which therefore spends considerable time and money on unproven therapies exploited by well meaning or less well meaning practitioners.
I thought the patient organizations where meant to be by the patients for the patients... I have yet to meet a patient who thinks GET and CBT is great.

Who runs AfME? Can anyone explain to me why the heck in the world anyone would want that as a spokesperson?
 

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,555
Likes
28,235
I thought the patient organizations where meant to be by the patients for the patients... I have yet to meet a patient who thinks GET and CBT is great.

Who runs AfME? Can anyone explain to me why the heck in the world anyone would want that as a spokesperson?
I think big patient organisations like to have medical professionals as advisers to make them look professional. In the UK, there may be few doctors that interested. But I don't know how hard they looked and I agree with the general sentiment of what you say.
 

redo

Senior Member
Messages
869
Likes
153
Unbelievable. The only real reason to put in an effort, as a patient or care taker in a non profit, is pushing for positive change. And there they are, having built an organization, and it's being used to promote ME as a psychological disorder (or at least a disorder where psychologial intervention is the right thing). Who would put in hours and weeks of their spare time, for free, to support such an organization? Is the leader feeling they are mentally ill, or being care taker of a mentally ill person, and thereby seeing ME as a mental illness? If it's not a "one person organization", than what does the dozens of other active people in the organization think? One of the very most important reasons to do non profit work, is to me, to do exactly the opposite of what's being done over there. Is there's something I've missed? Are the leaders really care takers or patients?
 

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,555
Likes
28,235
Unbelievable. The only real reason to put in an effort, as a patient or care taker in a non profit, is pushing for positive change. And there they are, having built an organization, and it's being used to promote ME as a psychological disorder (or at least a disorder where psychologial intervention is the right thing). Who would put in hours and weeks of their spare time, for free, to support such an organization? Is the leader feeling they are mentally ill, or being care taker of a mentally ill person, and thereby seeing ME as a mental illness? If it's not a "one person organization", than what does the dozens of other active people in the organization think? One of the very most important reasons to do non profit work, is to me, to do exactly the opposite of what's being done over there. Is there's something I've missed? Are the leaders really care takers or patients?
It's a patient organisation with lots of paid staff who aren't patients or carers - not always the best combination in the ME world I think given decisions have to be taken carefully.
 

redo

Senior Member
Messages
869
Likes
153
I read here that their leader had ME for two decades. So, why the heck in the world doesn't she (or the entire board) protest when they've got people working against the whole cause, of which they should be working for? Does anyone know her?

If there is a more or less consensus that GET and CBT are things money should be spent on, than I really think patients should join the organization as members with the sole purpose of electing a new board. I don't know how they do it, but it's normal that people are appointed to a couple of years on the board, and the paying members elect whom sits there once every couple of years (only that just a small fraction of the members actually use their voting power).

I found their info on GET and CBT. Although it's more moderate than what their spokesperson Miller writes, they seem really supportive of both GET and CBT.
 
Messages
81
Likes
59
Location
UK
Biological Weapons - the Facts, not the Fiction

16 October 2001

The Royal College of Physicians is hosting a free seminar on biological weapons on Thursday 25 October. The intention is to establish the true extent of the threat posed by the possible use of anthrax and other biological agents as terrorist weapons, and dispel some of the recent myths and hysteria surrounding the subject.

The seminar will be chaired by Professor Sir George Alberti, President of the College. National experts on infectious diseases and biological warfare will be speaking, including Dr Nick Beeching, Dr Alastair Miller, and Professor Simon Wessely, as well as Professor Liam Donaldson, Chief Medical Officer for England. The seminar will conclude with an extended question and answer session.
http://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/press-releases/biological-weapons-facts-not-fiction

Doctors who have worked in the military and have the appropriate specialty training can sometimes have unconventional careers.
 

ukxmrv

Senior Member
Messages
4,413
Likes
4,593
Location
London
Redo,

Action for ME is run by a group of trustees. The names are obtainable from Companies House as AFME is a company. This is a UK charities "thing".

Although ordinary patients can join as "members" they are in fact subscribers and have no voting rights.

Historically when happened is that Action for ME evolved from a group called the ME Action Campaign. This was a solid, campaigning group that was anti psycho-babble. The group sadly was taken over by people who believed that ME was fatigue and it went horribly downhill.

The trustees run it as a closed shop. Up to a couple of years ago the "subscribers" were not invited to the AGM's. This has changed though and last year that held an AGM that people could go to.

Sadly, "subscibers" have no voting rights and cannot vote the current trustees out or have any influence over policy. The trustees (in my experience) don't usually answer letters or anything like that.

There is no mechanism to keeping them in check (i.e. stopping them using "ME" when they don't represent patients with ME). We have tried the Charities Commission but there is nothing to stop a charity doing this.

When the MEA (ME association) faced the same problem with Trustees being elected who supported psychobabble we members were able to vote them out at the AGM. AFME doesn't allow this. It's a disgrace that they can get away with it.
 

SilverbladeTE

Senior Member
Messages
3,043
Likes
3,739
Location
Somewhere near Glasgow, Scotland
which is why I reject IVI's outlook, as our system is viciously, evilly, inherently CORRUPT and it's evenbeen extending to charties for some time.
nobody note how charities are now so vociferous, lead by well paid...hounds...barking braying after more revenue, hm? it is NOT for the good cause, it's "the ends justify the means and my expesnive meal ticket!", all self serving bullshit.
it's another lucrative cash cow for the corrupt professional classes/system.
UK's been getting carved up for sale for last 30 odd years, not much left.
To Hell with them all.
Sigh.


(not saying all charities are rotten, but take a good long look at them...especially in regard to their leadership and outlook on fundraising..."Money changers in the temple")

and, oh yeah, the psych warfare psych spooks spewed lies for decades that bioweapons weren't that bad, etc etc, at the behest of their masters (during the Cold War).
I fact, they are orders of magnitude more lethal and troublesome than nukes.
 

justinreilly

Senior Member
Messages
2,498
Likes
1,225
Location
NYC (& RI)
Redo,

Action for ME is run by a group of trustees. The names are obtainable from Companies House as AFME is a company. This is a UK charities "thing".

Although ordinary patients can join as "members" they are in fact subscribers and have no voting rights.

Historically when happened is that Action for ME evolved from a group called the ME Action Campaign. This was a solid, campaigning group that was anti psycho-babble. The group sadly was taken over by people who believed that ME was fatigue and it went horribly downhill.

The trustees run it as a closed shop. Up to a couple of years ago the "subscribers" were not invited to the AGM's. This has changed though and last year that held an AGM that people could go to.

Sadly, "subscibers" have no voting rights and cannot vote the current trustees out or have any influence over policy. The trustees (in my experience) don't usually answer letters or anything like that.

There is no mechanism to keeping them in check (i.e. stopping them using "ME" when they don't represent patients with ME). We have tried the Charities Commission but there is nothing to stop a charity doing this.

When the MEA (ME association) faced the same problem with Trustees being elected who supported psychobabble we members were able to vote them out at the AGM. AFME doesn't allow this. It's a disgrace that they can get away with it.
This sounds a lot like CAA here in the US. They don't let members vote, the board self perpetuates and ends up getting controlled by Kim McCleary so she can support CDC and collect $178K per year. It's all disgusting.
 

Tom Kindlon

Senior Member
Messages
1,630
Likes
8,651
Dr Alastair Miller calls CBT & GET "definitive therapy" for#MyalgicE. :(#MEcfs#CFS#NeuroME#CFIDS#CFSME
---

I was just reading InterAction (Spring 2015) edition and Dr Alastair Miller's response to a question about symptoms.

I was going to type some of it in but see the same text is now online in the BACME guide.

See the last one
http://bit.ly/1gcymeT
i.e.
http://www.meassociation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/BACME-guide-with-pharmacology-30-06-2015-copy.pdf

-----

There are four potential outcomes from introduction of symptomatic drug therapy:

- The symptom worsens or the patient suffers an adverse drug reaction in which case it should be withdrawn.

- There is no change in the symptom. In this case, the drug should also be withdrawn after an appropriate trial period that will depend on the particular symptom and drug.

- The symptom partially responds to the introduction of the drug in which case it should be continued and consideration given to attempting a dose increment bearing in mind the risks of adverse reaction. If no dose increment of this drug is feasible and the symptom persists then it may be reasonable to add a second drug.

- The symptom is completely relieved. Under these circumstances it makes sense to continue the drug for some time and the consider withdrawal as the patient's overall condition improves (perhaps in response to definitive therapy with GET or CBT).
-----

There is not evidence that CBT and GET should be called "definitive therapy" unless you've been taken in by the ridiculous recovery definitions in the PACE Trial and the like.

Tom

(I posted same post on Twitter https://twitter.com/TomKindlon/status/642061740394553344 )
 
Last edited:

Kyla

ᴀɴɴɪᴇ ɢꜱᴀᴍᴩᴇʟ
Messages
721
Likes
4,203
Location
Canada
Dr Alastair Miller calls CBT & GET "definitive therapy" for#MyalgicE. :(#MEcfs#CFS#NeuroME#CFIDS#CFSME
---

I was just reading InterAction (Spring 2015) edition and Dr Alastair Miller's response to a question about symptoms.

I was going to type some of it in but see the same text is now online in the BACME guide.

See the last one

http://bit.ly/1gcymeTi.e.http://www.meassociation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/BACME-guide-with-pharmacology-30-06-2015-copy.pdf

-----



-----

There is not evidence that CBT and GET should be called "definitive therapy" unless you've been taken in by the ridiculous recovery definitions in the PACE Trial and the like.

Tom

(I posted same post on Twitter https://twitter.com/TomKindlon/status/642061740394553344 )
!!!@&@!&

Sometimes I feel like we need a "dislike" button on this forum. (Not for your post itself of course Tom, but for the abhorrent content)

Calling this "definitive therapy" is just ridiculous at this point.