Here is a transcript of Prof Sharpe's (
delusional) views.
Michael Sharpe on Today – 18 March 2019 – 8.45am
Martha Kearny – Thank you very much. It’s a quarter to nine. An Oxford professor has stopped his work on chronic fatigue syndrome – also known as ME – because he says he’s faced a barrage of online abuse from patients and campaigners. Well let’s talk now to Michael Sharpe, Oxford Professor of Psychological Medicine who’s in our Oxford studio. Good morning.
Michael Sharpe – Good morning to you.
MK – Tell us a bit more about your decision and the kind of abuse you’ve been facing.
MS – Well, as you said, chronic fatigue syndrome, sometimes called ME, is a serious debilitating condition that affects up to about 1% of the UK population and so clearly we need treatments. And the good news is we do have treatments – developed over about 20 years in the UK and other countries - various forms of rehabilitation, cognitive behaviour therapy, graded exercise therapy – have been found to be helpful. They don’t help everybody, but they’re helpful. The less good news is that a small group of campaigners want to have the research stopped – they want the treatments banned – and the way they do this is extremely relentless. They make multiple accusations - of fraud and abuse of patients, they stalk researchers, they try to get journals to retract papers, and in some cases even threats of violence. So this has meant that in this field, it’s not just me, but a number of researchers in several countries are now finding it impossible to continue in this field.
MK – There have been criticisms though, haven’t there, about the methodology – the Journal of Health Psychology said that the results are at best reliable [sic] and at worst manipulated to produce a positive-looking outcome.
MS –The way that science works is, as you know, people do studies, those studies are peer reviewed, and then we see whether those studies are replicated. The studies of this treatment have been replicated maybe a dozen times in trials. These journals – journals like Health Psychology – are at liberty to publish campaigns against the treatment – because that’s effectively what it was – but it’s very important that science takes its course with peer review and replication, and we don’t have science bent by campaigning.
MK – Do you have any sympathy for patient groups that say that they feel marginalised and dismissed? I mean, historically, people talked about ME, didn’t they, as “yuppie flu”?
MS – Yeah. Absolutely, and I think what you say is in part behind this campaign. I don’t agree with the campaign, but in-so-far as one understands its motivation, it is a view that the application of any treatment that is at all psychologically informed is saying to the patients “your illness isn’t real”. That of course is not true, but I think that fuels the hate, frankly, behind these campaigns.
MK – And what are the consequences of people like yourself deciding to stop research this area?
MS – Well, that there are a lot of things to research, and I’m finding it - moving to areas such as cancer and elderly people in hospital – I can make more progress at helping patients. Other researchers have had problems with their health because of the relentless campaigning and, I say, others have left. So what this means is potentially that the majority of patients who want to have this kind of research done, who want to access this kind of treatment, will not be able to because of the views of a minority, and I think that is wrong.
MK – Professor Michael Sharpe, many thanks.
https://www.facebook.com/ufi/reacti...s6MTAxNTc4OTUxMTE2ODAzNDg=&av=100000616658363
