Change the committee and stick to your assignment

Messages
48
Location
The Netherlands
The president of the Health Council of the Netherlands accepted a petition on september 18. More than 10.000 people signed this petion to change the committee and stick to the assignment to advise on ME. They changed it to MECFS conflating the diagnoses just like all the severely flawed cbt/get researches did. Prof Van Gool told the petitioners that the members of the committee are reliable scientists. BTW: 4 mups, one of them hailed the PACEtrial in The Lancet and works together with Ester Crawley on FITNET.
 
Messages
48
Location
The Netherlands
One of the members of the advisory committe was also author of the editorial that hailed the PACEtrial in 2011 in The Lancet. So you can imagine what his point of view is. The CBT GET lobby is rather powerful overhere. They are represented on all important levels. There is much at stake such as their scientific careers and the status of the university they all work(ed) for.
 
Last edited:
Messages
48
Location
The Netherlands
Hi, it is a good suggestion but almost everything David wrote has been translated. It can be found on me-gids.net. Apart from that most Dutch people do understand English very well, especially those who have studied at university because most of the literature is in English. Most important problem is that we have certain powers that want to prevent CBTGET will be moved aside. Too much at stake here.
 

Hugo

Senior Member
Messages
230
Sad news indeed. Doesnt surpise me that the commite wasnt exactly neutral. Ive seen this again and again, would it been a court of law he would not been alowed to be a part of an advisory committe since he is so clearly bias. Ive heard about the situation in Netherlands and its not good, it seems like right now Netherland and Uk may be worst of for anyone with this serious illness. In this countries it may even be better to not be diagnosed with ME.
 

Esther12

Senior Member
Messages
13,774
One of the members of the advisory committe was also author of the editorial that hailed the PACEtrial in 2011 in The Lancet. So you can imagine what his point of view is. The CBT GET lobby is rather powerful overhere. They are represented on all important levels. There is much at stake such as their scientific careers and the status of the university they all work(ed) for.

That is the editorial which claimed a 30% recovery rate, and still has not been corrected - that alone should exclude them from any respectable committe.
 
Messages
48
Location
The Netherlands
My own brother is a physician and even he is reluctant to accept this is actually a physical disease. First give me a diagnostic test he said. Physicians and other healthcare providers have been indoctrinated succesfully. Even I believed the bps model to be accurate in the beginning.
The thing is that doctors, psychologists etc mostly only read the introduction and the conclusions when studying a research publication. And that is what fatigue scientists know very well. They exaggerate the positive effects but one needs to read meticulously to find out how they performed the research, what patients were included, what measures were used which measures were not published and how they defined tresholds (still severely ill but so called improved) and last but not least how they changed the protocol or defined recovery post hoc. Surely I have mist some more methods to delude the public.
 
Back