Pretty serious direct challenge to PACE.
Couple of minor points might need double checking:
1.
"CBT and GET cured around 30% of patients"
I thought PACE used 'recovered/recovery' and 21%. Or was that only the formal claim in the paper itself, and they then used 'cured' and 30% in the press release/conference flogging their great success?
2.
The 2/3 reduction in the
improvement rate (from 60 to 21%), after reanalysis according to the protocol, was originally calculated and published by the PACE team, not by Wilshire et al.
However it should also be pointed out that the PACE team did this only after they had been ordered by the court to hand over the
recovery data to Mr Matthees. In other words, they re-calculated the
improvement rate because their hand was forced by the public revealing of the
recovery data. They did not do it willingly.