The belief that exercise should be avoided
Bizarre. What's the charge?The hospital has decided to press charges against me, which i find hillarious. They do F*** all, and when somebody does - they must be deported and punished for their sins. I am not paying a dime, so I guess I will se them in court!
Bizarre. What's the charge?
Have they never heard of adverse publicity? One would think they would want to shut down the story rather than potentially broadcast it to a wider audience.
Exactly. I will argue that their charge violates my freedom of speech, but especially due to the circumstances: No Q & A, no treatment for patients, and false information in Chalders presentation. I even asked specifically for a Q & A before her talk.
Make sure to bring relevant critical articles by Tuller, Coyne, IOM, ME Association, etc. You need to be able to show that you're not a loony but rather an informed citizen scientist and skeptic.
Is there any way that we can support you in this @Marky90?
You obviously rattled someone, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered. It looks like they are scared of others showing up at events & influencing opinions by making valid points and asking reasonable questions. It appears that just having a captive audience isn't enough for them....next it'll be an exclusion zone around the venues!
I look at it as a chance to get some publicity on our situation
The conclusion I'm left with, Marky, is that to equalize the struggle we have to have the ability to gather audiences of medical professionals together at conferences and get them to hear the other side of the story. How do we do that? How do we convince enough people in medical circles that it is not Chalder et al who can teach them anything about ME but the patient groups and the few doctors who support them, who are never given a fair hearing?Let`s wait and see how this unfolds. If they want to pursue it when I don`t pay the fine, i would love to get some help from associations to shine some light on it. I look at it as a chance to get some publicity on our situation. It`s a David vs. Goliath scenario, and most folks usually like David.
Exactly. I will argue that their charge violates my freedom of speech, but especially due to the circumstances: No Q & A, no treatment for patients, and false information in Chalders presentation. I even asked specifically for a Q & A before her talk.
The conclusion I'm left with, Marky, is that to equalize the struggle we have to have the ability to gather audiences of medical professionals together at conferences and get them to hear the other side of the story. How do we do that? How do we convince enough people in medical circles that it is not Chalder et al who can teach them anything about ME but the patient groups and the few doctors who support them, who are never given a fair hearing?
Sadly, I suspect you're right.I concur wholeheartedly.
Some process is probably necessary
1. A medical breakthrough (e.g. a positive phase 3 rituximab trial)
2. That medical breakthrough must hit the headlines
3. The headlines must hit the eyes of the healthworkers & researchers, and get them interested
4. These healthworkers and researchers must become as engaged as us in the current state of affairs, and confront the psychobabblers
5. Another medical breakthrough
6. Rinse & repeat
Sadly, I suspect you're right.
Your answer underlines just how unequal the struggle is. We will be able to convince people only after multiple medical breakthroughs, whilst Chalder and her coterie can already convince people with little more than thin air.
Unbelievable! They would have been better off doing nothing. They have now handed you an opportunity to make media aware, rally supporters outside court and air your views in court, which I assume will be open to the public and reporters.