Sunday, October 2, 2016

Does "the President of The Royal College of Psychiatrists condones what is widely considered to be scientific fraud?"

Posted on behalf of Margaret Williams:
Simon Wessely is at pains to distance himself from involvement with the PACE trial, but once again he seems to have overlooked the facts.
The Trial Identifier is clear:
The trial will be run by the trial co-ordinator who will be based at Barts and the London, with the principal investigator (PI), and alongside two of the six clinical centres. He/she will liaise regularly with staff at the Clinical Trials Unit (CTU) who themselves will be primarily responsible for randomisation and database design and management (overseen by the centre statistician Dr Tony Johnson), directed by Professor Simon Wessely, in collaboration with Professor Janet Darbyshire at the MRC CTU.
Prof Simon Wessely will oversee the CTU”
It also needs to be recalled that the post of Statistician Clinical Trials Unit Division of Psychological Medicine Ref No: 06/A09 was described as the “Johnson_Wessely_Job” (07/07/2006) at The Institute of Psychiatry where: “The team works under the direction of Professor Simon Wessely, the Unit Director. The team is supported by the regular input of a Unit Management Group from within the Institute of Psychiatry. The statisticians within the Unit also have regular supervision meetings with Dr Tony Johnson from the MRC Clinical Trials Unit. The post holder will be directly responsible to the CTU Manager (Caroline Murphy), supervised by the CTU Statistician (Rebecca Walwyn) and will be under the overall direction of the Head of Department, Professor Simon Wessely”.
So please, Professor Wessely, stop dissembling, as you are fooling no-one but yourself.
Despite the fact that post-hoc changes showed reported results that were up to five times better than those derived from the original protocol, you continue to defend what has been described by many as “fraud” in the PACE trial.
Can it be said that the President of The Royal College of Psychiatrists condones what is widely considered to be scientific fraud?

Friday, September 30, 2016

Classical case of projection: PACE trial's Peter White accuses Prof Stark and Levin and Matthees, Kindlon and Maryhew of scientific misconduct

Classical case of projection: PACE trial's Peter White accuses Prof Stark and Levin and Matthees, Kindlon and Maryhew of scientific misconduct. And at the same time he still claims that 22% of patients with this disease recover due to CBT and GET; Pinocchio Psychiatry at its best. That and More in today's Guardian; article by Peter himself:

"Our research, and that of our colleagues in this field, has attracted its fair share of criticism. Some campaigners have even called for the research to be stopped, the findings retracted, and CBT and GET abandoned completely as they cause harm. One recent focus of criticism has been whether CBT and GET can actually bring about recovery or remission from the illness, not just reduce the symptoms. And by recovery we mean recovery from a patient’s present episode of illness – which is not necessarily the same as being cured, as someone might fall ill again.

To address this we did another test on the data, and found that 22% of people could be considered as recovered with either CBT or GET. Though not a large proportion it was about three times more than the recovery rates achieved by the other two treatments. Other studies showed similar proportions recovering after CBT.

"In the latest step in this saga, a blog  that hasn’t gone through the rigours of scientific peer-review, or being published in a journal claims that CBT and GET are not as effective as we reported. The authors got their figures by tweaks such as increasing the pass-grade for what counted as recovery, and excluding patients who had reported themselves as “much better”."

PS: A review of the PACE trial by Vink, that has gone through the rigours of scientific peer-review, and was published in a Medical journal found that CBT and GET are INEFFECTIVE, aka a NULL effect. You can read the excellent PACE trial review here

  PS 2: I hope that somewhere in the UK there is still a psychologist who hasn't gone to sleep to give PACE trial's Peter White emergency CBT to cure his false Therapy beliefs and turn him into an honest psychiatrist

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

"You can't ignore me now" Naked Millions missing protest at Whitehall to demand better care for M.E patients

By Reya El-Salahi (@_Reya) 27 Sep 2016:
"You can't ignore me now" Naked protestor demands better support for M.E patients. Details on @LondonLive before 2pm #MillionsMissing (

Saturday, September 24, 2016

PACE trial's principal investigator Peter White has retired from clinical practice with immediate effect to avoid ...

Margaret Williams, 14th September 2016  

"The role of Professor Peter Denton White OBE
In 2004, Professor Peter Denton White was awarded an OBE for “services to medical education”;
notices circulating at the time proclaimed him as leading the research into “CFS/ME” and said his OBE was “a well-deserved honour and acknowledgement of his contribution to work on CFS/ME”.

He was born in November 1952: aged only 64, he suddenly retired from clinical practice just before he was compelled by an order of the court to release the raw data from the PACE trial, so any
investigation by the General Medical Council for alleged professional misconduct is unlikely to be
pursued, but is he guilty of misfeasance in public office?

According to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) website, misfeasance in public office is a cause of
action in the civil court against the holder of public office, the allegation being that the office-holder
has misused or abused their power: such misuse or abuse is an affirmative act that causes harm to
another party without reasonable justification. The NHS is a State body as it provides public health
care, so this matter is one in which the public has a significant interest.

Facts to be considered
1. Peter White has used his own money, as well charitable money and public money, in order to
lobby support for his belief that ME/CFS is a psycho-behavioural disorder that can be
overcome through “cognitive restructuring” and graded aerobic exercise
2. he has egregiously used large sums of public money (£250,000) to prevent the disclosure of
data that would falsify his belief
3. for nearly 30 years, he has ignored evidence that disproves his belief, including evidence from
his own trials
4. he has failed to correct errors of fact after being alerted to them
5. he has consistently failed to disclose significant financial, institutional and ideological
conflicts of interest
6. he has been in breach of his NHS contractual obligations in that he has persistently ignored
mandatory directives and has wilfully encouraged other clinicians to do the same
7. as a consequence of his actions:
 money which should have been used for biomedical research into the aetiology of
ME/CFS has been diverted to fund studies into therapies which were already known
to be ineffective and even harmful
 patients have been stigmatised as sociopaths and malingerers who refuse to accept
they have a behavioural disorder
 patients have been denied financial support from private insurers for whom Peter
White and his colleagues work (for example, he was Chief Medical Officer for the
giant re-insurer Swiss Re and was also CMO to Scottish Provident) and from the" ...

Proof positive (revisited) .pdf

Friday, September 9, 2016

The statement which we should have issued

Statement: Disclosure of PACE trial data under the Freedom of Information Act

The statement which we should have issued

We sincerely apologize for not releasing the data earlier. We now realise this was a big mistake; even more so as the trial was funded with more than 5 million pounds of public money and therefore the public has a right to see the raw data.
We also sincerely regret ignoring our own NULL effect and making it make it look as if our two favorite treatments ie CBT and GET are moderately effective; it was a major oversight on our side to suggest that 22% of people recovered courtesy of CBT and GET;
We now realise that we have been exposing people with this disease for at least 25 years to ineffective and harmful treatments and that hundreds of thousands of patients have been severely harmed by especially GET;
We also regret decades of ridiculing patients with a debilitating neuro immune disease and pretending it to be a functional disorder, MUS, PPS or words to that effect;
The only function that served was making ourself important so that we could pretend to be experts of this disease and that no one would listen to the patient;
We realize that we cannot make up for all the mistakes we have made over the last 25 years including coming up with the Oxford criteria so that we could select patients who do not have the disease but label them as if they do, in an effort to improve the effectiveness of our treatments;
A very nice side effects of these treatments for this disease was that no doctor will take a disease seriously or ask critical questions if we pretend that it can be cured with behavioral and exercise treatment;
We realize that we have not only let the patients down but also our Universities and our Medical colleagues worldwide; we fully understand that after 25 years of being very economical with the truth and spinning our results people will call us the British Diederik Stapel;
The only way we can make up for our mistakes is by resigning from all our posts with immediate effect and together with our universities and sponsors, we will donate 5 Million £££ ie the equivalent spent on the PACE trial to proper biomedical research as done by the Norwegian oncologists and for example by Stanford's Professor Ronald Davis in an effort to get patients with this debilitating disease effective treatments ASAP;
Our Biopsychosocial model as an explanation for this disease will go down in the history of Medicine and Great Britain as one big ego trip and we sincerely apologize once again for letting patients, our universities and the medical profession down in the biggest possible way;


The three principal investigators of vested interest psychiatry who have now handed  back their professorships and more

Saturday, September 3, 2016

Psychiatrist Dr. Henderson: proponents of the biopsychosocial model do not want to accept the evidence that ME/CFS is a physical disease and that their model is wrong

Psychiatrist Dr. Henderson: proponents of the biopsychosocial model do not want to accept the evidence that ME/CFS is a physical disease and their model is wrong

Dr. Thomas Henderson - September 2016 @

  In conclusion, we appear to be entering the type of shake-up in the field that Thomas Kuhn referred to as a “paradigm shift.”7 All of the elements are there.

  A well-established concept about a phenomenon fails to account for a growing number of non-conforming bits of evidence. The examination of the bits of evidence reveals a new theoretical model that better explains the phenomenon. 

  Lastly, the resistance by the established community (in this case the medical community) to give up the old paradigm generates attacks on those who promulgate the new theoretical model, dismissal of the evidence that does not fit the old paradigm, and dogmatic rigidity. Only with great effort is the new paradigm recognized and accepted as correct. We shall see...


Monday, August 29, 2016

ME/CFS has an objectively identifiable chemical signature in both men and women 

ME/CFS has an objectively identifiable chemical signature in both men and women 

  By: Robert K. Naviaux a ,b ,c ,d ,1 , * Jane C. Naviaux a ,e , * Kefeng Li a ,b , * A. Taylor Bright a ,b , * William A. Alaynick a ,b , * Lin Wang a ,b , * Asha Baxter f , * Neil Nathan f ,2 , * Wayne Anderson f , and * Eric Gordon

  "Patients with CFS showed abnormalities in 20 metabolic pathways. Eighty percent of the diagnostic metabolites were decreased, consistent with a hypometabolic syndrome."

"We studied a total of 84 subjects using these methods. Forty-five subjects (n = 22 men and 23 women) met diagnostic criteria for ME/CFS by Institute of Medicine, Canadian, and Fukuda criteria. Thirty-nine subjects (n = 18 men and 21 women) were age- and sex-matched normal controls. Males with CFS were 53 (±2.8) y old (mean ± SEM; range, 21–67 y). Females were 52 (±2.5) y old (range, 20–67 y). The Karnofsky performance scores were 62 (±3.2) for males and 54 (±3.3) for females."


Related Posts with Thumbnails