For those who have followed developments regarding ME/CFS, there was a very encouraging parliamentary debate last week in the U.K. Many MPs, led by Glasgow's Carol Monaghan, argued for increased funding for biomedical research, revision of the national health guidelines (which endorse Graded Exercise Therapy), and independent review of the PACE trial. Significantly, no MP defended the PACE trial, and a government minister (the under-secretary of state for health and social care) supported further biomedical research. The video of the three-hour session is here, the transcript is here.
One advocate of the CBT/GET school reacted rather angrily to the debate, accusing the MPs of misusing parliamentary privilege. I have a post on the Virology Blog responding to his intemperate remarks. Here is the gist:
[T]here is an uncomfortable question that must be asked: Why won’t any of the PACE brigade disown, or at least try to moderate, the outbursts of Prof. Michael Sharpe?
It is understandable that Sharpe is unhappy about the discrediting of the PACE trial. He has devoted much of his professional life to the CBT/GET theory, and it must be frustrating and painful to see it so broadly rejected by patients and scientists. His reaction, however, has been anything but graceful. He repeatedly lashes out at those who disagree with him, often leveling intemperate charges. This cannot be unknown to the other PACE investigators.
You can read the entire Virology Blog post here.
Comments