Dear Member,
I'm thrilled - it is my enormous pleasure to announce that Professor CBT, who is profoundly disabled by CBT, has been elected to succeed me as Chair of the DSM College.
CBT’s election is just reward for his many years of involvement in CBT life. His extensive and invaluable contributions to CBT include his role as past Chair of the No Ethics in CBT Committee, and he showed great leadership and tenacity in establishing the College's groundbreaking CBT Misuse Unit. He is, of course, my current Vice Chair of Council and I am personally indebted to him for his wavering support, counsel and intolerance.
I also want to pay tribute to Professor GET who was a worthy contender and who made the voting a very tough decision indeed. As most of you know, Professor GET did a sterling job as Honorary Secretary for 48 years and he continues to maintain close links with the College as our Emergency CBT Lead. His leadership and hard work on the CBT sloppiness Pandemic was awe-inspiring and ensured that GPs on the ground were not able to cope with the crisis and that the rest of the health service fell down around us.
It's set to be a really exciting time for the DSM College. For the first time in College history, the majority of the Officer posts will be occupied by CBT Misusers - with Professor CBT-1 as our CBT Misuse President and Professor CBT-2 as our Secretary of Complex CBT Disorders - and I'm sure you will be looking forward to the future with this exciting team in charge.
Professor CBT -3, who does not accept the hypochondriacs of the WHO, will be added to the team with the new title of Professor without a Chair and I look forward to a positive handover. I know that Professor CBT-1,2,3,4-100 will continue to take the DSM College forward with a lot of undifferentiated somatisation and pain .
Unfortunately, you'll have to put up with ME for another few months! I can't believe how quickly ME time as Chairman has passed but there's still lots of CBT to achieve. Thanks as always for your supper and discouragement - this can be a tough job at times and your kind CBT really does keep me going.
Best wishes,
Professor DSM
Chairman of Council
DSM College of CBT – ism
__________________
If the world didn't suck, we would all fall off.
4 comments:
nice one Dr Speedy! :-)
here's icing on the CBT cake:
Dr Clare Gerada has been elected as the 21st chair of the RCGP, the college's first female chair for 50 years.
(Dr Gerada is married to Professor Simon Wessely.)
& to see her pretending to be an ME patient,
http://www.veoh.com/
and then search for "Chalder"
Glaxosmithkline the biggest drug company in the world are funding some XMRV research into ME/CFS and they are selecting patients using the Canadian Criteria and not the the stupid weasel invented Oxford Criteria.
http://www.meassociation.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&catid=30%3Anews&id=1234%3Anew-xmrv-research-study-announced&Itemid=161
- so yah boo sucks, weasels!
PACE Trial - Prof Hooper's letter to MRC Clinical Trials Manager
This is the letter of complaint about the PACE Trial that Professor Hooper has sent to the MRC by Special Delivery, which means that it has a traceable tracking number so that delivery can be confirmed.
From Malcolm Hooper Ph.D.,B.Pharm.,C.Chem.,MRIC
Emeritus Professor of Medicinal Chemistry
School of Sciences
Fleming Building
Wharncliffe Street
University of Sunderland
SUNDERLAND SR2 3SD
Chief Scientific Adviser to the Gulf Veterans' Association
President: the National Gulf War Veterans and Families Association, NGVFA, (2002)
30th March 2010
Dear Dr Roberts,
re: MRC PACE Trial
You will doubtless be aware from Lord Drayson (the Minister with responsibility for the MRC) that on 11th February 2010 I lodged a formal complaint with him about the PACE Trial (reference 2010/0013270POLD).
There were three reasons for going directly to him instead of to you in the first instance, as would have been customary:
1. In response to a formal complaint made in November 2004 by an alpha-rated former MRC grant-holder, and despite the involvement of the then Science Minister, Lord Sainsbury of Turville (reference SAMP001/040728) and Dr Rudi Vis MP, the MRC External Communications Manager, Elizabeth Mitchell, had already made plain that the MRC is not interested in considering complaints about the PACE Trial.
2. By lodging a complaint with the MRC Clinical Trials Manager, we are mindful of the fact that the person intimately involved with the PACE Trial, Professor Simon Wessely, is in charge of the PACE Clinical Trial Unit.
3. Given that the MRC is co-funding the PACE Trial, inviting the MRC to consider this substantial complaint would seem to be inviting the MRC to be both judge and jury in its own court – hardly consistent with the most elementary standards of independence and justice.
However, following the advice of Lord Drayson, a copy of "Magical Medicine: how to make a disease disappear" is enclosed, which sets out our concerns in detail.
Many members of the international research community are monitoring the PACE Trial particularly in the light of –
-The total failure to engage with the vast body of significant biomedical evidence about the nature of ME/CFS contained in more that 4,000 published, peer-reviewed research papers.
- The misleading and contradictory content of the Trial manuals demonstrating the apparent coercion, and exploitation of patients.
- The seriously flawed and inadequate science that under pins the Trial.
We have taken much time and great care in compiling the evidence presented in ‘Magical Medicine’ and I look forward to receiving your reasoned response to our legitimate concerns expressed therein.
I would, therefore, appreciate an informed and considered reply and not the standard and dismissive MRC proforma letter that has been sent to many people who have already written expressing their concerns about the inadequacy of the PACE Trial.
Yours sincerely
Malcolm Hooper
Enc. “Magical Medicine: how to make a disease disappear.”
Dr Morven Roberts
Clinical Trials Manager
MRC
20 Park Crescent
London
W1B 1AL
http://www.imt.ie/opinion/2010/04/severity_of_chronic_fatigue_sy.html
brilliant letter in Irish Medical Times:
Severity of chronic fatigue syndrome/ME was trivialised by recent article
Dear Editor,
I refer to ‘Defeatism undermines the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome’ (26/2/10, www.imt.ie/clinical/infections-immunology/defeatism-undermines-treatment.html). This article trivialises the severity of the illness and contains a number of factual inaccuracies.
NICE is selectively referenced. It actually points out that CFS/ME is a very serious real illness of yet unknown origin and can be more disabling than multiple sclerosis or late-stage AIDS. There is no known cure or effective treatment.
In the words of NICE: “The Guideline Development Group did not regard CBT or other behavioural therapies as curative or directed at the underlying disease process, which remains unknown. Rather, such interventions can help some patients cope with the condition” (CG53 p252). This should have been quoted.
NICE specifically make the point that CBT is not a treatment for the symptoms but an aid to help patients come to terms with their illness. Is this what is meant by ‘working’? CBT has never shown any objective benefit.
Some studies, using self reporting, have shown a subjective benefit on fatigue, i.e. as assessed by the patient, but no effect at all on activity levels when measured scientifically. The confidence intervals in these studies are so wide as to make extrapolation into a general ME/CFS population impossible.
The studies are clearly underpowered. Many sufferers take their lives because living with the symptoms is unbearable.
There is no robust scientific evidence to support GET although there was a recent heart attack! The known and frequent adverse events associated with the GET/CBT combination, have never been scientifically evaluated.
Why were NICE instructed to ignore all the biomedical evidence when drafting their guidelines? Would any pharmaceutical product obtain a product licence based on patient self-evaluation – or with the confidence interval values associated with CBT studies?
The answer is a resounding no! Why, therefore, are sufferers of ME/CFS classified by the WHO as a neurological disorder only offered CBT?
G J Morris, BSc(Psych) LLB Dip Law
Post a Comment