Trial by Error: The Science Media Centre ’ s Desperate Efforts to Defend PACE

By David Tuller, DrPH This week, the Journal of Health Psychology published a special issue containing a raft of commentaries on the PACE trial. Most of them slammed the study for its many, many unacceptable flaws. Not surprisingly, Sir Simon Wessely’s lackeys at the Science Media Centre immediately posted three comments from “experts” lauding the trial and criticizing the JHP commentaries. I thought it might be helpful to deconstruct these rather pathetic efforts at defending the indefensible. I’ve posted all three statements below, followed by my comments. I decided to keep them relatively brief, although I could have gone on much longer. ********** Prof. Malcolm Macleod, Professor of Neurology and Translational Neuroscience, University of Edinburgh, said: “The PACE trial, while not perfect, provides far and away the best evidence for the effectiveness of any intervention for chronic fatigue; and certainly is more robust than any of the other research cited. Reading the criticisms, I was struck by how little actual meat there is in them; and wondered where some of the authors came from. In fact, one of them lists as an institution a research centre (Soerabaja Research Center) which only seems to exist as an affiliation on papers he wrote criticising the PACE trial. “Their main criticisms seem to revolve around the primary outcome was changed halfway through the trial: there are lots of reasons this can happen, some justifiable and others not; the main think...
Source: virology blog - Category: Virology Authors: Tags: Uncategorized Source Type: blogs