• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Illustrations of threats issued by Simon Wessely

SilverbladeTE

Senior Member
Messages
3,043
Location
Somewhere near Glasgow, Scotland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie

Later, Joseph Goebbels put forth a slightly different theory which has come to be more commonly associated with the expression "big lie." Goebbels wrote the following paragraph in an article dated 12 January 1941, 16 years after Hitler's first use of the phrase "big lie," titled "Aus Churchills Lgenfabrik" and translated "From Churchill's Lie Factory." It was published in Die Zeit ohne Beispiel.

The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous

takes one sick, evil, twisted bastard, to know how another scummy system really works ;)

and the classic:

The phrase was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler's psychological profile:[3][4]

His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.

Hitler went from being laughed at by many, to mesmerizing on stage, very very quickly...ever wondered HOW that occured? He got taught, that's how, and by whom? Those skilled in psychological manipulation, which apparently included professionals.
Alas, the curse that writing etc is, means that scum nowadays, can learn from such lessons. While most folk who read "The Prince" and "The Art of War" do no harm with the knowledge, some readers are not so benign.

Silverblade's Pearls of Troubling Wisdom said:
The worst killer of all, is the one who can coerce another person into cutting their own throat....
 

Enid

Senior Member
Messages
3,309
Location
UK
Certainly nothing very meek and humble in the "all in the mind" establishment here. !!
 

Ember

Senior Member
Messages
2,115
I look at the 'header' on this site, and on other ME sites, and I see "CFS" or ME/CFS or CFS/ME - why is it that we cannot drop "CFS" - the Wessely construct of confusion. Wessely is right when he states CFS is a belief, he uses the label because he knows it causes confusion and a blurring of patient selection criteria in research. It is a distraction that has played out exactly as planned. Any 'body' that uses the term "CFS" is supporting Wessely and in turn supporting authority.

As Fred Friedberg wrote yesterday, "The biological focus in the article for the new definition of ME is clear, consistent, and unequivocal."
 

SOC

Senior Member
Messages
7,849
I look at the 'header' on this site, and on other ME sites, and I see "CFS" or ME/CFS or CFS/ME - why is it that we cannot drop "CFS" - the Wessely construct of confusion. Wessely is right when he states CFS is a belief, he uses the label because he knows it causes confusion and a blurring of patient selection criteria in research. It is a distraction that has played out exactly as planned. Any 'body' that uses the term "CFS" is supporting Wessely and in turn supporting authority. We may as well just call this site :
"Phoenix Rising - ME/CFS (chronic fatigue Syndrome - otherwise known as Yuppie Flu) Forum"

Not arguing with you in principle, max, but a serious issue for those of us in the US is that there is no other diagnosis for us than the abhorrent 'CFS'. ME is not an accepted diagnosis here (unless things have changed recently). Any patient with our illness in the US is diagnosed as 'CFS' for any formal/official purpose. I doubt any patient likes that, but we're stuck with it to some degree. Any new US patient looking for information is going to be searching "CFS" or "ME/CFS" at best. Sucks, dunnit? Nevertheless, if this forum is going to serve newly-diagnosed US patients, it can't completely drop the dreaded "CFS". Not yet, anyway.

I certainly wouldn't call that "supporting Wessely". I'd call it common, temporarily necessary pragmatism.
 

max

Senior Member
Messages
192
I had my coat on and the car keys in my hand, I was half way out of the door .....

you're correct sickofcfs - you have to use their label and accept their diagnosis terminology - and yes, that appears to be some kind of pragmatism - still,..... saying the words CFS (yuppie-flu) helps Wessely, it does not help a sufferer with ME.

When I said I was in the 'wrong place', I did not mean for it to come across as a slur, I meant ....... that I am talking to people with ME, I need to be talking to other carers / advocates about what to do. A number of times this has been pointed out to me, my apologies for being so thick and not realising it.

I'll let you know when the MRC/NA release more details.

Now, I really am ........................ gone.
 

Enid

Senior Member
Messages
3,309
Location
UK
Going back to topic Wessely and the Press does anyone know of any investigative journalist/publication (outside the Wesseley cronies) who might bring a balanced picture of ME - it's history in the UK especially now daisymay has brought so much information to light - or is that wishful thinking ?
 

Bob

Senior Member
Messages
16,455
Location
England (south coast)
Good question Enid. It would be good to have a summary of the history of ME in the UK, that was comprehensive, but wasn't so long that no one would read it. And a very short version to send to journalists. (And preferably not written by a psychiatrist!)
 

Ember

Senior Member
Messages
2,115

Enid

Senior Member
Messages
3,309
Location
UK
How about this for a good cut and paste (I've popped in on another thread too). Nothing new under the sun in the W tactics - I've seen elswhere described as psychological inversion. We must be on the way to the history with all things here on PR.

http://www.rescindinc.org/countessmar.html
 

redo

Senior Member
Messages
874
I just can't believe this guy. Or I guess most of the medical realm as a whole. If a patient says they are fine mentally, if a patient insists they are fine mentally, they still tag them as nut case just because their samples don't show anything yet.

It reminds me of a cartoon strip I've seen. It's a doctor who's got a car which is making this terrible rattle noise, and he goes to the mechanic.
Doctor: I think my car is broken, it keeps making this terrible noise every now and than.
Mechanic: I hear you. We've checked your car, in and out, and we can't work it out. So I guess it means the problems must be in your head!

I really should have had that strip available now. I think it's so spot on.
 

Merry

Senior Member
Messages
1,378
Location
Columbus, Ohio, USA
I just can't believe this guy. Or I guess most of the medical realm as a whole. If a patient says they are fine mentally, if a patient insists they are fine mentally, they still tag them as nut case just because their samples don't show anything yet.

It reminds me of a cartoon strip I've seen. It's a doctor who's got a car which is making this terrible rattle noise, and he goes to the mechanic.
Doctor: I think my car is broken, it keeps making this terrible noise every now and than.
Mechanic: I hear you. We've checked your car, in and out, and we can't work it out. So I guess it means the problems must be in your head!

I really should have had that strip available now. I think it's so spot on.

Interesting that you should say this about a cartoon strip, redo, because after reading Hillary Johnson's assessment that Simon Wessely's most recent complaints to the press about people with ME (pardon me, I mean CFS) is actually a book promotion stunt, I thought: Hilarious. And so very evil. Simon Wessely is a cartoon character.
 

redo

Senior Member
Messages
874
Normal, sane people would have gone into themselves if they got so much critique. They'd stop for a minute, and ask "What the heck am I doing?", and "What if I am wrong?", "What would the consequence be for the millions of people if I am wrong?". Sadly it's often money and career mongers who go into the medical profession (there are exceptions, but too few). And this is what happens.
 

Roy S

former DC ME/CFS lobbyist
Messages
1,376
Location
Illinois, USA
"Reading these emails it becomes clear that a previous article "No imaginary illness" (see "CFS is a lie (part 2) in the resources section below) by this journalist which was published in De Standaard on February 7, 2011 was removed from their website after a complaint by Simon Wessely, who found it to be "libellous, inaccurate and malicious". The lively discussion sparked by his article was also removed. "
 
 
If liberty means anything at all, it means the right
to tell people what they do not want to hear.
George Orwell
http://www.pugilator.com/awareness/are-british-libel-laws-used-to-silence-mecfs-debate-in-belgium/
 
(I ran across this without even looking for it)
 

Roy S

former DC ME/CFS lobbyist
Messages
1,376
Location
Illinois, USA
This is the removed article referred to in the first post on this thread.
 
 
ME sufferers have found enemy in Wessely - so they need friends

By Margaret Cook

THIS week at the Scottish Parliament Visitors’ Centre, I spoke to a cross-party group of MSPs on ME - myalgic encephalomyelitis. I am still amazed at how I came to be doing such an adventurous thing, for it is a topic on which I have minimal expertise or knowledge.

I am one of those people who tend to leap in at the deep end rather than reflecting on the brink, so I should have considered how improbable it was that a sufficient number of MSPs would have an interest in the low-profile illness ME to make up a group. On arrival, I found that most of my audience were either sufferers themselves, or carers of sufferers.

Now if there is anyone likely to have a thorough knowledge of a medical condition, it is someone who has found the Establishment uninterested and even sceptical about their problem. Think of Gulf War Syndrome, think of CJD and its association with BSE. The place where ME patients have come up against a brick wall is the Benefits System, and this is why they were interested, nay pressing, in inviting me to come along, as I have a passing acquaintance with that system.

There has been widespread scepticism among doctors as to whether ME exists at all. It has been labelled derogatorily as "yuppie flu"; and some patients have been called malingerers, hypochondriacs and worse when applying for state benefits.

If I found some of my audience identifying me with all the negative attitudes they had encountered and expressing themselves rather warmly, who am I to blame them?

They are particularly resistant to the view, embedded in current medical thinking, that ME is predominantly or partly a mental health problem. Now this is not an easy conundrum to disentangle, because it is quite common for people with chronic disabling conditions to become clinically depressed.

Simply treating for depression will not necessarily address the primary issue. And though there are no established diagnostic markers, it is not by any means the only condition which needs to be diagnosed on the basis of the history.

I’ve said before in this column that the most important thing I have learned in a lifetime of medical practice, is that you should LISTEN to what the patient tells you. So, following my own advice, and feeling somewhat humbled, when they asked if I needed to know more about ME, where would I go? I replied that I could do worse than coming to this particular group. That raised me in their estimation.

But I picked up a name, the significance of which did not strike me until afterwards. Simon Wessely, professor of epidemiology and liaison psychiatry at Guy’s, King’s and St Thomas’s Schools of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, London. Ah, what a Big Cheese he sounds.

It seems that he has been central to the psychiatric perspective that ME does not exist at all, and that the related "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome" is a mental condition best managed by a psychiatric therapeutic approach.

He has downplayed the need for research into diagnostic markers for the condition(s), and such is his influence that no state funding is forthcoming to support any other research than his own. For a mystery condition, this is closing down the portals and reducing the chance of the broad, open
perspective needed to break through the barriers of prejudice and ignorance.

After I left the meeting, that name echoed in my subconscious mind, until a day or so later, I suddenly remembered where I had met it before.

In May 2003, a revolutionary issue of the BMJ challenged the age-old association between doctors and their lavishly-generous sponsors, the pharmaceutical companies. The attack was bold, and very shocking to those who had not thought of how the profession prostitutes itself for funding, and how both treatment and research are distorted as a result.
Well done, the editor, said some of us. But not all.

One of the foremost who objected to the challenge to our collective integrity was the aforementioned Professor Simon Wessely, who (using a reductio ad absurdum argument), refused to countenance the possibility of his judgment being swayed by any such paymaster.

He wrote: "It is time we doctors grew up." He no doubt subscribes to the principle of the double-blind, randomised clinical trial, yet is himself blind to the possibility that doctors can be biased by that most powerful motivator, money.

You can tell from every sentence of his letter that he is used to dictating principles and having everyone in his orbit humbly accept his gospel. If I needed persuading that the ME community merited my support, this letter and its author would convince me. When you have enemies like him, you need a powerful lot of friends.

--------
(c) 2003 The Scotsman
 
http://www.whale.to/a/me12.html
 

Roy S

former DC ME/CFS lobbyist
Messages
1,376
Location
Illinois, USA
This remains on the Scotsman's site.
 
Research goes on
 
Margaret Cook’s article "ME sufferers have found enemy in Wessely" (Doctor’s Notes, 6 October) shows the real battle is not between myself and sufferers of ME but between your correspondent and the facts.
 
I have never suggested that CFS (chronic fatigue syndrome) does not exist. Unlike Margaret Cook, I have spent the past 15 years of my life looking after sufferers from this condition, and do not need reminding of the reality of the illness or the damage it can cause.
 
Likewise, I would delighted if anyone could find a diagnostic marker for CFS. She might like to read our 20 or so papers dealing with immunological, virological, nutritional, endocrine and even haematological aspects of CFS. No, we haven’t found a marker, but we keep trying.
 
Quite how Margaret Cook thinks that I, or any single individual, could block research into this condition is beyond me, but if she had read the recent Lancet editorial I co-wrote with the chief executive of Action for ME, she would have seen a powerful plea for more, not less, research into all aspects of CFS/ME.
 
She begins her article by saying she has "minimal expertise or knowledge" of the subject. Indeed so.
(PROF) SIMON WESSELY
Director, CFS Research Unit
King’s College London
Camberwell
London
 
http://www.scotsman.com/news/research-goes-on-1-667634
 

worldbackwards

Senior Member
Messages
2,051
Likewise, I would delighted if anyone could find a diagnostic marker for CFS. She might like to read our 20 or so papers dealing with immunological, virological, nutritional, endocrine and even haematological aspects of CFS. No, we haven’t found a marker, but we keep trying.
 
Chortle.