With the advent of the Whittemore-Peterson Institute's XMRV research
we may be entering a new and more relevant era of research of our
So will it put the medical fantasies about the illness to rest?
And what of the likes of Simon Wessely and Michael Sharpet whom have
both created and perpetuated those fantasies under the guise of
For decades the psychiatric profession has been increasingly trying to
elevate itself by portraying psychiatry as pure science. They have
been like the somewhat dysfunctional child who wants to be seen on the
same tier as other medical professions, to elevate psychiatric and
psychological conditions to the same tier as medical conditions.
Let's accept for the sake of discussion that the road to credibility
is pure science.
So what of research psychiatrists such as Simon Wessely and Michael
Sharpe now? They have professed to be using that 'pure science' to
define ME/CFS. We've seen them generate lots of data shrouded in
supposedly pure science.
What happens now that Simon Wessely's and Michael Sharpe's theories
about ME/CFS and supposed science are being scientifically proven to
be nothing more than tainted data conducted and created to support
preconceived flawed theories?
What does the so scientifically oriented psychiatric research sector
do now that it is becoming evident that two of their own have
corrupted 'the science' so profoundly?
Do the psychiatric sector, academic medical sector and government
health sector distance themselves from such corruptors of science?
That is usually what happens in science when an investigator is shown
to have been generating corrupted data.
Will Simon Wessely and Michael Sharpe be cut loose, on their own to go
down in history as having egg on their faces?
Or will the psychiatric research, academic medical and government
health sectors rally around to protect their own, only making the
whole matter more scientifically reprehensible?
As we enter this new era of ME/CFS research it is not enough to let
the gradual progress of science illuminate the contradictory nature of
Simon Wessely's and Michael Sharpe's decades long campaigns.
As research progresses we advocates, activists and patients must bring
the contradictions to the doorsteps of psychiatric research, academic
medical, government health, and media sectors.
Researcher's time is best spent researching. While under some
circumstance we need their voices, the are wise to for the most part
steer clear of the politics; that is up to us. If we do so effectively
we can open the doors to more needed research in the days and months