was from this time that I developed my way of judging the Chinese by
dividing them into two kinds: one humane and one not. It took an upheaval
like the Cultural Revolution to bring out these characteristics in people
Chang, "Wild Swans", p.454)`
"You can see why I've got myself so much disliked, and why I'm
in such a dangerous situation. Not that I'm not an expert pro-body
too. I'm a pro-truthist, a pro-beautician, a pro-sinceritist, and a
pro-everything that's pro-worthy. But I don't find much scope for
exercisting my talents in that direction, whereas thousands of
people are always queuing up for the anti-treatment."
As before, I continue being not well, for which reason there were no
Nederlogs the last two days, and I continue with more good news and also
some news about an ME-Fraud, that stands in interesting stark contrast to
the very good news I start with.
1. The Grand Opening of the Whittemore Peterson Institute (WPI)
2. The fraudulence, falsities and phoniness of Dr. Esther Crawley,
Incidentally, my first quotation of today, that I have used before
repeatedly, because my experiences with
ME in Amsterdam have led me to a
very similar conclusion, is explained somewhat, by implication, in section 2, that also
is covered by the quotation from Lucian.
1. The Grand Opening of the Whittemore Peterson
The good news continues the earlier good news, and generally shows
that I am - well: a little slow, these days, also being far from Nevada.
For that's where the Good ME-News hails from, as before, in my Nederlogs
of August 17,
Some good ME-news (?!), that detailed news from
Reno from the previous day, and August 18,
Some more good
, that provided the links to an Interview with the Whittemores (mother and daughter)
on August 16.
Clearly, I am running - well... crawling - a bit behind the times, but
then the news is worth it, and here is more:
In fact, on August 17 the Whittemore Peterson Institute was opened
with a VIP-party, and quite a few speakers, who've all been caught on
video and all can be found in the next link, which collectively is a long
view, that also may not be quite the thing for you if you have ME and are
not a Nevadan (if that's the name), but which I found yesterday and then
did all watch (more links with excerpts follow, in case you don't want to
Having viewed it all, I can assure you that I found it interesting
sociologically (US folks look like real people in Nevada!
(*)) and for some other reasons, especially such as help make clear
that the existence of the WPI is somewhat of a fluke or minor miracle,
mostly due to the Whittemores, and in particular to Mrs. Annette Whittemore.
In fact, here is her speech, lifted from that long Grand Opening
This is slightly over 10 minutes, and all of it is interesting, for
indeed she managed, with the help of others, to erect a 77 million dollar
biomedical research institute from basically nothing at all AND lay the
institutional foundations for the Lombardi-Mikovits XMRV-breakthrough
nearly a year ago.
The star speaker though at the Grand Opening was not Mrs. Annette
Whittemore, but her daughter Andrea, who has been ill with ME/CFS for a
very long time, and at long last seems to be revalidating remarkably
This is 2 minutes 40 seconds, is both restrained and emotional, and is
an excellent speech.
In fact this is from August 16, while yesterday the WPI-opening for
guests took place. I haven't seen any video or pictures from this
(**) but this no doubt will arrive over the course of
the next week or so.
In any case: All of this is very good news for anybody with
ME/CFS, for at long last there is a cutting edge research institute, that
took some 77 million dollars to get surrected; which has some of the very
best researchers in ME, virology and related diseases present; which has
the support of both the University of Nevada at Reno and the state of
Nevada, indeed cross party, it would seem from the video (***),
the shortly to appear Alter/Lo replication and extension of the
Lombardo/Mikovits study, the situation for people with ME is better, in
principle, and in hope for the future, than I was aware of the last 32
And a great part of the credit for that is owed to the Whittemores,
for they set themselves the end; had the money, the intelligence, the
willpower and the perseverance, and made it happen, indeed against high
odd and with much opposition, some very unfair and unscientific also, as the
next section will show.
2. The fraudulence, falsities and phoniness of Dr.
Esther Crawley, paediatrician
I have written before about the socalled Lightning ProcessTM, that I
have restyled as Lying ProcessTM, since I am a psychologist and a
philosopher, and I do think that's what it is. See e.g.
I think it is total nonsense, also quite dangerous to some, especially
those with real illnesses, to which some may cynically reply that -
"alas", they might say, sincerely or not - the socalled Wellness Market is
full of frauds since the days of Antiquity. Indeed it is, and I wrote about it in
2008, in Dutch, in
Lucian from which I like to quote the following passage, before
quoting Dr. Esther Crawley, whose doctorate is in the science of
paediatrics, that these days (unlike in Plato's days) is not precisely
Here is Lucian on the doctores Crawley, Wessely and White of his day
and age, when quizzed by the Goddess of Philosophy (see
what's your job?
There's no harm in
LUCIAN: I'm an
I'm anti all the
like that - and
there are plenty
of them, as you
Well, well! You're
certainly am. You
can see why I've
got myself aso
much disliked, and
why I'm in such a
that I'm not an
too. I'm a
But I don't find
much scope for
talents in that
people are always
queuing up for the
fact I'm so out of
practice as a
probody, that I
dare say I have
lost the knack of
it by now - but
I'm a real expert
at the other part
of my profession.
sides of a coin,
as it were. So
in one at the
expense of the
other. They should
of the same
LUCIAN: Well, you
I'm so constituted
that I can't help
hating bad types
and liking good
(uit: Fishing for phonies, in de Turner-vertaling, p. 177-8)
I have been
likewise, and now
turn to Dr.
Crawley, who seems
to be very typical
for the postmodern
since when fifty
percent of people
admissible for a
they then arrive
devoid of all
talents but with
sharp elbows and a
willingness to lie
for a degree and a
then indeed these days
open to virtually
anyone not totally
braindead - see e.g. my
with an IQ of 115"
- and thus
it indeed could
come about that a
Dr. Crawley could
climb towards such
minor fame as
calls it thus, no
doubt by design)
as she has
then was followed
by my stumbling
Incidentally, not being British, like Dr. Crawley,
I didn't do the stumbling all by myself, but was originally alerted to the Lying Process
by Phoenix Rising, where Ms. Suzy Chapman
a.k.a. ME agenda wrote about it, also pointing
to a wealth of information (or rather: desinformation, as the case is here, but
that is not Ms. Chapman's fault), as she often does. (See her site:
agenda, where you find a wealth of ME-related material summarized by
categories in the lefthand column.)
It's also to Ms. Chapman's site that I owe the following, which is
part of a transcript of a lecture that Dr. Crawley - a heavily subsidized
"researcher" (so called) into "chronic fatigue" (so
called) - held the end of March this year, to
a group of patients with ME in Dorset.
In fact, I could say a lot more about this text than I do today, as I
also could say a lot more about Dr. Crawley's so called "scientific"
prose, and her type of person, as this ancient psychologist and
philosopher, crabbed with dysfunctional beliefs since 32 years, believes
he can see, underneath all the posturing, blustering, and phoniness, but
I do want to quote a few succulent bits of the Crawley prose,
in view of the facts about the opening of the WPI in my
first section and the phony stories about both XMRV and the WPI by
Dr. Crawley just a little over 4 months ago - and let it be noted here,
in case there is any dubiety, that it is my considered opinion that Ms.
Crawley, next to being a paediatrician and experimenter with children, is
a genius, in the
Swiftian field of saying the thing that is not.
What follows are parts from
the transcript that Ms. Chapman prepared from a DVD that contains video from
the event (and the underlined part in this paragraphis the link to all of it, and a
lot more background, on ME
Here is a taste of postmodern British paediatrics (and see my
Scientific Realism versus Postmodernism):
Approx 27 mins in from start of presentation:
XMRV. OK, so in the next, last,
remaining bit of the talk I want to summarise what’s happened about the
XMRV story for you. I think it’s really important that we’re all
informed about it.
Many of you will have woken up and read
this story, in fact I knew about it 24 hours before it was about to
break – “Has science found the cause of chronic fatigue syndrome?” –
we’re all very excited and hopeful this might give us something we can
Don’t you think this is the most
beautiful picture? That’s the XMRV virus. I don’t know how they get
those colours on them – very beautiful.
Now this is the Centre that reported
it. Do any of you notice anything about that picture? XXXX you’re not
allowed to say.
Member of the audience:
yeah. It’s in Reno, yeah, yeah. Anything else? It’s a bit far away.
Has anyone looked at the website? Isn’t
that interesting? That doesn’t exist. That’s a fake picture – it’s what
they would like to exist, when you donate money, when you go on the
website. I thought everybody knew that! Yeah, sorry? This is Dorset.
OK. The Centre isn’t built. That’s
their picture of what they would like to build and when you go on the
website it has “Please donate.”
How sneaky and insinuating, how phony and false can an English doctor
of paediatrics be? Well... about as much as a dr. Esther Crawley, I'd say,
logically and empirically speaking, and on such evidence as I have, for
it is hard to top that, at least without running directly into a lawyer.
You see: On March 27, Dr. Crawley, who in fact seems to have known
quite differently, and who in fact certainly both should and easily
have known better, said in public, on video also, of the WPI-building,
opened on August 16:
That doesn’t exist. That’s a fake picture (..)
Not only that: She managed to suggest, to insinuate, to just barely
fully say that you donate to something fraudulent - which possibly is an easy thought for a
mind like Dr. Crawley's, it seems, as fraudulence apparently coming
natural to her, although in that she is not
alone, among pseudoscientists.
I skip some (without falsifying anything, me not being called "Crawley",
"Wessely", "White", "Sharpe", "Chalder" or "Gerada", thanks be to whatever
divinities there may be: See
the transcript) and arrive at the following gem of paediatric science,
as this is practised by Dr. Crawley, who asks her audience what is called in
legalese "A Leading Question":
So what do you think’s going on?
Member of the audience:
….I have actually given a clue.
Member of the audience:
Member of the audience:
XXXX wants to tell us.
EC: OK, go on, XXXX…
EC’s young son (in front
row): Did they all do it from one place?
The first group – actually, the question is, was the first group
chronic fatigue syndrome? And eventually, when they were asked, they
told the research community that, this is in Lisbon, at the end of last
year, that all the samples came from an outbreak of chronic fatigue
syndrome in one village in Lake Tahoe.
And when you actually go and have a
look at all the research data around that outbreak, everybody at that
time thought it was a viral infection. And nobody could find the virus.
So most of us think that that was
probably the issue – it was probably a viral outbreak that has
certainly caused chronic fatigue syndrome but is not necessarily going
to be relevant for us here in the UK.
Incidentally, Ms. Chapman had the kindness to edit out the name of Ms.
Crawley's young son, and rightly so,
even if Ms. Dr.
Crawley is quite willing to apply the Lying ProcessTM to
then her own, to find out whether these other
children may perhaps be killed or harmed by it,
as may well be the case, since there never has been any decent scientific study into
the merits of this anyway insane sounding nonsense, not even in
In other words - to get the morality somewhat clear - as it may have happened in the very early days of the
discovery of electricity, when Benjamin Franklin just had discovered that lightning is
electrical, what the paediatrically learned Miss Dr. Crawley is investigating is something along the
lines of whether being struck by lightning or being
might do harm to any children that are ill anyway with ME (or
whether it may magically and miraculously cure them within three days, as
its devotees have paid through the nose for to tell the world).
How sick and phony can one get, in England, these
days, in paediatric circles? Why not immediately propose thumbscrews "to
help improve their school attendance", as seems one of Dr. Crawley's
purported objects? (I can guarantee, or am willing to bet my brilliant
M.A. degree in psychology, that school attendance will dramatically
Well... here is the paediatric doctor on XMRV:
And there’s a big question here
[Ed: indicates on slide] – this XMRV virus was initially described
with prostate cancer and the prostate research community has shown this
in prostate cancer in two studies in the USA. These are different labs
in different studies but no association in Europe.
Meanwhile, this has been shown to be
false, and anyway this is only the sort of pseudoscience a fairly to very dumb
- if honest, to be fair to this doctored miss - paediatrician or a lying
pseudoscientist would come up with, since it is on a par with the imperial British level of
"black people and eskimoos have other diseases than us Brits".
So maybe this is a virus that’s
important in America but not important in this country – it’s not
What is clear is that Ms. Crawley is very
probably aping professor Wessely's and professor
McClure's stance, which is effectively that (1) In Good Old Brittain
there is no XMRV and (2) even if there was,
professor Wessely personally would take
care it would not be researched while (3) if it were to be researched he,
professor Wessely, psychiatrist, is the very man to do the work, and
retrovirologists that he knows better than they do, or at least
manipulates the facts, the reports and collaborating retrovirologists
like no one else. (The last link is to my
ME: On the postmodern falsifications in Wessely &
McClures BMJ-editorial of March 9, still quite correct, unlike the
I return to the noble, moral, honest
character that calls herself doctor Crawley:
And I think this is of interest. Within
a week of their paper being published they produced a test for the XMRV
virus at $650 a test. [Ed: Slide reads, at point 4: Conflict of
And if I was developing a test, I would
declare that as a conflict of interest on the paper – “I’m developing a
test for this.” Then people can make up their mind about whether it has
affected the results. We don’t know, it wasn’t declared they’d produced
Rhetoricians, lawyers and logicians call
this "innuendo", but no doubt Ms. Crawley's eventual lawyers will point
out that Miss Doctor Crawley doesn't know the word; can't grasp the
concept; and altogether always means well and always speaks, spoke and
will speak the truth, in their
And then at one point, rumour has it
(and I couldn’t find any evidence for this) that they started to
suggest that patients with chronic fatigue syndrome should have
anti-retrovirals, ie HIV drugs.
Rhetoricians, lawyers and logicians call
this "innuendo", and further as above.
They’ve taken that back, and this is
all I could find:
[Reads from slide quoting Dr Judy
Mikovits; the "she says" refers to Dr Mikovits]:
“While it’s not advisable to take
highly toxic anti-retrovirals [without tests confirming effectiveness],
she says some available therapies may help, including: immune
modulators; anti-inflammatories, because inflammation activates XMRV,
things that improve natural killer cell function; medications that help
[level progesterone levels, because progesterone up-regulates XMRV in
lab tests]; avoiding stress.”
In fact, Dr. Mikovits is a medical doctor
and FAR more of a scientist and a researcher than Ms. Crawley ever could
be (for else the miss would not be a paediatrician, although -
fairminded as I am - there are no doubt good paediatricians in England, if not called Crawley, or so it would
appear to this elderly logically highly educated psychologist).
It appears – and this really upset me,
OK. All of their studies are in adults. OK, all in adults.
Dr. Crawley, who wants to do "empirical
research" to find out whether ill children get miracuously cured by the
process of lightningTM a person (a process that never has been tested
scientifically, not even on adults, but
then children are far more pliable by
brainwashing, I'd say, as elderly cynic with a scientific education in psychology), at this
point - her eventual lawyers will claim, with a show of moral indignation
- did not at all know what "innuendo"
means, never-ever lies or lied, and did not seek to suggest that the WPI
wanted to prescribe "highly toxic anti-retrovirals" to children.
O no! Dr. Crawley is an honourable woman! Here is the proof:
And then they say:
[Reads from slide]
“Early infection in children can lead
to more severe disease later on.”
Oh, that’ll be that test that they
produced for $605 [sic] a pop.
See? Did I already suggest to you that
Ms. Dr. Crawley does not know what "suggestion", "innuendo" or "bearing
false witness" means? O, I did.
[Reads from slide]
“and intervention important to keep
viral loads from getting high.”
I find that really frightening. If I
had a child with chronic fatigue syndrome and I read that on the web,
the first thing I’d do, I’d go and buy the test, and the second thing
I’d be doing would be phoning an infectious disease doctor which is
what’s happened and ask about anti-retrovirals for my child, having
Miss Dr. Crawley, at this point, still
had no idea of the meanings of "suggestion", "innuendo" and "bearing
false witness", I must suppose her eventual lawyers will try to
lure a jury into believing.
So I do feel as researchers, we do take
some responsibility for saying “This is a first paper! Let’s wait and
see what happens.”
Messrs. Wessely and
Van der Meer, no doubt Ms. Dr. Crawley's
firm friends and colleagues, did NOT "take some responsibility"
when the Lombardi-paper appeared: They did not say "This is a first
paper! Let’s wait and see what happens."
O no! Instead, while neither had or has any competence in
retrovirology or any real competence in real science (both of them
being pseudoscientific trick-cylists) each of them started by saying
immediately this was not so, and next both bought themselves a
tame retrovirologist, and both produced very flawed "research", indeed
such as the very honourable Ms.Dr. Crawley names in her speech, that -
so they claimed falsely, impertinently and unscientifically - "refuted"
the Lombardi-paper. (See my
ME: On the postmodern falsifications in Wessely &
McClures BMJ-editorial: Good philosophy of science, on my part.)
Here is the honest, moral, never posturing or posing miss Crawley
You know, I think it’s really interesting, it look likes they did
find something in a group of patients and we haven’t found it here.
That’s really interesting and is deserving of more research.
This sounds very much like an out and out moron telling an excellent
mathematician he did well, adding that the mathematician did something
trivial, and that he shouldn't feel too conceited.
But let’s just say, it’s interesting at the moment, rather than all
of this speculation, which I think can be very harmful for patients.
Instead of which Ms.Dr. Crawley travels around the country doing
little else than insinuating, misrepresenting, falsely suggesting,
playing the game of innuendo, and meanwhile dishing out the sheerest
trash, both scientifically and morally, as if it were "real science".
Well... I haven't vomited yet and will for the moment
prophylactically stop commenting and quoting Dr. Crawley's phony,
immoral, pseudo-scientific tales, and quote one item from today's
Phoenix Rising, as - again - a piece of good news. It is by one John
Leslie who, for what I read of him, knows his science and at least some
of the scientists he mentions:
According to my Washington contact, the Lo/Alter paper will be
released tomorrow and published on Tuesday. The paper will confirm that
XMRV and its variants (human MLV-related viruses) are associated with
CFS and are also present in the blood of healthy controls. The WPI
"will be completely" vindicated (including the variants disclosed by
WPI in support of the Science paper) and the negative studies are
likely the result of the non-use of the Lombardi primer sets or or
other equally sensitive tests. The study apparently blows away the
"contamination" argument, finds the retroviruses in over 85% of the CFS
patients, and almost 7% of the controls. Maybe someone can get an
advance copy on Monday or early Tuesday.
P.S. As I said several times: If you want to
know more about the facts of the matter, or whatever else Dr. Crawley
said in Dorset, or indeed more about ME,
agenda's site will help. The material
and about Dr. Crawley, including the transcript quoted in part above,
is under the last link on her site.
P.P.S. It may be I have to stop Nederlog
for a while. The reason is that I am physically not well at all. I
don't know yet, but if there is no Nederlog, now you know the reason.