David Tuller Tears Apart PACE Trial

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on email

Health scientist and New York Times published journalist David Tuller today launched a damning critique upon the UK’s £5 million PACE trial in an article published on the popular Virology Blog.
The PACE trial was an open-label study of graded exercise therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome that used subjective measures as its main outcomes. It is the core justification for prescribing these therapies to ME patients around the world.
In his detailed article, Tuller challenges the PACE trial authors’ claims that the therapies led to recovery for some patients.
Tuller points out multiple changes to the original, approved study protocol, including the changing of all of the methods for assessing the primary study outcomes, and the relaxation of all of the criteria for recovery.
In what Tuller describes as a “bizarre paradox”, patients’ scores at baseline for physical function and fatigue could worsen and yet they would be considered “recovered” according to the new thresholds that replaced those specified in the study protcol.
The objective measures used in the trial, including a walking test, did not, Tuller says, support the authors’ claims concerning recovery, but the study authors dismissed these measures even though they themselves had designed them.
Critics of the trial have previously pointed out that PACE patients’ average walking test scores after therapy have been exceeded by patients listed for lung transplantation and by older patients with chronic heart failure.
In further criticism, Tuller reports that patients were not informed of the main investigators’ insurance-industry conflicts of interest in the trial, in violation of the study protocol and the Declaration of Helsinki.
Principal investigators Peter White, Trudie Chalder and Michael Sharpe, and Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet where the PACE trial was published, did not grant interviews to Tuller.
However, a number of high-profile scientists spoke to him about the trial. “I’m shocked that The Lancet published it,” said leading geneticist Ronald Davis, of Stanford University. “The PACE study has so many flaws and there are so many questions you’d want to ask about it that I don’t understand how it got through any kind of peer review”.
Jonathan Edwards, world-famous for his work in rheumatoid arthritis at University College London, told Tuller, “It’s a mass of un-interpretability to me. Within the circle who are involved in this field, it seems there were a group who were prepared to all sing by the hymn sheet and agree that PACE was wonderful. But all the issues with the trial are extremely worrying, making interpretation of the clinical significance of the findings more or less impossible.”
University of California epidemiologist Arthur Reingold said to Tuller, “Under the circumstances, an independent review of the trial conducted by experts not involved in the design or conduct of the study would seem to be very much in order.”
Tuller credits patients for much of the information and scientific insight that led to his critique.
The second part of his analysis will appear on Virology Blog tomorrow. (You can read our summary of the entire four part series here: “Investigative journalist debunks PACE trial“)

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email

4 thoughts on “David Tuller Tears Apart PACE Trial”

  1. This powerful story, published over three days, will definitely get some traction on Twitter. I have been adding @Lancet to include the journal, and suggest using #retractPACE. Maybe others have different ideas about how to get the message across. Just putting it out there.
    The XMRV paper could have been just not replicated, but was retracted, unnecessarily. I believe PACE has some much worse harm to scientific understanding of this disease, and needs to be robustly refuted and then retracted so it can’t be used against us anymore. I’m sure others have more knowledge about how to pursue and support that process.

  2. I am smiling, smiling. Finally the mind-medics are about to receive their comeuppance. Psychology and Psychiatry are not real sciences [paraphrasing Sheldon]. The mind is bathed in physicality. Along with Prof Newton’s team finding the enzyme that I may be short of, [I have been telling people for years that I am an enzyme short of the full reaction], this has been such a good day that I am going to have a little lie down now. Don’t laugh too hard, you lot, PACE yourselves hahaha – not.

  3. Thank you David Tuller!
    An independent investigation is so desperately needed and it is so refreshing to hear numerous experts point out the blatant manipulation of data and laughability that the PACE trial is.
    I hope that the UK will start to catch up to the US in terms of booting out the psychiatric view once and for all.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest News

Press Jungle Featured Image

#MEAction Swinging Through The Press Jungle

Welcome to the jungle, the press jungle! It’s hot and noisy here, with news fresh off the press. Trying to get the attention of the media is not as impossible as legend had it! This is Adriane, and as your Press Scribe, I’m here to write our way through this next adventure and make sure

Read More »
Research Lagoon

#MEAction Swimming Through the Research Lagoon

Hi, everyone! It’s Jaime, the Director of Scientific & Medical Outreach at #MEAction. During this week’s #MEAction Giving Adventure we swam through the Research Lagoon as we surpassed our second fundraising level of US $20,000/UK£14,820. While our fundraising format this year is fun and lighthearted, the work #MEAction is doing to advance research and clinical

Read More »

Join over 1,000 people and vote for your ME/CFS research priorities

Over 1,000 people have now voted for their ME/CFS research priorities. People with ME/CFS, carers and clinicians in the UK are all asked to take part. The ME/CFS Priority Setting Partnership is particularly looking for more people from ethnic minorities, carers and health care professionals to take part. So far: Just 4% of respondents are

Read More »

Help keep our work going

We rely on donations from people like you to keep fighting for equality for people with ME.

Donate

Get actions alerts and news direct to your inbox

You can choose what you want to be kept up to date on.

Subscribe
Scroll to Top