It will be interesting to see the recording and compare to the write up, I realise they need to report both of the sides for a debate, but it seems a little bland on the combination side, then again that might be my bias.
I think I’d like to have seen the no difference in outcomes statement at the top, include the no difference in safety aspect.
Oooh I think I know ( puts hand in the air) is it antidepressants and CBT, or acceptance therapy because we need to come to terms with the fact we feel like crap and its clearly not the fault of Levo so it must the fault of the patient.
Fancy wanting to feel well and have a normal life, sheesh the sense of entitlement from these patients.
Pearce really is the perfect model for a debate of this nature. However for once I would like to see him defending a view opposing his own. He ought to be taking the pro combo ‘side’. It’s boring him trotting out all his usual crap and it’s the height of utter laziness on his part. Real scientists should be able to at least cover both sides of the debate with some enthusiasm. It’s scientific to be challenging (and be seen to be challenging) your own views. Pearce never shows any sign whatsoever of being ‘open minded’.
He is a total disgrace. In my view he almost single handedly, right now (unfortunately there are others involved) brings the whole reputation of endocrinology, where hypothyroidism is concerned into disrepute. It’s utterly damaging to patients health and damaging to the furtherance of medicine. It’s no wonder the likes of cardiologists pay little or no heed to the rather large effect it has on the heart. For many patients it’s way too late for them by the time they are being treated by cardiology.
This man ought to be brought to account by ….. who/whom?
He is probably, with his very questionable influence, pretty much single handedly costing the government (you and I) a fortune in uneccessary MIs, welfare payments for disability, lost GDP, hospital bedblocking, mental healthcare, treatment of co-morbidities, social care etc etc etc.
“Among most non-endocrinology health care professionals and lots of the public (unconscious bias) is absolutely huge.” Pearce.
A case of kettle and pot. Lies. Lies.
As for assessment of feedback on trials, I could not trust this man with … anything.
Lies, lies and statistics.
It doesn’t seem to matter one whit to these guys what a patient might feel. What are all these signs that the patient is better - to him? TSH? The doctor has no relevant information other than what the patient tells him and Pearce definitely is not listening.
I hate to say this but whilst I was in the waiting room for my ‘exciting’ and longed for appointment with my new endocrinologist, another patient was asked which doctor she was here to see. She replied “I don’t know.” It was discovered it was the same doctor I was seeing. I have no wish to be disparaging but there was a patient who either had no need to see Dr ……. And/Or who had such a level of disinterest that - what on Earth was she doing there? The name of the doctor is clearly written on the letter. Maybe she was so far ‘gone’ she did not care but my impression was she did not know what she was doing there. She certainly was not like us lot on the Forum. In some ways I envied her. However if the cohort of satisfied patients included her, no wonder it’s an uphill battle for those of us displeased with our treatment.
This endocrinologist also said to me that half his patients on the trial combo report no difference in their response to treatment. It fails. Lots of reasons I can think of for that one! However again I am thinking of that woman AND I have come across others who seem to have little or no self awareness of what the heck is going on. They just tootle on with their symptoms completely unaware that many could be addressed by better treatment.
I think both Pearce and Perros have been quoted in the past of being very dismissive of patients who challenge them. Categorising many in an extremely misogynistic way. Presumably they like the patients unable or uninterested in helping themselves. Certainly easier to get them and keep them onboard the ‘five star’ treatment of Levothyroxine.
It’s the likes of Pearce et al and his inability to look at the ‘evidence’. He does not seem to comprehend the basics. All patients are individual. This means anyone falling outside his parameters just does not exist! He proves that every time he opens his mouth.
What stands out to me is the use of the word 'prefer', as if there's some element of choice between two equally efficacious solutions. For some, it's an absolute necessity that enables them to function.
It plays into Pearce's narrative, especially his comments about T3 being a placebo.
Four years before I was diagnosed with thyroid problems I read a magazine in my GPs waiting room about it and knew the symptoms I had been experiencing since my son was born were the same as those described in the article. I told my GP and she did a blood test. It came back negative. I trusted my GP and me and, more to the point, my poor little children suffered four more years of hell. It was clear to me once diagnosed that there was something wrong with the normal ranges in the diagnosis of thyroid problems ie they are and were and still are too wide. I suppose Pearce (I refuse to refer to him as a doctor because he is clearly isnt one in the true sense of the word; just a narrow minded bigot working on the same lines as all those who refused to listen to the hundreds of postmasters who said they hadn't stolen money from the post office) would have said I was suffering from the placebo effect and it was just coincidence that I was later diagnosed with an over active thyroid. Goodness knows what he would have said 20 years later when I ditched levo altogether in favour of liothyronine!
Hi would love to know if he had the guts to stand by his own words. We could club together and pay to have his thyroid removed, throw a box of levo at him and tell him to get on with it.
I heard he does indeed have a thyroid problem. He has had an op so I am assuming on meds. However if everything is going fine for him on Levo, it will prop up (in his mind) the ‘rightness’ of his cause. Really you can’t get more focussed than a man (or I guess woman) on a mission, as having ‘right on your side’. It’s the battle cry of the true sociopath, without empathy to hold him back. We have heard it down through history.
It's infuriating how the trials rely on TSH being in range to manage dosing. If people were dosed T3 to the point where the thyroid hormones fT3 and fT4 were at the points in range that research suggest they need to be, then I expect that many more would prefer combination therapy. In my view professor Pearce's ignorance coupled with his sphere of influence, is extremely dangerous. You may have gathered that I'm not a fan.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
T3 debate House of Lords
Prof Simon Pearce again
