The following post is from a person who has personal experience with the Incline Village Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) outbreak. After years of observation and frustration, this is Erik's conclusion. I agree with Erik and feel that the tactics he speaks of below are widely used in medical/health activism. Controlled opposition can be defined as individuals and or groups which are formed to look as though they are set up to promote causes, monitor outbreaks, find cures and to help make proper treatments available.....BUT, instead their purpose is to thwart any positive action.This intentional obstruction of any forward movement can be due to conflicts of interests, political agendas and other monetary goals
Since the very inception of the syndrome, the CDC has conducted a masterful performance of controlling (limiting) the dissemination of information.
The tactic has always been the same.
To stay just on the ragged edge of credibility by slowing the release of, and claiming credit for information that has reached a level in which it can no longer be denied.
For this purpose, instead of looking to the actual "CFS doctors", a surrogate "spinmaster" is proffered as the person to whom patients should look for information.
From Stephen Straus on, a chain of individuals have been placed in charge of "CFS" as the "thought leaders".
As we saw with Dr Reeves "whistleblowing", things are not always as they appear.
The very "CFS advocates" and "CFS organizations" who appear to be working on behalf of pushing information forward are, in fact, acting as obstructionists and reshaping history by a carefully crafted presentation of partial-information.
This is so unbelievable to the unwary public that it seems utterly inconceivable, and even sounds "conspiratorial".
The only means of knowing whether a person who is in the position of a "thought leader" is being perfectly straightforward is to know the history well enough to observe whose interests are truly being served by the presentation of information, and whether certain critical facts are being held back.
One may notice the peculiar way these "thought leaders" give lip-service to the history and evidence generated by doctors who pioneered the CFS field, and yet still seem to put an amazing slant on it as if we're not really sure, nothing proves anything, and everything is in doubt, usually because it is not "replicated" in all and sundry persons diagnosed with CFS.
One would think that "thought leaders" would be very close to the noted CFS researchers, and yet there is a strange distance.
Combined with this is an almost uncanny way that the thought leaders seem to be slightly more connected to the CDC...
even as they seem to be strongly criticizing the CDC.
It takes many repetitions before the average CFSer realizes that this cannot be an accident, when it is so consistently done.
Incline Village "observer" of misinformation