A Little Man Trying To Stand In Big Shoes
By John Herd
Today I read one of the best editorial CFS advocacy articles I have read in years. Not only was it very well written, but its expressed views were well backed up by past CFS Advisory Committee transcripts and video, not to mention a long history of CDC actions and inactions. It was written by an advocate who is clearly a patients’ advocate for truth.
The article had only been on the Internet a short time when Cort lifted quotes from it, refuted what the author had written and called the author’s analysis “nuts.” In disagreement Cort then claimed that if Dr. Unger broadens the CFS definition she “would be quickly thrown out.” Hello? Did Dr. Reeves get thrown out because of his lackadaisical use of the Fukuda CFS definition or his creation of the “empirical definition”? No. Cort’s suggestion is typical Cort sticking his head in the ground in typical Cort fashion. We’ve seen him do so regularly when the CFIDS Association of America has been held accountable for their questionable actions.
But for Cort to call a person “nuts,” to publicly demean a person, just so Cort in his nasty way can try to elevate his own perceived stature goes way to far. And don’t think this is a first for Cort, he does so regularly.
I do not usually comment about an individual’s personality, but after watching Cort’s dishonest and corrupted mischief for years I feel compelled to make an exception.
Cort often ignores proper etiquette and posts other people’s words from other’s web sites onto his own, often taking them out of context and dishonestly representing them. He then adds his own biting derogatory editorial commentaries that are nothing more than his unfounded personal judgements for which there is no objective evidence. It’s as if he believes Cort has said so is it is so. And the mischief he conducts on public forums is the tip of the iceberg; there is often more of a stench to his private words. He repeatedly journeys on a psychologically driven vendettas against people who have views differing from his own and anyone who has been critical of him.
Why does he do this? Why does he attempt to kiss up to some people [and organizations] he perceives as potentially influential to his aims while viciously berating other people Why does he write so much that is blatantly untrue? And why does he intentionally instigate controversy that would put many of the most corruptly extreme spin masters to shame? He does it in part because controversy sadly attracts readers. But it goes deeper. He does so to egotistically building his Internet sphere of bandwidth. He possesses a thirst for that. He typifies a tremendously damaged ego needing to augment itself or replace itself by creating a fictitious substitute identity.
Don’t be fooled. Cort is not an advocate of the patients for the patients; Cort is an advocate for Cort, an advocate for feeding his own idiosyncratic ambitions at the cost of truth and the the sincere needs of the CFS community.
I write this not just because I’ve seen so much evidence of it since he came on the Internet scene, but because so many other people have personally experience what a vicious egomaniacal little man he can be. He does not care what he inflicts on others if it serves his personal goals.
I am sorry that this has been so bluntly frank, but people need to see see Cort [and his web site] for what they are. People need to see some of his garbage editorial judgments disguised as declarative fact on his web site for what it is. And people need to turn to trusted proven advocates ‘of the patients for the patients’ if they want objective analysis about what is happening in the CFS arena.
© John Herd, ’10
May be reposted only with prior permission
Feel free to respond to me via: