Search results

The link in @Andy 's post above includes the following information regarding participating in the biobank:

My view, as someone moderate for 25 years, is that it depends. If you are currently resting too much, you may benefit a bit (in the sense of getting a bit more enjoyment from life) by increasing what you are doing gradually until you find your current limits and stay within them. By the same...

Again it's inconceivable to them that the causation might go the other way. It's not having the energy that shuts down the social interactions, not the other way around.

Table 1(b) of the recovery paper (Psychological Medicine (2013), 43, 2227–2235) shows that the transfer function used was the AND function - CFQ in range AND SF36 in range AND Oxford not met AND CGI 1 or 2. So a sieve, like Graham said.

And that's why the Cochrane review surviving is unfortunate.

How to pad your references. List the same article three times (Kelland 2019, "Sick and Tired", Reuters). And hardly worth referencing once.

Sounds very much like "Nothing to see here, move along." And nothing to add beyond that.

Maybe the line "With this methodology, homeopathy can be shown to be effective" should be used more often in criticism of this stuff. Even better if references to such "trials" can be found.

What you are describing is a straw man argument. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man Never a sound way to win an argument but, nevertheless, often employed.

It always seems to me that the usual BPS line is that our fatigue (mental or physical) is caused by our inappropriate attentional bias to emotional stimuli (usually a result of assuming the causation direction from an observed correlation). But this seems to be saying that the causation, in one...

Wow. 5%! Where does that come from?

Is there a "real" placebo effect or is it just entirely due to hidden biases?

Thanks for the work you put into this @Michiel Tack . Noticed that you seemed to have used ICC many times throughout when I think you meant CCI.

It seems this or something like it goes back to Jonathan Swift (of Gulliver's Travels) in 1721. According to https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/07/10/reason-out/

Not necessarily. The link is to a members only page.

How can you possibly say that based on n=1?

I admit to knowing nothing about how FOI works beyond what I gained by reading the ruling on Aleem's case. But I would have thought that once data had been released to one person the precedent would be set so asking for the already released data plus something new would just involve...

What's to stop them creating new identifiers for each set? What should be asked for is a set containing all the previously released data plus the newly requested data.

QMUL should be asked for a complete consistent set of all the data that has been ordered to be released. If they refuse and it gets escalated through the FOI and appeal process I can imagine a judge not looking favorably on their deliberate attempt to avoid complying with their FOI obligations.

I'm not sure whether to be very disappointed that the MEA seems to be recommending homeopathy and acupuncture or pleased that it considers behavioural therapies to line up between homeopathy and acupuncture.