Search results

I noticed that your emphasis obscured the emphasis in the original, which was: They were that sure that they had checked every possibility and this was the only determinate? Get real. And I bet it was only a correlation anyway with no demonstration of causality.

But it's not just memories of the time. It's time and time again. Life always seems to get in the way of pacing.

Imagine what it's like to wake up on the other side of the earth with 160 posts to read and counting!

"[Shi-min] Fang was attacked by thugs... Wessely ... has been reviled by many ... " So being disliked is like being attacked by thugs?

It strikes me that the last dozen or so posts since and including Jonathon's sum up a lot of sensible, coherent rebuttal to the BPS position. Perhaps someone should distill the major points into a S4ME position paper that is put somewhere prominent so the ideas don't get lost. It would be mostly...

Well they could ... if they changed the conclusion to say there is no reliable evidence of efficacy. But I am dreaming, aren't I?

I don't.

So the authors have recognized this possiblity but prefer to emphasise If pain severity, functional impairment and negative emotions (anxiety) are all correlated with poorer outcome then it seems plausible that it is severity of the acute phase that is the predictor and anxiety just correlates...

Wikipedia (and that is the limit of my knowledge about this) seems to be saying that it is not whether or not the distribution is normal but how wide it is. If it's width covers several orders of magnitude, Benford's law applies, but if it is narrow so only covers one order of magnitude then it...

Not always. From the wikipedia page So it depends on the nature of the data your dodgy accountants/researchers are presenting.

Sorry, I think most (if not all) of metaphysics is bullshit. Philosophy based on reason alone without evidence gets us nowhere. By adding a connection to reality through the importance of evidence, science actually achieves things. The success of artificial neural networks for information...

Is it possible to have inflammation and a low ESR? I have always been puzzled by this but admit to not really knowing much about it. I know some ME "specialists" have sometimes observed that low ESR is common in ME and my ESR has always been low (often 1mm/hr). Does this fit with inflammation?

It seems to me this is a risky strategy that could easily backfire, unless you are absolutely sure that only evidence and not eminence holds any sway at NICE. Could it not be interpreted by some that if the eminent Harvard thinks this, there must be some truth to it?

If the idea of such an app is for it to be regularly asking me to rate my symptoms against some scale I wouldn't use it. The thought processes involved in that, (should I tick more than or very much more than, etc) for me, seem to be exactly those that drain my energy very fast. I would imagine...

I think we're touching on something complex here.

It's not the programmer that's the problem but the data used to train the AI. Who will provide the data? White, Sharpe et al?

Exactly. It always seems that so much of the crap coming from the BPS crowd boils down to them implying causation from correlation without justification.

I don't understand why, for most of the conditions in this table, the numbers for Percentage with medical condition ever diagnosed is much less than Percentage endorsing condition as active/unresolved. Logically, those that have ever had it should include those that have it now, unless of...

To be fair, when scientists say "I believe X" they usually mean it in the sense of "based on all the evidence that has been accumulated, X seems to be the most probable explanation". This is a very different usage than faith based belief. I'm not trying to support the psychoneuroimmunological...

Worked for me.