I don't think we know what exactly the PEM 'issue' is i.e., what was said that prompted a reanalysis, and by who? I can't quite work out the most probable explaination. If this was BPSers, what must they have said? what are they arguing for with respect to actual changes to the evidence base...
Minutes for a series of four guideline committee meetings in late April have just been uploaded: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/indevelopment/gid-ng10091/documents
It looks as though the meetings were to consider the recommendations in light of a new 'post-exertional malaise re-analysis'...
I really hate this 'app for everything' approach. My mum lives with IBD. She manages it with medication, but sometimes it flares for no good reason. I have no idea what this tool would offer her that she hasn't figured out herself through common sense.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210609-how-long-will-long-covid-last
I don't think this has been posted yet. Apologies if I missed it.
Reasonably good piece. Quite a few mentions of ME/CFS and speculation about the overlap and what's driving the illnesses.
They really love throwing money at this crap, don't they?
"I'm going to interview some kids, and do some crappy and patronising qualitative analysis based on questionnaires."
MRC: Take our money!
"I learned that my Covid-19 infection had probably induced a physiological stress response that put my brain in a state of high activation and had an immediate effect on my hormone, heart, gastrointestinal and immune systems."
Paul discovers the concept of being ill.
Yes, I hadn't thought of that. Maybe the April meeting was cancelled. But surely they've not gone nearly three months without a meeting. They were part-way through going through the recommendations.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.