Search results

Not sure if this useless AfME hospital passport for PwME has been linked to.

I love the idea of such a think-tank, but wonder if university institutional support is needed (or whether it might even be a straitjacket). We have so many useful people with science/medical/academic skills who are PwME (and now PwLC). In any other disease field I might wonder whether such a...

How can they be clued?

I hadn't seen that review, and it's fascinating - it's here.

I think you've mentioned before that the literature on OI is in disarray and it's a real shame because needing to lie flat is a major ME/CFS symptom as you've said, and hugely disabling.

If only sodium is key, why do so many recipes seem to involve other salts? There seems to be a lot of variation that I don't understand. Lots of PwME say their OI improved with electrolytes (not sure about ORS). What do you make of that? I'm wondering at what point lots of anecdotes become...

He could have sent you the minutes in the time it took him to tell you the excuse he's found to deny your reasonable request.

Isn't that from January 2024?

Thanks, @Arnie Pye - the question is, though, what do we know about such ORS in relation to OI in adult PwME? It seems to be a low-evidence / low-theory zone...

That's an interesting point that I hadn't considered but there are lots of other conditions to which BPS stuff is getting applied, and I would have thought that the whole field was awash with this design problem.

Sorry, you're right, I did! :)

But surely such a paper would be highly cited, enhancing the writer's career massively? And if writing from within a BPS-free/BPS-nondominant discipline, BPS grant reviewers would be unlikely, especially if you're putting in for purely biomedical grants, surely? So do I, and it's not like other...

But what about the senior people who are themselves grant proposal reviewers? There are people so senior that that are surely safe. And people who are retired, and are completely safe. Why aren't they writing and presenting this stuff?

But on a blog! Yes, blogs! But where's the stuff in high-impact journals and big conferences? Blogs are easy to ignore.

Yes, ideal... So why is no one going for the easy win and making a big name for themselves by mass-debunking this stuff?

I've changed the title of my thread from 'major critiques' to 'high-profile' critiques, just to clarify that it's the latter that we need. That NICE critique by @Jonathan Edwards was vital but I would imagine that 99% of BACME members, for instance, never read it. The perpetrators of this...

I find it weird beyond belief. If I had the health and energy, I'd be outside university epidemiology departments every day with a placard reading, 'What's the point of you?'

I agree that does cover it well but in order to stop people churning out these terrible studies, or believing their results, these arguments need to appear where a lot of scientists and medics are going to see it and be suitably horrified by the appalling breach of basic scientific principles. I...

Not sure if you're just making a light-hearted comment here but if you're serious, one option would be to start a new thread with that request as the title.

I can't understand how this s**tshow continues. Academia is supposed to be a place of the cut and thrust of ideas. Rubbish gets spouted, rubbish gets ripped apart, the field moves forward. That's what academic science is supposed to be. So where are all the high-impact critique papers burning...