Ah, Snowy, your cynicism is coming along nicely. You will make a fine old curmudgeon. :thumbup:
This is a good point to get to, where the risks for the still uncommitted of throwing their lot in with an existing school/faction/theory are becoming obvious and well-known.
Nobody likes backing a...
This compliant personality type (or possibly people who are apparently compliant to avoid displeasing their therapist/assessor, and often for very good survival reasons), is no doubt described by those therapists/assessors in more positive terms like 'having the flexibility to reassess their...
They certainly used to be very common when I was growing up (1960s-70s), and no doubt were over prescribed. But it is also true that they still have their place.
A relative of mine had persistent nasty tonsil infections for years, and went through hell with them, and endless antibiotics...
The way to partner productively with Big Pharma is to buy a controlling interest, then they will do whatever you tell them.
Anybody got a spare trillion dollars down the back of their couch?
The reason the BPS crowd don't use real examples of genuinely recovered patients is the same reason they don't report genuinely positive objective outcome results.
They don't exist.
Again, there has never been an objection to this kind of CBT or psychotherapy, for those who choose to use it.
Depends if the reasons for sleep problem are because of poor sleep hygiene (i.e. behavioural drivers), or other reasons that are not amenable to standard behavioural management...
This is a complementary companion thread to this one.
This thread is to list suggestions for research that creates new data (as opposed to the other thread which lists suggestions for research that uses existing data).
The kind of research that generates or tests new hypotheses or...
:laugh:
"I was cleaning up the bedroom in the normal healthy way – stark naked, with a lubed up turkey baster full of used coffee grounds – when I tripped over the spare gimp suit and fell backwards..."
Lucky that there has never been any objection in the patient community to that type of support, for those who wish to use it.
We are not anti-psych. We are anti-pseudoscience.
Thank you for your response, @Leonard Jason.
Following on from the comment by @Snow Leopard:
My concern is that subjective self-report is inadequate and that we need a good objective measure for PEM, but one that doesn't require PEM to be provoked by stressing the whole organism.
We need an...
Which is why they must be stopped. This slippery subjective anti-evidence madness goes way past just ME and MUS. We are just the means for them to impose it on the wider world.
That is truly pathetic and contemptible. :grumpy:
Wessely will not survive a comprehensive collation and cross-referencing of his own words and work.
--------------------
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/20602098_Management_of_chronic_post-viral_fatigue_syndrome
Note the date on that paper, 1989.
Don't you just love the certainty...
Seriously, is that the best you can do?
How do you know it is a genuine patient or BPS critic behind that account? You seem very ready to uncritically accept that it is.
If those claiming harassment and threats are serious then they should be asking for a full public inquiry into the matter...
Wouldn't surprise me if a few of her acolytes from the BPS cult, along with some general trolls with no stake in this game but nothing better to do with their lives, were deliberately stirring up trouble by pretending to be harassing threatening patients.
In fact I would be very surprised if...
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.