Search results

The GP leaflet links to a 'PESE booklet', which is available here: https://www.shu.ac.uk/advanced-wellbeing-research-centre/projects/an-information-booklet-to-help-manage-chronic-fatigue-brought-on-by-covid-19. It's just a booklet on general chronic fatigue, and doesn't even mention ME, CFS...

Jeannette Burmeister has written a new thread after receiving a response to her complaint:

I was thinking about this just the other day. It seems the ME/CFS community is the only place where this is discussed and challenged. That's not good enough. Why is the rest of medicine/clinical science silent?

Could it have been the antibiotics (assuming these were administered concurrently) or even steroids, which it seems were given at that time? These improvements in ME/CFS after antibiotics seem to be documented quite frequently in the patient community.

The patient in this study is the first author. I'm not sure that it is good practice to do this without mentioning the fact.

He has been discussed at length on the forum. He's a one-man paper mill, and I wouldn't trust that anything he writes is of value.

Yeah, the submission took a while for me. And they don't give confirmation, except the green message. Hopefully they add it after Christmas.

She could at least tag Phil Parker as the creator of this brainwashing experiment.

Garner has just posted this video about the trial.

I think this is just a copy of a Reuters article from a month ago: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/many-long-covid-patients-adjust-slim-recovery-odds-world-moves-2024-11-14/

I suffer with noctural bruxism, and have done for at least six years. I have written about it here on other threads. There is no cure. There are certain things you can do to help lessen the issue. Minimizing stress is probably up there, because often this is related to stress. You should also...

Does anyone have access to this?

Does anyone know anything about getting this funded — a proposal in the works, for example?

Yes, I looked up the author and she is a PhD student. Her co-authors — some of whom will likely be her PhD supervisors — should be making sure the paper is not littered with trivial, and more important, mistakes. They should have raised concerns with the journal that Reviewer 1 wasn't doing...

Oh dear. This is one of the two peer-reviews, if you can call it that.

"Given that fatigue is such a core component of PESE and long while PESE is not a type of fatigue in itself, in the studies that we have found here, it is often being used in, it is often being used as a measure of fatigue." Are you telling me 7 co-authors and 2 or 3 reviewers have read this...

I thought they were inventing a new thing for a second, but it's another typo. Quite a bad one too. I really wish co-authors and reviewers would read the paper in front of them.

Well, this grammar does not inspire confidence. Does anyone read the first line of the abstract these days?

I do not know how formal the rapid response system is. Is it expected that the authors respond?

There's also another new, critical response from someone who seems to work in clinical evidence synthesis and medical statistics: https://www.bmj.com/content/387/bmj-2024-081318/rr-4