Search results

When they say there were improvements in the treatment group but choose not to mention whether the control group also improved, do we take that to mean the control group also improved?

Karl Morten's group's discussion paper on the Wüst paper went into brain aspects.

Can someone refresh my blurry memory on something in this study? The much-hyped "effort preference" finding is based on differences in activation of the temporo-parietal junction in the (small numbers of) pwME and healthy controls in the button-pressing reward test. Did they also look at TPJ...

but the Discussion says: ... so who knows what's what. Looking at the graphs, some of them are basically flat lines from week 1 to 16, while in others the score for week 14 is about the same as week 1 but then there's an uptick right at the end at week 16 (maybe the subjects were happy that...

When I am queen of the universe, this kind of cherry-picking and suppression of results to fit preconceived ideas will result in the researcher(s) concerned being automatically disqualified from receiving any funding ever again. And possibly their institutions too. Tough love, it's the only way.

Shall we guess the results? Questionnaires will show small but probably not clinically significant improvements in the intervention group; "this shows that the intervention is safe and acceptable to patients... more research is warranted..."

Some rather baffling bits: and

I've tried to see if there's anything useful in here but it looks like a collection of just about everything anyone has suggested *might* be true about LC, with a lot of confident statements about microclots, faecal transplants and mouse models, etc.

It would be interesting to know which other reviews this refers to.

Silvia Oliver-Mas is also an author on this 2023 paper "Hippocampal subfield abnormalities and biomarkers of pathologic brain changes: from SARS-CoV-2 acute infection to post-COVID syndrome"...

It's incredible to see it written out like this. Real cult brainwashing stuff.

(Not sure if this is the right place to post this, re evidence of harms; feel free to move) Just wanted to flag up this sentence: "Awareness was growing of the ineffective or possibly harmful16 effects of approaches such as a graded exercise programme" in...

The impact in question being somewhere between negligible and nil.

"We don't understand why what we're doing isn't working, so you should definitely keep paying us to do more of it."

Bless their hearts.

Is it possible to see how many women's symptoms were unaffected by menstrual phase? (I ask because I'm one of them and I don't think I can be that unusual.)

This is the kind of thing that gets weaponised against autistic people who benefit from familiarity and predictability, to imply that they're just being "controlling" and "manipulative".

"Slow-paced breathing improves HRV and calms the nervous system" is one of those articles of faith for all the wellness devotees and mind-body proponents, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if it turned out that the reality is a little more complex. (My own HRV decreases with slow-paced...

From Hilda's blog at https://absolutelymaybe.plos.org/2025/01/24/when-journal-scientific-society-and-community-values-clash/ Did this recommendation by the IAG make it into any of Hilda's "monthly" updates in 2024?

There were only 10 Long Covid patients in this study.