Search results

So the major finding is that there are no major findings.

From the Limitations section: Very biased and bad study published in an obscure open access Chinese journal. People with ASD are often rejected, ostracised and bullied by neurotypical people so it's not surprising that they spend a lot of time on the internet. It's also unsurprising that...

There were stories like this coming out of Norway about rituximab 10+ years ago. It all turned out to be a mirage.

Tried it a long time ago, back when it was all the rage. It’s hard to recall the specifics. Some mild initial improvement in ME symptoms but it was coupled with worsening of sleep disturbance and gastroparesis so I had discontinue it.

1.3 mill flushed down the drainpipe.

Bonus points for sexist dig at the childless female patient.

They are all like this. This article almost reads like a self-parody of the entire worthless and disgraceful profession of neurology. They have zero insight into their appalling behaviour and can't even retain a veneer of professionalism when confronted with a patient who they believe has no...

Disturbing article full of lies and self-aggrandisement. Basically, the whole thing boils down to how to trick/screw over the patient. Check out also this self-indulgent bit where they talk about how taking the "functional" patient's history should be tweaked to make it more interesting for...

From an article by this Stone person, coauthored with our old friend Sharpe. First sentence immediate stigmatisation and invoking of negative stereotypes about angry, irritable, depressed woman entering middle age: https://jnnp.bmj.com/content/76/suppl_1/i2 So there you have it, folks. CFS =...

These sorts of pseudoacademic disciplines should be completely defunded and the departments purged of people of this sort.

Ugh.

Wouldn’t you just keep getting reinfected with EBV?

This sort of meekness and docility when confronted with pseudoscience is unfathomable to me. To see some people tone-policing is really disappointing. Our lives are destroyed because of these people's "research". We are being systematically destroyed (and in some cases [e.g. very severe ME/CFS]...

The supervisors know that the vast majority of ppl only read abstracts. So if the abstract omits key info or is misleading, you can essentially bury bad news.

They’ll probably never allow him to publish it and unpublished theses are rarely if ever cited.

Ok I just skimmed through the method and discussion. None of the ML techniques identified useful clusters or predictors of treatment response.

Very strange abstract. Describes the methodology but not the results.

As far as results go, they just have this:

Good coverage. Thanks for putting yourself out there Tom.

Simple heuristic but works almost 100% of the time: if they call it CFS/ME you know it’s quackery.