Search results

Yes. They're notorious for doing it all equally badly, too. Private Eye magazine doesn't call them "Crapita" for nothing! That wikipedia page @Nellie posted is incredible. It's just a litany of failures, but successive governments have been addicted to throwing money at them hand over fist...

I assume he sees which way the wind is blowing and is doing his best to shore up his defences before the storm overtakes him. This way he'll be able to say "but I always said it was a complex condition with heterogenous triggers! None of this new research in any way invalidates my own theories!"

If this isn't sophistry, I don't know what is. Well, knock me down with a feather!

The Big Bloomers Company is my secret weapon for big bloomers ;) https://www.thebigbloomerscompany.co.uk/ They're very soft and comfortable. No labels on the garments to scratch you, either. I haven't tried their briefs, but I have their anti-chafing slip shorts and their pull-on bras, and...

My god, this is harrowing. Poor Karina.

Yes, this is the value of heart rate monitors, as I see it. Not so much a case of "my heart rate monitor says X, so I can't do Y", but more as an objective validation that what you say and think about your own condition at a particular point in time is a true reflection of what's happening in...

Haha! Yes, everything's just fine and dandy in the psychiatry/psychology research world. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

Oh, thank goodness. I've been thinking for ages that there must be something wrong with me because I've never been able to determine what this mythical "baseline" is that pacing guidelines are always banging on about. It's wild how willing we are to blame ourselves sometimes.

Monstrous. These people are a danger to the public.

This is the Oxford-Brookes report. You'll immediately see why MS might have taken a fright when you check it out ;) https://www.s4me.info/threads/me-association-forward-me-and-oxford-brookes-university-announce-results-of-patient-survey-on-cbt-and-get-in-me-cfs.8902/

Yes, perhaps I'm being too pessimistic and he'll pull a Mike Godwin. I doubt it, given the contempt he has for people who question his own work (he thinks they are anti-science trolls and he reminds me our favourite psychiatrists)... but you never know.

Pinker is one of the evopsych/sceptic types, like Fiona Fox and Frank Furedi etc. I very much doubt he would be persuaded by evidence shown to him by pwme. There are some battles worth fighting, and I don't think Pinker's attention is one of them.

Honestly, I doubt it. The site used to just display the comments inline at the end of each article, and it took me more time than I care to admit to find where they'd hidden them. I can't imagine that anyone who isn't already highly motivated to comment on ME/PACE articles will bother to find...

Oh, I'm sure they expected or wanted him to update his COI statement to something like, "hello yes I am delusional and I'm only reviewing this paper to feed my obvious psychosis"

That sounds like what psychotherapists would call "catastrophising". Perhaps they need to go on a course of CBT?

Ooh, ooh, I know this one! It's "trolls"!

Why is Sharpe so active lately? He seems to be everywhere at the moment. Perhaps he needs a nice holiday.

Thank you!

Lordy, I don't even understand the basics presented in that thread. I'm glad they took the time to do this, though. What does this bit mean? In the 3rd tweet in the thread: Is this referring to the patient's activity (i.e. pacing), or is it referring to activity in bodily systems that we...