Search results

There are some good points there.

And I've spotted another discontinuity in the IDP related to the Transforming Support white paper... In the survey, in relation to the Employment section of Chapter 4, they say [my emboldened italics]: The "impact of their vision" is not described in that section of the IDP. In fact, all the...

There does seem to be quite a lot of overlap. The white paper is mentioned in the IDP, but only appears under one agreed action (in Improving Statutory Support): However, it is mentioned in Chapter 4 in the section on "Provision of Welfare Support" (extract included below): To my (untrained)...

In case it is useful to anyone, my "master doc" is over on this thread: https://www.s4me.info/threads/4-uk-2023-interim-delivery-plan-on-me-cfs-consultation-agreed-actions.34691/#post-493245

It is presented as a cross-government interim plan: "The government is committed to supporting all people living with ME/CFS. On 12 May 2022 the government announced an intention to develop an ME/CFS delivery plan to improve the experiences and outcomes for people with the condition. The...

The one helpful thing about the easy-read version (ERV) is that the summary is included in full in the survey doc itself. This seemed an improvement on the main survey, as you can't actually see what it is you are being asked to agree with. (They've helpfully summarised the problems and not the...

If that's how Q11 is displayed, they are using an incorrect copy of the CFQ. It should also have the options "Better than usual" >>> "Much worse than usual" for that question. Wait till you see the GHQ!!!

Because it's not important to them, and never was. This all linked to increasing the prevalence of psych(ish) disorders that fall into their patch. Empire building, if you will. More here...

I just wanted to link through to somewhere that discusses the CFQ and its problems, because I had another, closer, look at the original "Development of a fatigue scale" paper by Chalder et al., and spotted something I hadn't realised before. And it's important, because I'm sure that whenever any...

I've finally got round to writing this up... https://lucibee.wordpress.com/2023/08/08/is-science-self-correcting-how-flawed-stats-and-false-assumptions-plague-the-medical-literature/ In doing so, it's revealed some things I hadn't previously realised (or had forgotten) about the CFQ. That it...

ME Association have just posted this on their Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/meassociation/posts/pfbid026E9R198fxFUVzDJFHCTv1inL3tFNNZPHTHXZdtizZRZYHhYX58A7avR24qjih1iPl

This was more recent: https://www.ouh.nhs.uk/news/article.aspx?id=1826&returnurl=/news/default.aspx&pi=0 But if he is now Emeritus (or Honorary), I guess he still has influence?

This article (of which this thread is about, which I'd entirely forgotten about) appeared in a search for something else this afternoon, and it occurred to me that we so often pounce on the bits that we disagree with, but not the parts that are better? This extract from the grey box section...

Have they said they will do this?

Just to update - this now seems to have been removed, but Wayback has a copy or two: https://web.archive.org/web/20200722020729/https://www.eapm.eu.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/EACLPP_Turner_MUS_2002.pdf

I'm a little confused as to what the status is now? The IPD review has recently been cited in the JNNP Anomalies paper in the last paragraph as thus: So they seem to have a new protocol, but what does this actually mean in practice? They also link to the Cochrane statement here...

Interesting series. Here are the links to the individual papers. Respiratory sequelae of COVID-19: pulmonary and extrapulmonary origins, and approaches to clinical care and rehabilitation Sally J Singh, Molly M Baldwin, Enya Daynes, Rachael A Evans, Neil J Greening, R Gisli Jenkins, Nazir I...

If I could reply, I'd say, "Sometimes, being able to influence policy that agrees with and promotes your ideology is payment enough, isn't it Prof Sharpe."

Yes - it should be 56 (not 52).

It's really hard to know how to interpret this report. It seems that many of the trusts (and AfME themselves) seem to have taken Q1 (Has [NHS Trust] implemented the NICE Guideline [NG206] on ME/CFS?) to also mean "Do you have an ME/CFS service?", when the guidance is relevant to *any* care...