Search results

In some ways, the hype seeming to go against prior views could be seen as a reassuring thing?

Getting to the truth is the most important thing. Any attempt to have lower standards for research that might be of some short-term political value is likely to hurt patients in the long-run. Thanks from me for the blog. The media push makes the problems with the paper more worrying too imo...

I shouldn't really comment on the internal politics of Australian ME groups when I know so little, but there can also be problems with larger groups. Wasn't one of the larger groups supporting that video-game exercise trial that seems likely to do more harm than good? In the UK I think that...

I suspect that this is the problem. Lots of these sorts of bodies can have a policy on COIs that is more effective at letting them act as if they've addressed problems with COIs than actually mitigating the bias the results from problems with COIs.

Interesting that there isn't anything on the Science Media Centre website about their briefing.

If they only had funding for a very small study, I can see why they'd want to do what they could to avoid overlooking any possible signal. Even with that very loose criteria they still only ended up with 18 participants classed as having persistent fatigue. It's not ideal, and it seems that...

Looks like the Guardian's coverage includes comment from Sharpe, but it doesn't seem to be on their website yet: https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-guardian/20181217/281775630256669 "It may give us some clue down the line. If the thing is triggered by an abnormal or excessive immune response...

No, but sometimes they don't until the day after with a midnight embargo. Also, I get the impression that they don't openly declare all of their involvement with CFS media management. I could just be wrong about them being involved with this though.

BBC coverage by Laurel Ives includes mention of Monaghan, so that's a bonus: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46570494 Edit: I somehow missed the "Others defended the treatment" last night, but as @Sly Saint mentions later on: "I don't remember any of the other MPs defending the treatment...

I just had a quick skim of the paper, mainly looking for references to Moss-Morris' shit post-infection work (I couldn't see any). Here were a couple of bits I thought could be of interest: I hadn't heard of that somatization study. I agree with others saying that this work is of some...

Maybe a premature assumption on my part. I saw someone else say so (in addition to NelliePledge), and it looks like it to me, but I shouldn't have acted like we know they did.

Independent coverage with some quotes from Pariante: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/me-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-myalgic-encephalopathy-immune-system-virus-infection-diagnosis-gp-kings-a8684111.html The articles framing of *challenges CFS is 'all in the mind'* isn't useful imo.

Just saw Kindlon tweeted the abstract to: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/80506/ Looks like it is the results we already knew about, which still leaves the puzzle of why they decided to push media coverage of this. Maybe this is laying the groundwork for Wessely going to the House of Lords, or a PACE...

Sarah Knapton's Telegraph coverage is on yahoo news, again, didn't much of a reason why they'd be hyping these results like this: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/chronic-fatigue-syndrome-may-triggered-000100009.html edit: This piece does start with: "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome may be triggered by an...

It does seem odd. Maybe they just want to hype the work of researchers who won't criticise PACE?

Kate Kelland for Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-chronicfatigue/study-finds-chronic-fatigue-clues-in-overactive-immune-response-idUSL8N1YL0EU She didn't seem to add any of the unpleasant spin we saw in her Cochrane piece.

Daily Mail coverage: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6502357/Chronic-fatigue-condition-caused-active-immune-study-claims.html

I hope that if any patient groups are asked to comment they don't join in with over enthusiastically hyping this research. @Action for M.E. @Russell Fleming (Is Russe;l the best person to tag for MEA? I couldn't find another). I'm sure that there often is a view that it's worth trying to sound...

I still think of myself as 'new' to PACE, but I'm probably not any more. I agree with people's points, but as the PACE authors were putting such a positive spin on their results it would be very difficult to have just cited their work as evidence CBT/GET weren't effective. Articles like the...

Reading that thread title was not worth the effort!