Search results

Now if only the profession could apply the same reasoning to the failed psychosomatic ideology. But of course they see no comparison, just like none of the anti-vaccine conspiracy fantasists do. For the same reasons: they made up their minds and facts don't matter past this point.

Normal given that 'anxiety' is defined purely as having a vague set of symptoms, which it turns out are rather common symptoms of some illnesses. Not fundamentally different from ascribing pain to repressed trauma, then on solving the pain problem noticing that the psychosocial problem must have...

This is by far the main issue. How it doesn't disprove anything because none of those concepts and none of the evidence that supports them are any reliable themselves. It's comparing apples to tree bark sculptures. But at the very least it can be used to repeat the simple basic fact that there...

Considering that there is plenty of published evidence of this, and it keeps being ignored in favor of fake efforts at addressing it (causing the problem, then getting paid to pretend to solve it, now that's a devious business model), one can only conclude that this is a desirable thing to them...

Sums it up pretty well. It's about as perfect an example of the banality of evil as it gets. And of pseudoscience. And of what "throwing out the babies with the bath water" is all about. Humans can be awful in groups, but they can be truly evil when they are organized in institutions detached...

Also the idea of the chronic pain field learning from the psychosomatic ideologues is basically like saying that the person who finished last should teach the person who finished second-to-last about how to win, just completely laughable. The truth is that neither of those disciplines have...

It's really hard to believe this isn't trolling. I believe it, it's just really hard. It's so ridiculous, it's like the profession never developed basic skills. And yet they did, obviously, but again and again you have these completely absurd takes like this that reflect zero understanding of...

Ah it's easy, just slap a "biopsychosocial" sticker on it and no one cares about this. In fact in BPSland this basically means 100% safe and effective.

Delusional. Just completely delusional. Even after decades of total failure disproving this, it's still held up as some promise that is already fully realized and just needs to be tweaked here and there. This is grift. Fraud. A scam. Zero difference between this and the madness RFK Jr is pushing...

And a massive underestimate as one of the main efforts in recent decades has been the perfection of how to lie without sounding like it. Which has been a massive failure, since "I believe you" literally doesn't matter one bit if actions don't follow. And the actions never follow. Most patients...

I strongly dispute that. They are quite clear. They are intentional, this is the problem. The root cause problem is that the problem is not considered a problem, it's considered good. It also shows how evidence hardly matters in health care. Only beliefs ultimately do. Evidence only matters...

Clueless? Or malicious? Hard to say. The medical equivalent of "I'm not a bigot but [hugely bigoted tirade]".

So, this is a literature review of a flawed literature mostly built out of flawed data, leading, unsurprisingly, to a flawed review, which misses most of the important points, and brings entirely unrelated ones to the forefront. As is tradition with a flawed process analyzing flawed data. If...

Most psychobehavioral papers are nothing but marketing propaganda. Making false statements to open up papers, and the journals don't even care, they allow it. They make no attempts at being serious, and it beclowns everyone and every institution involved in not blocking this nonsense forever...

Pretty ridiculous to show this definition without pointing out that it's entirely speculative and relies entirely on absence of evidence for what it is, lacking the technology and knowledge of where to look for it, rather than actual evidence. But it's even more ridiculous to have this "dark...

Clearly neither does The Lancet or its reviewers. Which is the bigger problem. Publish this junk in some random blog, where it belongs, and it doesn't matter. In fact there are dozens of those already, and they're all over the place. Even though most of them only include a small fraction of...

This is simply false, and exposes just how useless evidence-based medicine is, how it's completely detached from reality, just as much as the bullshit RFK Jr is peddling out there. It's widely known that there are no treatments for LC. This has been the most over-used of those useless...

There's just no one catching on to the obvious fact that they are not capturing 'mental health problems' here? That their questionnaires with overlapping questions about common generic health problems are actually catching declining health that is systematically miscategorized as 'mental...

Somehow, still stuck at the "women be hysterical" phase, a self-fulfilling prophecy of the exact same nature as why phrenological features of "civilized people" just happen to be morphologically European, by pure coincidence having nothing to do with the people inventing it being of that lineage.

What a useless study. Absurd to talk about issues with cause attribution to the virus, then jumping right on making their own, with their obviously preferred attribution to social causes having no plausible mechanisms, let alone evidence. Literally never once saw the term 'long pandemic' used by...