Search results

http://jonathanweisberg.org/post/Reviewer%202/ (includes some analysis/discussion of reviewer order etc...)

"References" sigh. One of the possible boxes of "experience" is severe ME, but how would someone who has had severe ME have the social/professional network to have such references on close hand?

QMUL are not claiming the data is lost, they're claiming a much more sophisticated version of dog-ate-my-data defence. They're claiming that the statisticians have moved on and it is impossible for them to get another statistician to access the data. Yes, really.

The cunning plan involves a sports car.

ME and CFS show up all over the world in similar prevalance, if there are any key environmental factors (besides infections), they seem ubiquitous.

No data yet published, the stated outcome measures are purely subjective questionnaires.

Mean (24 h) physical activity (accelerometry [ENMO])† increased by 6.5%. Not a big improvement, but acceptable for a adjunct therapy.

lambchambers dot co dot uk/who-can-help-you/barristers/richard-colbey

Amitriptyline is a far more potentially harmful drug than many people think - I had POTS when taking it, even at low doses. I am not a fan of this recommendation either.

The shame isn't that they're trying to classify ME as a mental illness to avoid paying out past 24 months, the real shame is that they can get away with discriminating against mental illnesses like this and those who should be calling them out on this, are not doing so.

I don't agree with the idea that because someone is under 18 that their views are somehow worthless. Just saying.

That is true, but it doesn't mean these sorts of studies are worthless. But I agree it would be dangerous to justify experimentation based on studies like this.

Yes, all we can say is the intentions and motivations of patients and activists when criticizing the trial. To @Mike Godwin, I'd like to clarify the two issues, that are often misportrayed: 1. This prominent group of UK psychiatrists who are being criticized, have long been involved in the...

It doesn't add anything new and there are some proofreading issues/errors too, some words have opposite meaning e.g. harmless instead of harmful.

Who wants to buy a cheap bridge? It's in an area with a lot of cute flying pigs, you'll love it!

Well any discussion of psychology and CFS eventually leads to Simon Wessley being mentioned, so his @ing of Godwin is some sort of reverse-Godwin. or something.

The basis of evidence based medicine is that there doesn't need to be a solid understanding of the underlying condition. There just needs to be high quality evidence of efficacy. Trials that are not controlled, eg are not blinded and rely on questionnaires are not high quality evidence.

There is a comment on pubpeer by the way: https://pubpeer.com/publications/AFE059364C22AEEBF7CDC627969403

My sister has adult onset T1D hmm!?! (confirmation bias for the win!)

I guess he doesn't understand how to infer causality from correlation.