Search results

Most patients don't have low cortisol, if you review the literature... Some patients have flatter daily cortisol profile compared to healthy controls and an altered sleep-wake cycle and activity patterns can entirely explain this.

Those people who have read the articles, do any of them describe polio-like illnesses on onset, eg acute flacid paralysis or other severe weakness syndromes?

Their neuroendocrine model seems very different from my understanding (and I've spent years reading the papers... They seem to be cherry-picking/speculating heavily). I will be extremely surprised if this "treatment" leads to remission. This might not be what some people want to hear, but...

Retrospective studies like this can only ever be considered suggestive, rather than conclusive evidence suggesting some sort of causation (which requires prospective population studies). Even Simon Wessely says that retrospective studies on things like this are junk.

Relapse/remitting. This onset is actually far more common than has been discussed in the literature.

Convenience samples (strong selection biases) and equivocal results from similar studies. Hopefully no one will form any conclusions based on this...

If she's exiting the CFS field, then surely this is a good thing?

I must say I am a little disappointed that he'd leave without warning... Who is replacing him?

We aren't nematodes and we aren't hibernating. Telomere shortening is potentially consistent with chronic illness...

Side question: are there any articles like this in the Italian media?

Some researchers seem to confuse the directionality between cause and effect due to preconceived biases...

Was that the one where they're just like "there were no differences, data not shown" or something to that effect?

Guys, epidemiological research like this often isn't perfect but is better to be done than not done, in terms of hypothesis generation, even with the dodgy criteria. The key is not to assume the conclusions are generalisable.

the "stigmatising" research is a deliberate strawman/mischaraterisation. We aren't critical because it's psychological research, we're critical of psychological treatments because they don't work. Answering differently on a self report questionnaire because you are more optimistic is not the...

What evidence? That CBT/GET don't lead to objective improvements in functioning and no difference in self reports at the long term followup in the PACE trial. Sharpe needs to look at the evidence himself.

The results of this study are likely true -there is no major effect of HRV or cerebral blood flow post 'mild' exercise. I am basing my opinion on other heart rate and blood flow studies that have been equivocal overall.

Is it though? I mean almost no one actually reads what Malcom Hooper writes as it is way too long and nitpicky.

We know this is true. This is why the PACE trial was funded by the DWP - to achieve a goal. Of course it backfired as the study showed no long term effect, no meaningful effect on objective outcomes and dammingly, no effect on work/study/welfare outcomes.

Yes. Sadly some, like David Tuller, Malcolm Hooper don't seem to understand this. You don't throw everything you have in hope that something sticks, instead you choose the most fundamental issue and show that everything else falls like a house of cards.

Notice how dualistic this is? Patients are accused of being mind-body dualists, but assuming medically unexplained disorders* should primarily be treated with psychological treatments and that medical investigations and treatments should be avoided shows you that it is the medical/psychiatric...