Search results

And then some. It is astounding just how protected a species these guys are. Clearly various powers that be regard this, er, project as too important to be allowed to fail. It is anti-science.

I want relevant subjective/self-report/QoL/PROM measures used. But only if adequately controlled by blinding or objective measures. Inadequate control, and failing to adequately account for control outcomes, is how this area of medicine got into the quagmire it is now in. Correcting that is...

+1 Good point.

For example, when it comes to patients reporting harms. Both these examples can be measured much more objectively using a kitchen scale or an unobtrusive sleep monitor. Given they are used properly, then the bias from dodgy recall can be eliminated from the outcome (or at least reduced so far...

Psycho-behavioural therapies are not objectionable, if they are appropriate, actually work, and are safe.

Randomised controlled trials provide the best and only reliable evidence on safety and effectiveness of any intervention in any condition. PACE was not controlled. Nowhere in the PACE paper does it say it is controlled. There is no possible dispute about that. If he can't even get a basic fact...

From David Tuller's blog: Call me crazy, but I think there might be a pattern emerging here. Does intolerable circumstances include patients enduring decades of increasingly unscientific and unethical behaviour by medical authorities? And they have learned from experience to not commit...

:hug:

Titanic.

I don't have monthly contact with my GP, but it is a few times a year, mainly for routine stuff like renewing prescriptions, or common things to do with ageing (e.g. osteoarthritis), etc.

So this is what passes for novel research these days. I thought the problem was that patients paid too much attention to these things in the first place? And isn't monitoring and regulating physical activity levels just pacing?

This.

:thumbup:

Sometimes you can't pace nice and evenly. Some activities need a minimum amount of effort to make them worth doing. Not much value in only going halfway to the shop. That is part of managing it all. Learning where and when to push it, and manage the payback the next day. There are no...

Yep. They know it is a massive fault line in epistemology, with profound consequences for the clarity and robustness of causal modelling and testing, and its safe practical application. These guys are not stupid, just wrong and unable to admit it.

An ocean cruise across the Atlantic, you say? In a mechanically sound, water tight ship, its passengers free from any peril? :rolleyes:

Written over a couple of days, so some points have since been made by others, but anyway... Well said. I am firmly on the side of subjective outcome measures requiring adequate blinding, and/or being used alongside objective measures (which are given at least equal weight to the subjective...

"been out of the field for years, mainly because I found the hostile debates stressful" Be grateful you had the choice to walk away. Patients don't get that luxury.

Hugs for Graham and family :hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::hug:

Nor their integrity. :grumpy: