Search results

Well, if the majority of blokes are women that sounds like real diversity;)

Are you sure about that David? Did it arise and then disappear? And then arise again? Was it just that you thought it arose out of the film or were persuaded that it arose? Did it sort of flicker in and out of a sort of Wicki consciousness? Was it just a dream you wanted to tell me about seated...

Myths, Damned Myths and Statistics about Placebo Effect...?

Quite so. It probably takes the Homo sapiens at least a decade to derive a gerund from a noun.

Sure, but was the word 'gaslighting' used in the film?

Could be mind-body interaction?

The Wikipedia entry makes it look pretty plausible, with Judy Garland fans calling themselves Friends of Dorothy in the 1950s. The intriguing thing is that the original book seems to have some gay and Bi double entendre: 'some queer friends' 'some people go both ways', but the article remains...

Once source suggests that before Trump the term was mostly used by psychologists and sociologists :nailbiting:

I doubt the film had anyone talking about gaslighting. The Wizard of Oz was 1939 but 'Friends of Dorothy' appeared in the 1950s it seems.

Indeed. She is a physician who specialised in rheumatology but was attracted to the rehabilitation side (in those days we had dual training in 'R & R') having decided that research into lymphocytes (her PhD) was a waste of time. She was a trainee in out department, probably 1986-92. I suspect...

The New York Times first used the common gerund form, gaslighting, in 1995, in a Maureen Dowdcolumn. However there were only nine additional uses in the 20 years to follow.[5] The American Dialect Society (ADS) recognized the word "gaslight" as the "Most Useful" new word of the year in 2016.[6]...

That is the epistemological term of art usage, argued about by Hume, Leibniz, Kant and Quine. I was brought up as a scientist understanding a priori to be usable to mean decided or known in advance of some event (first) in a more general sense. https://ludwig.guru/s/a-priori+stipulation...

But that is OK. You can do all sorts of things like that as long as you do it in a way that cannot be tinkered with later. GAS-light allows tinkering so that really is useless for gathering reliable information.

I had never heard of gaslighting before joining this forum.

To the treatment. A priori just means first in Latin. It is a term of art in epistemology, as you say, but it is perfectly obvious what it means in this context if you know Latin.

Yes, and the bolded words are the devil in the detail. All that can be assessed in an uncontrolled case observation is improvement - or the success of the patient. The whole piece is written with the assumption that all improvement is due to the rehabilitation. I wonder what this GAS-light...

Think you may be misunderstanding what is being done here @chrisb. This is a perfectly legitimate and very intelligent approach to genuinely complicated and heterogeneous clinical problems. I published a trial of steroid infusion in lupus using this approach in the 1980s. The 'a priori' is...

It seems to me more like something said by the caterpillar or the March Hare in Alice in Wonderland.

but it seems they changed the outcome thresholds because the results weren't consistent with their previous experience! Assuming course we are talking of experience of outcomes rather than experience of having your trials come out the way you want.

I suspect to cut costs. A NICE review will be very expensive. And I think if I were the Department of Health I would wonder quite why four years have to be spent creating vast spreadsheets of a body of evidence that turns out to say nothing useful. Maybe a systematic review is needed but if...