Search results

Pretty much as expected, that this is basically the people who did this "research". Couldn't possibly be more biased and conflicted, especially how much emphasis they place on PACE, which was run by the very people who invented this treatment model and had been marketing it for years. Zero...

Independent Expert Panel on effective ways of investing in health publishes opinion on the impact of the post-COVID-19 condition (long COVID) on health systems https://health.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-12/031_longcovid_en.pdf Some independent panel has made recommendations about Long Covid...

The opinion side of the WSJ is notoriously unserious and very biased. So this is actually consistent with LC denial being entirely political. Sad but not surprising, but it serves as a good gauge of what's true, since whatever opinion you see in those pages is almost guaranteed to be wrong.

Ironic. Since the facts have not changed since then. Showing the issue is all about perception and perception alone. It's a people problem, with the problematic people being the medical profession. There is radicalization, but it exclusively comes from medicine, from EBM zealots and BPS...

This is the evidence-based medicine model in a nutshell: literally anything can pass through it. That's why everything passes through it, because anything can, as long as the people involved want it to. Whether it's yoga, CBT, exercise of any form, healing crystals, snorting freebased Brussels...

Yeah but they "teach" this stuff themselves. Energy management is all over BPS stuff, in the pamphlets, in the "clinics". As treatments. Without evidence. While we explicitly remind that it's not a treatment at every opportunity. So they are basically mad at their own argument, either unaware...

It would be worth thinking about putting the issue in its broader context, how it's clearly the process behind this that is flawed and arbitrary. This isn't reserved for us, we're just the easiest punching bag for this. It's the entire EBM paradigm mixed with the BPS ideology that is universally...

More than anything, I think this tells us that this way of doing things is simply not good at all. This is small. Tells us nothing. Simply not a valid way of evaluating this. And probably something to do with how they assess things:

They've had 20 meetings in 2021 starting from February. The outcome basically amounts to suggesting to do something, and maybe that'll help. It's no better informed today than in February 2021, when we knew a lot and they knew nothing. So they formed a bureaucratic process that took 2 years to...

Other than in confirming, yet again, the scale and significance of the overall issue, this is just another useless study that is less comprehensive than the patient-led studies published 2 years ago. But denial remains firmly cemented in place. Somehow. Well, we know how, and why. But any...

Even though their entire thing is that it's all about perception. They don't even believe in their own claims. Which means they know they're lying.

Why do they even pretend this stuff is real when it's not even a thing? Even the old McDonald's men had more personalisation to it, the whole paradigm is fully generic. All it does is create the illusion of expertise when for all intents and purposes it's just as random as Feng-Shui.

After years of seeing papers like this published, I don't understand why anyone bothers. No one reads this. Likely fewer people will read this than the number of people who have participated in its production. It adds nothing. No one learns anything. It doesn't produce useful information...

Ah, but all they said is that there's a lot of it. True. Just as true as exercise is commonly used to treat "chronic fatigue". Despite a complete lack of evidence, it has been used for several decades by now. So there is pretty much the issue with evidence-based medicine: it's a placeholder...

I agree there are personality types that are more prone to it, especially with pathological liars who don't really see the difference between truth and lying. But gaslighting is far more than that, a lot of it is purely circumstantial. It's usually hard to get away with this behavior in real...

Not necessarily. Sometimes all you need is a massive power imbalance, no skill required. In fact, gaslighting can be subtle, such as not even mentioning medical gaslighting (unless I missed it) in an article about gaslighting. I think this article desperately wants to make it so that there is a...

FTFY. The freaking incompetence, good grief.

Whew lad, this is not how this works at all. Especially when Especially you have garbage methodology and fully generic hand-waving "treatment" with zero details anyway. This entire era of medicine should be labeled as the era of confirmation bias. Completely unserious.

There is no need to persuade anyone about the default. The default is already the default, it's persuasive in itself on this basis alone. All it needs is repetition and imposition by force. Frankly none of their arguments are even coherent. I think it's important to say it: their arguments suck...

Sounds about right. I'm sure they did that, ask the police for recommendations, and were probably given generic answer with some amount of confusion from the police, who don't know the ins and outs of conspiracies in the BPS bubble. But the idea that police were on standby is beyond laughable...