The dumbening of medical science continues. I'm really looking forward to this fantastically professional group of intrepid researchers puzzling over how adding water to a sponge wets it and why does the sponge thinks it is wetter when more water is added despite this being quite unusual to a...
They will never allow an independent reanalysis for that reason. Furthermore, that's not how any of this works. Scientists can't cherry-pick people to "independently" analyse their work. That makes a mockery of the scientific method and is a sure display of consciousness of guilt. This is...
And that weight outside the UK is basically nil.
That's the problem with mutual admiration societies. As soon as you step out of the circle jerk, nobody's jerking back.
Quite relevant to this discussion about Wessely's absurd claims about war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan being less dangerous than interacting with us: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09540962.2018.1535044.
Video game publishers regularly get threats over featuring female or gay...
That's an odd choice considering you can barely whack around a pool noodle without hitting dozens of non-psychiatric chronic pain patients desperately willing to try anything to make the pain go away and ready to participate in research right now.
The study seems on the serious side but I...
That "connection" is that most MCS patients will be wrongly given a misdiagnosis of anxiety instead or being properly diagnosed. That's not a connection, that's a freaking mistake.
That claim has as many legs to stand on as claims that a bad personality gives you cancer. Yes, people have...
A valid concern but scientists doing science the "old way" are not connected to some deeper level of reality, they use data with the same flaws and issues that comes with reducing reality into data, just on a much smaller scale because they have to reduce dataset size to be able to handle them...
:giggle:
I'm not sure which book but it's from Franz Alexander, supposedly the "father of psychosomatic medicine". Trying to find a good link and I checked the Amazon reviews, turns out being wrong doesn't phase... uh, let's go with "hardcore psychosomatic ideologues". People still find it a...
Uh, just scrolling by and I found a slide from Trudie Chalder talking about the "boom and bust" cycle in persistent physical symptoms. So it's really all the same to them and the concept was made up for generic MUS rather than ME. Interesting. Idiotic, still interesting.
And on that same slide...
Well, yeah. They do. There is no evidence for any of it. So the best they can do is "may be", "could be" and so on. That's all this body of research is: it may be this, it may be that, nobody knows, especially not us. Then any legal challenge over harmful medical advice can be met with a quiet...
It's pretty much whatever anyone wants it to be. It's all untestable so any idea is as good as any other. Is it a bird? Is it a plane? It's both!
That ambiguity is generally resolved by inventing a feedback loop of sorts. Any hard question can thus be conveniently deflected with the strong...
Odds of that person being willing to put this idea to a test on themselves: 0.
Odds of that person finding that this idea really works on themselves: also 0.
"Have you tried not being sick?" This ain't it, chief.
The reply doesn't address anything. It just describes their flaws drily and says there's no problem there because they don't see the flaws as a problem.
TL;DR:
Not much. It's just that most of the easy problems have been solved, those that can revolutionize science overnight by chance. Most of scientific research has been like that, it's just more obvious when you don't have the sheer luck of stumbling on breakthroughs anymore to get everyone past the...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.