Search results

You know it.

Completely clueless as usual. How many times has this been done already? 5? 10? 20? What is the point of arbitrarily comparing to asthma? What a complete waste of resources. Just a constant churn of zero quality work. How many papers does Chalder have her name on per year? No wonder the quality...

Freaking reporting for duty. I've had that since early in the year and been trying to figure out what is causing it and it's incredibly annoying. I don't have the fight in me for yet another pointless attempt at figuring out and solving one, just one, problem. That and basically what feels like...

Wut? Oh FFS, that makes no sense. Why give someone who literally does not believe there is anything more than psychology funding to study immunological factors? That doesn't count anymore than giving HIV deniers funding for AIDS research would. Ugh. This looks like some BS attempt at pretending...

The outcome analysis? It's really not clear what changed since there is no change tracking feature but what I understood is that they added the statistical analysis plan and some more details of the "intervention". It's frankly hard to follow the timeline. And from the reviewer comments it seems...

Changing protocol mid-trial again? I mean of course, this is typical of psychosomatic research. I though this practice was not possible anymore? The AllTrials thing? I'm sure they already have their exception lined up. I guess some people are just special like that and can do whatever they want...

However, there is quite a difference between performative kindness and genuine kindness. The former can hide unbelievable suffering and cruelty when used as a weapon. Quite like lying to someone in order to gain their trust and lie more effectively to them. It's possible to simulate the...

Ah, I see the latest edition of copy-paste research journal is up. Very expensive copy-paste. It would be measured in lives if anyone bothered to check but no one does so I guess it's all fun and games doing the same things over and over again with no results but arguing otherwise because...

And if you don't worry enough despite the "complaints" then you're probably emotionally stunted with low affect or some other BS. Heads they win, tails we lose. Always. It's basically scripted with only one possible outcome.

Those questionnaires are all so super weird and loaded. They are tailored specifically to get the answers they want based on specific circumstances they can control. I have no idea how such obviously biased attempts at outcome-seeking have made it into common practice. There is simply no quality...

Oh, are those problematic? Because they basically define all FND literature. In fact this is basically the recipe for how to conduct this type of research. As in every single one of the studies and experiments have those as prominent features. Every. Single. One. And then some, like switching...

I am eagerly waiting for that moment, especially when people capable of sifting through the papers and see the glaring weakness and overall mediocrity of the research in all its technicolor glory. :emoji_popcorn:

A first step being to use adequate language for it. Fatigue isn't appropriate. We don't call a car a steering wheel just because most cars have one. And actually since fatigue isn't even necessary it would be like calling cars a spoiler or clutch or whatever else is common but not universal on...

Yup. This thing where we would essentially need every physician to experience every disease in the book in order to understand them is a seriously lousy way of doing things. It reminds me of the people who think it's no big deal to be waterboarded and that they could handle it easily since it...

Wow, I mean, seriously look at those questions: 19. My response to the lockdown shows that I am a bad person. 20. My life is worthless now. 21. Whenever my breath is short I think I've got the virus. 22. If I feel hot, I think I'm...

Whew now that is what we call loaded questions. They are almost all framed in the most extreme possible way. This is borderline "when have you stopped beating your wife?" level of loaded questions. I can reduce this questionnaire to a simple question: 1. ARE YOU SUPER DUPER EXTREMELY...

Condescension always looks bad. It looks absolutely pathetic when it condescends on woo. This is a bunch of woo. It suggests one can essentially shield against a viral infection by happy thoughts, or something to that effect. Completely ridiculous.

Yeah I had to look that one and having looked at it it's frankly even more puzzling. This is completely self-contradictory. BPS assumes no pathophysiology, it's literally the whole point. THE treatment? There is no treatment. That's part of what makes it all so problematic. Important to you...

Hammer sees lots of nails

Study: is my pet topic of interest useful? Results: here's a bunch of cherry-picked arguments for why my pet topic of interest may be useful and why money should be allocated to it Totally normal that the reaction to the crisis of replicability is basically to just keep lowering the bar and...