Search results

I've seen this line used by many of the most prominent cheerleaders of CBT-GET for ME: there may not be evidence for it but I feel that it works and I have seen it work anecdotally. Literally the exact argument used to promote snake oil and pseudoscience since forever. It's the only argument...

OK this makes more sense. But surely there are better patient populations for this given that we do not have any objective correlates to relate to. I have personally found not much usefulness out of one given that I generally feel the effect of doing too much and don't need confirmation, but...

The gold standard of clinical evidence. :insert sarcastic clap emoji: Turns out it was a cheap gold-painted plastic tchotchke of the Fonz jumping the shark all along.

Put it another way: and it's like I'm seeing double. The discussion over this fraud HAS to include the fact that his ideas persist, they were simply reoriented away from cancer and onto more easily-abused populations. It's the exact same thinking as the psychomagic model of ME and generally...

The framing of how patients would use the data is bizarre. There is very limited usefulness. This kind of data is useful for research when gathered under a strict and reliable protocol. For patients, not so much. Odd.

This is (yet again) malfeasance.

This is bizarre. Although Cochrane does describe and ultimately recommend exercise, it does not recommend aerobic exercise. It is implied by many that the graded exercise should ultimately lead to this but since there is no evidence of actual improvement the advice is only an extrapolated...

For Canada I only found: Prescribing exercise interventions for patients with chronic conditions, by the Canadian Medical Association Journal, April 2016: https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/7/510/. Authors include Paul P. Glasziou. It includes several chronic conditions. I quote below those for...

To paraphrase someone who is not a smart man, yet clearly smarter than these dolts: fool is as fool does.

Not sure what could be considered reprehensible about this. The content of a medical consult should be the property of the patient with no exceptions. There is literally no other way to deal with incompetent and malicious physicians and, sadly, they are legion. The behavior that some display...

I'm not sure how one can define hope as a general thing. People typically hope for specific things or at least within strict constraints. Some people hope for the end of the world, others for a promotion so they stick it to Jim from accounting. I would assume most serial killers are hoping for...

Former doctor Stig Gerdes appeals his case to the national court. But it has long prospects for a decision, his lawyer says. Fredericia: Former doctor Stig Gerdes appeals the verdict in his lawsuit against the Danish Agency for Patient Safety. On September 30, he was told he had lost the...

While promoting PACE as the flagship trial that defines the entire treatment paradigm, knowing that if it were retracted it would throw the whole thing in disarray. Eating their cake and having it too. Expected but absolutely pathetic.

There are likely a few ones out there who have understood that there is a difference between what is usually taught and real life. It's unlikely that all who specialized in ME have bought the sales pitch. Still not good on the whole, but competent professionals should and will adapt.

Ah but you are missing the magical ingredient: did you spend several months trying to convince them to think of themselves as better than they are and telling them not improving is their own fault? That's how the pros do it. Common mistake.

All this relative improvement does not mean much without an absolute target. "Improving" from 15 to 40 on the SF-36 would seem highly significant and yet 40 is a severe level of disability. It's like having $5 deposited in a bank account that has a balance of $10. 50% improvement here still...

This seems to be based on similar ideas in evaluating disability cases with the ability to walk 200m, as if it somehow meant that being able to do that once, regardless of consequences after the test, means no disability whatsoever, which is absurd. Evaluating the ability to walk for a few...

Is there some implicit expectation that clinical usefulness leads to, not sure how to put it but the best I can would be actual usefulness? In the sense that if there is some "clinical usefulness" there has to be real-life usefulness as well, as in ability to function outside of a clinical...

I had roughly the same idea a few months ago and added some notes to this thread about a questionnaire assessment that borrows from the same idea but doesn't include the notion of sustainability, of being able to reliably do those things rather than just once...