Search results

They talk about subjective vs mortality. I would have thought trials like PACE and Smile were particularly bad for bias on subjective measures because interventions try to change perception of the illness. But if that is not included as a variable in any model then such an effect would be...

He was an author on the paper where they didn't seem to have ethical approval but claimed it was a service evaluation.

I had thought that sickness behavior theories were concerned with signaling between cells to conserve energy to fight bugs rather than anything psychological. I can of course see that some will try to make them brain based and hence suggest they may be amenable to therapy, But it seems to me...

I always thought "wares e to" was where is he or where is it. But that's bristol not Cornwall.

I think it is interesting that they don't broker partnerships. EPSRC has run a sandbox process to do this in the past where they considered areas particularly important. Perhaps when the research councils are merged into one organisation there may be more innovation in the way research is...

I find it a bit frustrating that there may be potential with the supplements but the studies are not good enough to say anything. I see no point in doing such small open label studies especially when measured with a questionnaire.

I was assuming it related to one of the PACE supporters (and Sharpe) celebrating the Rituximab failure.

Not sure about this one as it appears to be open label and assessment via the CFQ. But it is another paper looking at supplements for mitochondria and could relate to this paper https://www.s4me.info/index.php?threads/a-novel-nutriceutical-treatment-of-me-cfs-frank-comhaire-sept-2017.1036/

It is but I think it is noticeable that F&M have a huge amount of integrity in how they have handled this especially in comparison to others.

I view their approach as hate speech and I think they should be reminded of this. I say that because it is designed to label a whole group (and a minority) with a stigmatizing label (of dangerous and aggressive). The approach to me is to remind them of that. The way they talk about people with...

I had thought that the sickness behavior theories initially came from Vets looking at the behaviour of animals when sick.

I wondered about that. The recruitment strategy may play a big part as well. If I remember correctly the phase 2 trial recruited from the neurology department.

If that is what they are measuring rather than group means. If the numbers of responders are low then there may not be sufficient power to make them statistically significant. But there could be a small number with really significant improvements. Then the question is why - it wouldn't suggest...

I think there is another issue which is the branding of actions from possibly a few individuals to a whole group. Its an action that increases prejudice and would not be acceptable for any other group. Its basically building a stereotype that PwME are aggressive and violent.

It would depend on the size of the response. If 30% improved massively that would be good but if it was just a small improvement then that would seem less interesting. What seemed interesting from the previous trial was the amount of improvement that some people got but I think the numbers for...

It will still be interesting to see their results and they seem to have done a lot of blood analysis along the way, I'm wondering if they had no real improvements or good improvements in the placebo group.

Talking to people who have worked on anti-counterfeiting there are a lot of issues with fake drugs.

Clearly there is no simple rule. But if someone has a big audience they have a duty to get things right or at least understand the issues so should be able to defend their statements and views. Sometimes I think I rely on other people to point out my wrong or impractical ideas. I value and...

I do think some people (including myself) think different amounts of criticism should be given according to the status of the person. So I think a senior academic such as a professor should be able to justify everything they do. But with a junior researcher or a PhD student I sometimes think...