Search results

New term for me. I like it. I feel a song coming on. In two, on the upbeat... We love cherry picking hypothesis stacking and p-hacking all day. We get lots of cheers and famous careers and plenty of medals and pay. Our every word is clearly heard in journals grand and profound. Just ignore...

Snap!

Or the whole notion of functional somatic syndrome is just irrelevant acausal psycho-obfuscation retarding our attempt to understand what is actually happening here. Or are they arguing that FSS causes hypermobility?

Horseshit. If the entire measurable benefit of their therapy is a modest and temporary shift in questionnaire scoring behaviour, then they got nothing, and they know it. There must be broader tangible sustainable real-world benefits, like increased physical, cognitive, social, and economic...

Gerada, et al, wouldn't be catastrophising, would they? Surely not. I mean if intelligent, highly educated and resourced and privileged professionals are having trouble coping, imagine what it is like for the ungrateful peasants patients they treat. Exactly. They want blanket immunity because...

I agree. Doesn't mean we can let off the pressure, but does mean they are feeling it.

:thumbup:

I think we can go further now and state that the deconditioning hypothesis has been refuted and simply is not relevant. These questionnaires don't allow us to distinguish between patients' interpretation/perception of their symptoms, and their reporting of their interpretation/perception...

How did the human race make it so far without CBT?

Meta-bias

Biased bias.

That is powerful stuff. Short version: There are no excuses for inadequate methodology.

Not gonna lie, you had me to the end of the third sentence. :oops: :rolleyes: Beautiful. :laugh:

People feel better when doing things they enjoy doing. Who knew? The project to confabulate pacing with GET continues. And still obsessed with the exercise is always good trope.

Call me crazy, but have you ever considered proposing research that uses robust methodology?

How about the problem with the whole IAPT project is less the implementation and more the underlying assumptions and content, or lack of it? Maybe a lot of this stuff is just irrelevant at best, and trying to force round pegs into square holes is never going to work? Ever considered that, guys?

Which tells us far more about what is going on inside Garner's head than in ours'.

"What of the researchers braving this often toxic academic terrain?" If they do their job competently and honestly, they will not have a problem. And vice-versa. FFS, it is not difficult to grasp this. If you pervert and abuse the scientific process, smear and malign your critics, and harm...

This.

*sigh* So where is the evidence for efficacy of these 'teachings'?