Search results

Probably not of interest to many people; it wanders around lots of issues with only a small amount on the symptoms, for example.

There was also a healthy comparison group as the full text makes clear:

Some journals now do have open review where reviewers' comments are given with the name attached. However I'm not sure any journals share reviewer comments, if a paper is not published.

https://www.coyneoftherealm.com/2017/04/26/should-the-bmj-silence-authors-who-were-abused-by-a-reviewer/ This came out before this forum was set up. I thought there might be somebody here who hadn't seen it before and might find it of interest.

I posted this in a number of places:

People could share it around whether they donate or not. Here are tweets that the link is included in that could be liked and/or retweeted. https://twitter.com/search?q=https://crowdfund.berkeley.edu/project/22602&src=typed_query

I just donated and shared it around in various places in the hope it might also help.

This is an archive from 2014 of the original co-cure website: http://web.archive.org/web/20140625035237/http://co-cure.org/ However it was mainly a mailing list and many people who used it would never have gone to this site

This now has 109 quote tweets which I think is the most ever for one of my tweets plus 141 other retweets and lots of replies. It's also popular on Facebook but more things can really take off there. I didn't mention her by name, but I don't think I'm going to be on Prof Turner-Stokes'...

Incidentally, I send a link to the Science for ME weekly update each week to Co-Cure.

For my sins, I sometimes get complaints that people can’t unsubscribe at the link including one this weekend; I am able to tell them how to unsubscribe. Also there have been some complaints that people’s messages haven’t been approved despite the fact that I don’t see their submissions. What fun.