Search results

This is certainly true. And also people could have subclinical infections that are triggering it, or mild infections they don't really remember years later when they finally get diagnosed.

Once an embargo has been broken, it is broken. The Guardian would no longer be bound, I think, given that The Times already reported the same thing.

yes, something like this. I agree with Jonathan that the hypothesis essentially falls whether or not it is psychologically oriented. But one of the reasons it falls is that assumptions of psychological factors causing symptoms are simply unprovable and untestable. So the argument does inherently...

Given the different US and UK contexts, I can understand why in the UK there is concern about the tendency for the argument to be made about psychological vs organic illness, and why in UK it seems to play into the hands of the CBT/GET ideological brigades. But raising that argument does not...

To clarify--this is the Journal of Experiential Psychotherapy, published by the Romanian Association of Experiential Psychology. I'm not sure this would be considered a high-quality source.

He once told me he felt about 70% recovered, although that was years ago.

It would be strange for O'Neill not to follow up what he wrote with something about what happens when it comes out. But who knows? Things often depend on competing news at the time.

embargo is for the press and so yes, the SMC will have it and I assume also journalists covering the issue with the various media outlets. I assume SMC will post something the minute the embargo ends.

yes absolutely. i think the framing of the BMJ story gave a good indication of the best available arguments at their disposal, even though the best available arguments are terrible and stupid. but those are the themes that will be highlighted.

In the protocols for both the feasibility and full trials (they wrote one for each), they promised to vet self-reported school attendance against official records. They didn't mention these official records one way or the other in the feasibility trial report and in the full trial report. The...

I am surprised but not surprised to see that the hospital is still touting the PACE trial. pretty weird to see. I assume a lot of that is just knee-jerk cluelessness about anything going on outside the bubbles they inhabit.

I'm not familiar with that paper. What's the reference? The NYT Magazine ran an article a couple of years ago all about the notion that the diplomats in Cuba were suffering from FND--functional neurological disorder. Stone was a big part of that article--can't remember if Carson also was.

This abstract talks about changes within the experimental group but not about comparisons with the placebo group. Why doesn't the abstract mention the placebo arm results? Seems a bit weird if they actually found any differences between the groups and not just from baseline to assessment points...

Right but I would assume in this case most of these individualized treatment plans for the same individual would vary from clinician to clinician.

interesting, I realized as I wrote it that I had no idea where it came from or what it originally meant.

If what he means is that the people with Long Covid will now have the right to legal redress for civil rights violations under the Americans with Disabilities Act, that could be a big deal.

I definitely agree with this.

I think I do. if it's who I think, they had made similar representations to me about the need for an investigation of Action For ME about the PACE trial, and I had indicated I didn't see the point.

It's very easy for someone o be pretty careful in writing a paper to disclose everything, including null results on a primary outcome, while casting and interpreting things in their favor. It can be hard to characterize that sort of presentation as hiding things because they have included them...

absolutely. many people will look at the conclusion of the abstract as their main take-away. It's really disgraceful and demonstrates pretty terrible peer review processes