Search results

It's on a page where you click an image to reveal even more information. In the section on CFS/ME model, I think.

Thanks for that. Interesting then that she still included it not only in 2012 but didn't see fit to remove it in the 2018 review.

Thanks, Michael! About the association, the literature from this group is replete with these findings. Much of this stuff is more than a decade old. So research "has shown" this in the past. I'm not up-to-date on what the Vercoulen folks have done. I'm not sure whether or not any such data has...

Hi, just to clarify--this was not a policy statement about a policy in effect. The document is a response to a proposal or a report from the Department of Health. The offending phrase is an expression of RCGP's opinion--it does not indicate that this is current practice. Although we know that...

Oops! Since it seems those glitches were in the letter itself, I won't correct them on the blog post.

Brine needs to be put on the spot about this. Assuming he agrees it is not an acceptable approach, he will have to explain why a training program from the organization that endorses it should be praised for addressing "misconceptions" about the illness.

yeah--this would be shocking in a normal universe. In BPS-world, I guess it's normal.

I sent it to Monaghan, Nicky Morgan, Darren Jones and Steve Brine. I am sending it to Professor Chew-Graham seeking response to the post and to her misstatements about cost of MUS. Good idea to call out RCGP as well.

and all the PACE and NICE stuff seems exactly the same.

But Jo, what if you add absurdity to infinity?

Wilshire et al was published the month before--in March. A review that does not take that into account is absurd.

I thought I saw one version that indicated it had been reviewed in 2018. But now I can't find that version. Did anyone else see that, or did I make it up? Added: Found it. Here is the version that indicates it was reviewed in April 2018: http://elearning.rcgp.org.uk/course/info.php?id=93 And...

and it was reviewed in April 2018--after publication of Wilshire et al that busts all the PACE findings.

Wow!

wouldn't that be nice if more UK journalists started to do their jobs properly!!

Darren Jones, the bespectacled young man from the Bristol area. He spoke yesterday during the debate.

What was this? I don't remember from last time.

No. Yes.

True but she cited Cochrane as her main defense and hid behind the reviews--before Cochrane made it clear that the exercise review should be retracted, rejected the revision, and withdrew the IPD protocol. So things are in some state of flux.

I heard his little spiel. the idea that NICE is treated as just advisory is of course ridiculous