Search results

yes I do happen to know those people with that last name. I will let them know, thanks!

Thanks everyone for your support! And for reassuring me not to feel bad about raising funds this way!

I think there's a place for comments, isn't there? I've tried to make suggestions to the Berkeley platform folks but it's hard because really they're optimizing it for projects that mostly have more to do with stuff happening on campus. My effort is a bit unusual among the group.

the problem was people making up fake names that were actually quite funny but could be perceived as offensive by the parties being teased. But it also complicated Berkeley's effort to keep track of who was donating.

yes it's started. I really dislike having to raise money this way but, well, there it is...not much choice.

Sharpe is behaving like he's in kindergarten.

I'll be curious. Since the quote tracks with what she has said before, it would surprise me if she said anything much different. The idea that anyone "misunderstood" or was "confused" about the CDC's message is just silly. Does she really think people actually buy that line of argument?

What is the i newspaper anyway?

that's a good catch.

Terrific reply.

I didn't but I don't think you need to see anything other than Paul's tweet to know that it was not abusive or threatening or anything of the kind. Edit: But I'm not sure I understand what you mean by the whole original tweets. You mean, did I know Paul was responding to a tweet of Sharpe's? Yes.

I have written to him about SMC and this whole mess, although it was before the Reuters situation.

yes I think you are missing things going on behind the scenes. People are reaching out and have been reaching out to Dr Unger for years on these issues. That is continuing. There is a good-cop/bad-cop dynamic in some of this. There is no point in me reaching out to the CDC because I only get...

well, but Reuters did get a quote specifically for the article: The head of the CDC’s chronic viral diseases branch, Elizabeth Unger, told Reuters this was done to remove jargon and medical terms that are not widely understood by the public. “We received feedback that the terms were confusing...

yes, it lists PEM specifically as a characteristic of the fatigue. Then exacerbation after activity is one of the ten symptoms listed, of which at least one must be present. So PEM is required but exacerbation after activity is optional. Very ambiguous and confusing. No one ever seems to have...

Duh! yes, I blogged about it as a stupid study!

Wasn't there just another study using similar or same data from Chalder last month?

The other thing is I never understood why there would be a "boom" if patients have an unrealistic fear of activity. the model presumes they overcome that unrealistic fear every time they do too much and boom. Then they apparently reacquire the fear. It makes no sense.

And not that I have any interest in defending MS, in the context of the specific quote he appeared to be disagreeing with the perspective that patients should be viewed that way. he seemed to be being sympathetic to the plight of patients being viewed that way. I don't like it when people cite...

Kelland referred repeatedly in our exchanges to my "campaign." I told her it wasn't a "campaign" but an investigative journalism and public health project.