Search results

Apart from what they say!

Did the BBC choose at all or was this a story pushed to them by a press lobby group such as the SMC?

I can see though that it would present real issues from a diagnosis perspective as I'm not sure retrospective views on symptoms are accurate (I suspect there is recall bias). But I wonder if something could be done with long covid as there is a larger active population.

I wonder if this could be an important question. Assuming we have 2 groups with very similar symtoms (or variations within groups as much as variations between groups) then are there two sets of underlying causes but are there also common mechanisms to the symptoms or does something happen to...

I don't think it does discredit athe entire system of medicine. It points to the importance of following the evidence and that the experts will often crowd around the things they want not where the evidence takes them. Hence really stresses the importance of critical evaluation. Of course those...

I think the BMJ are generally supportive of the views he expressed. They are very anti-ME patients.

I've wondered if there is a role for specialists in diagnosing the non-obvious/difficult or rare diseases (i.e. not GPs but people who deal with those who can't easily be allocated to a specialism). Some simple screening tests may also help allocate to specialisms.

I think she is using a blocking tool which is based on followers and doing it in batches of 500.

Possibly but I find emojis challenging.

Or that is the message she wishes to propogate to make her sound reasonable.

My first thought this is that she (as an Oxford Don) thinks patients are the great unwashed and how dare they comment on the science! But I wonder if there is just a certain amount of embarassment in that things she says about ME clearly don't stand up to scrutiny - hence an effort to avoid...

Another way to look at both Garner's comments and Greenhalgh's is they demonstrate a clear desire to not support evidence based medicine and in that I think in the long term it helps illustrate the issues within the UK medical profession.

Yet isn't he doing something similar in pushing his theory which has no evidential basis? The difference is he is a medical professional.

Other academics should worry when they see the standard of reasoning that puts anecdote above the need for evidence. As someone who works in a different area I know people who get upset by bad research (some people can become standard jokes like the person who proposed music based cryptography)...

Doesn't it say alot about the standards of academics who work on 'evidence' in the medical field. Surely they must understand the basics about bias?

I think we should have a push for good scientific standards rather then using anecdote to push treatments. Especially from those with 'science labels'.

I think there is a real problem here in that where there is a chance of recovery (such as with post viral fatigue or early ME if you prefer that label) then it is easy to credit what ever was tried with the recovery. Its quite natural to do. But this is why proper science and trials are needed...

I think this represents how research funding is organized traditionally in the UK. Academics come up with ideas and put them to the various review boards and then they get funded or not. Its not a proactive approach to identifying areas that are important and doing things to encourage research...

You could see it as poor countries having a crap option but it may prove a better option where infrastructure is limited because it can be transported and kept cold more easily. Although I think some countries were struggling with refrigerated vacines in general. A few years ago Gates was...

Did it matter what you drank (was wine worse than beer or spirits)? I seem to remember someone saying that wine was particularly bad (apart from a really cheap fizzy wine that had probably never been near a grape or yeast).