It will be interesting to see whether she actually tackles this when she realises how entrenched in their views they are or if she does a 180 a la Garner
Perhaps she wants ro see whether views changed over 3 years.Why early? It's still happening. So why only early on? Odd.
This is not the conventional way you do a literature review, just saying.TG on Twitter.
"Writing a paper. Can anyone point me to studies published early in the pandemic which dismissed long covid as "functional" or "all in the mind"? (Just to be clear: this isn't a view I share but I want to analyse the reasoning of those who said it). THANKS all. Will post summary."
I am shocked by the blasé tone of "Psychology is key to any recovery of course, but I'm sure you know that"
If X is blocked by TG, it means that X is free to play with Y, Z and whatever mathematical formula they desire. X is also free to delve into chemistry and X is therefore a free radical.If X is blocked by TG does that mean that X can't physically reply to TG, or that TG can be replied to by X but TG won't see any replies by X?
Which would require also looking at how things have been recently, not just early.Perhaps she wants ro see whether views changed over 3 years.
No, it's really not. It's actually as superfluous as what people think of the color red. What a bunch of BS that says everything about the intent. I'm not sure she should be encouraged to write anything, in fact it would be far better if she'd stay out of a topic she clearly can't be bothered to actually learn anything about.I don't have a Twitter account, so I can't be blocked, and I can see everything that those with accounts have posted publicly.
These are the first four responses to the original tweet on this subject, as I see them.
View attachment 18818
I am shocked by the blasé tone of "Psychology is key to any recovery of course, but I'm sure you know that"