Search results

"prefering" a method (which no other studies have used and greatly inflates the numbers) because it gives the result you want is such bullshit.

Maybe, but focusing on the positives is not a bad thing.

Yes, the 'psychological' vs 'physical' debate is a regular mischaracterisation of patients beliefs. They are trying to make out that patients are against psychological treatments because it implies that we have a psychological disorder and we're afraid of stigma or something. This is total...

Sigh.

No attempt at balance, but then I'm not exactly surprised given what she has wrote before.

Kate Kelland of "Pushing limits can help chronic fatigue patients" fame. Sigh.

I'll comment again in more depth when I've read the full paper, but I think this paper is barking up the wrong tree for most patients (there are other reasons for the lower HR peak). But it is equally disappointing that researchers have been mentioned chronotropic incompetence for years, but no...

The problem is there is some evidence that fatty acid transport is also disturbed, meaning a ketogenic diet on its own may actually make things worse.. . https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21205027

Not the first time I've heard of a paper to be sent out for peer review, gotten good reviews and then be rejected by the editor. You have to wonder why the editors want to waste everyone's time...

The proportion of 1400 down to 69 also suggests participation biases, rather than merely filtration due to criteria... No, but, well, they're probably both true...

If they're not doing a "full update" (meaning they're not examining new studies), why does it take 6 months just to make a few modest changes!?!

It sounds much cleverer to say "putative", rather than 'shit we just made up'.

Lack of scientific specificity is somehow now a virtue. "interconnectedness"

Whereas in CFS there isn't enough evidence from adequate trials, yet patients are told it will help anyway...

If someone spends 3+ months of hope, time, effort and money on some sort of involved therapy and it doesn't work, while this might not be considered a serious adverse effect, they have still been harmed.

Not necessarily, GET is a type of CBT and does not have to be based on reversing deconditioning, but simply to alter beliefs about activity and exercise (eg expectations of symptoms from doing exercise). Whether this is successful is a different question

Me too, seems like strange questions.

But dogs can shows signs of being depressed!?! https://www.petmd.com/dog/behavior/can-dogs-get-depressed

I don't think it is unreasonable to test ACT in a randomised trial, only we need objective measures of improved functioning as the primary outcome and to not conclude that it is beneficial simply because patients answered some subjective questionnaires slightly more positively after the therapy...

That paper along with this recent paper explicitly show the problem is not within the mitochondria. That is a key part of the mystery.