Search results

That was my first guess too. Spin and mistruths similar to those that Michael Sharpe has stated in the media before.

I thought trial registration was invented back during the European renaissance? :laugh:

This is an excellent point. It is important that they are very specific when making claims about efficacy. I personally believe there are benefits for bed bound patients to be supported to be able to sit up, do gentle stretching etc to help with autonomic dysfunction.

Spin. Spin. Twirl. They can't be serious? Pull the other one! The problems of selective reporting was why databases of trial protocols were set up in the first place. The changes were not well justified hence the constant criticism. Besides, when people make mistakes, they should admit it and...

Classic tactics - defect our views to a strawman about debate about whether CFS is psychological or not. This debate is of course irrelevant. Patients don't much care about philosophy. We don't debate mind-body dualism as it is not relevant. We care about whether a treatment works. If this...

Oh, that isn't the point. The goal is similar to startups - pay yourself a whole lot of investors money as an 'innovator', regardless of long term success in the marketplace. I apoligise for being skeptical, and I certainly want to see more clinical trials, but their model of understanding is...

Most patients don't have low cortisol, if you review the literature... Some patients have flatter daily cortisol profile compared to healthy controls and an altered sleep-wake cycle and activity patterns can entirely explain this.

Those people who have read the articles, do any of them describe polio-like illnesses on onset, eg acute flacid paralysis or other severe weakness syndromes?

Their neuroendocrine model seems very different from my understanding (and I've spent years reading the papers... They seem to be cherry-picking/speculating heavily). I will be extremely surprised if this "treatment" leads to remission. This might not be what some people want to hear, but...

Retrospective studies like this can only ever be considered suggestive, rather than conclusive evidence suggesting some sort of causation (which requires prospective population studies). Even Simon Wessely says that retrospective studies on things like this are junk.

Relapse/remitting. This onset is actually far more common than has been discussed in the literature.

Convenience samples (strong selection biases) and equivocal results from similar studies. Hopefully no one will form any conclusions based on this...

If she's exiting the CFS field, then surely this is a good thing?

I must say I am a little disappointed that he'd leave without warning... Who is replacing him?

We aren't nematodes and we aren't hibernating. Telomere shortening is potentially consistent with chronic illness...

Side question: are there any articles like this in the Italian media?

Some researchers seem to confuse the directionality between cause and effect due to preconceived biases...

Was that the one where they're just like "there were no differences, data not shown" or something to that effect?

Guys, epidemiological research like this often isn't perfect but is better to be done than not done, in terms of hypothesis generation, even with the dodgy criteria. The key is not to assume the conclusions are generalisable.

the "stigmatising" research is a deliberate strawman/mischaraterisation. We aren't critical because it's psychological research, we're critical of psychological treatments because they don't work. Answering differently on a self report questionnaire because you are more optimistic is not the...