Search results

3 authors 5 participants. Underwhelming

I don’t think it really registered with me I definitely had heard of psychosomatic but didn’t think about it in any depth. To be perfectly honest people being malingerers was more on the radar. I didn’t believe that this applied to anything other than a small minority but I did have a couple...

Yeah symptom fluctuation should be an outcome And The actual perceived improvement being half that expected by the patients Is definitely telling them useful information that may be new to these researchers - Need to understand negative impact, does any perceived benefit outweigh the impact...

Energy conservation…. attention & amplification so as soon as you say I have to try to manage my energy carefully, I have to monitor my symptoms you are pressing alarm buttons traps to those who have been through this “training” and have had their thinking adjusted away from believing you

Cut and paste - surely not :whistle:

It’s bizarre using that random upper and lower case like some stereotype of the way an anonymous threatening message would be written

Sums it up. How do the manage to scam funding for anything they do??

As it is a Regional paper there’s a strong possibility this will also pop up elsewhere in the country due to common ownership or syndication.

And don’t forget to donate to the gofundme :whistle:

Oops must be an England Rugby fan

how about some tiny mouse shopping bags, or standing on a paper sheet and squeaking stop in mouse. Eta. Just to say this comment ^ is obviously flippant but I also disagree with using mice/rats

As a simple non scientist I think that whatever movement the step counter reacts to for that individual if a given intervention results in them moving say 10% 25% or 50% more in months following than in months before the intervention then that’s evidence of them being able to do more.

On the Guardian article specifically I just went to the home page and I had to do some scrolling it wasn’t highlighted near the top of the health headlines I had to click a link for more and it was down the bottom. For the general public this will not really register. It is there more for...

They are all adding their names because they are all believers in psychosomatic cause.

Oh specific multidisciplinary care when you really mean CBT/get

Wish he would properly retire.

Haven’t checked but surely as a public body they are subject to FOI

Maybe nowadays, they published some of the worst articles in the past - militant patients

Probably best referred to ME Association to tackle. As they have done with LP website

It’s a real mix. At least those who normally live in the alternative bubble will potentially be exposed to more sensible ideas. What is Methylene Blue? It sounds suspiciously like loo cleaner.