Search results

Did I see that Caroline and Eliana at the ME/CFS biobank are seeking to replicate it?

The studies included mainly used Fukuda or Oxford criteria.

This is how it seems to me.

By definition there'd have to be some difference in the mechanism, wouldn't there? Or at least in the initial phases of how a mental or physical exertion would be translated into PEM? In any event, it would be a good question to ask Dr Wust, if I get a chance to talk with him.

True. But neither do CPET studies or any studies that rely on provoking PEM based on a physical challenge.

As, so the "inference" in that sense refers to the brain's "inference" or interpretation of these acknowledged post-exercise symptoms, which he considers to be DOMS, I guess.

Can someone explain what he means by: "...must of course have a mechanism - i think thats where the issues of inference become key- but of course maybe your other data speaks to that" What inference is he talking about here? Can someone clarify? Is he suggesting these findings are similar to...

That is of course always possible or maybe likely in some guess, but I guess I prefer in general to think that people are deluding themselves rather than that they're being consciously venal and deceptive. that could be a naive perspective, however.

I don't think you're over-generalizing. They are incapable of accommodating any new information that challenges their biases. Period.

yes, I assume Knoop & Co. will push back soon. Maybe they'll even come up with "eight anomalies" in the paper!!

yeah, I just used the same intro. I like to post the videos on VB as well to make sure there's a record of everything there.

I haven't read the paper. Can someone translate the first part of this sentence for me? I don't understand what they're saying.

I actually wasn't quite sure what they meant. But the relevant point for the poster was that the score for the intervention was only 0.002 QALYs better than for the comparison group of activity management--which was at that time the minimalist treatment recommended in the NICE guidelines (after...

I could google this, but it's more fun just to ask: Who is Marina Hyde?

Hm. yes, that's a good point.

I assume actually they likely incorporated the drop-outs by doing an "intention-to-treat" analysis, which is a way of taking a more conservative approach than leaving the drop-outs out of the analysis altogether. Even so, the results were shit.

yup! I checked on pubmed and haven't found anything about previous findings. So these findings really document for the first time what a boondoggle this was. I love how they boast about this being the first study to assess the cost-effectiveness of online CBT for pediatric "CFS/ME" cases--as if...

This is the first sign of actual FITNET results, isn't it?

don't you need a no-underwear group as well? and will they stratify by boxers and briefs?

probably should have read: "an approach recommended in national guidelines at the time we wrote the protocol for this piece of crap."