Search results

So, as usual they got nothing. They can't even confirm the old stuff they've been asserting for decades. All the risks they mention here are either generically bad, smoking and alcohol, or not lifestyle, such as sleep quality. Nevermind the huge number of us for whom none of this was even a...

As impressively delusional as ever, just fiddling around with imaginary numbers. Seems to be the current strategy is to fake numbers in terms of RoI and framing them explicitly as reducing direct health care expenses. Lots of those lately. Hey it's not as if LC alone is estimated in the...

For severe patients I can't see this working out. They are already do so little activity that deviations wouldn't be noticeable. For mild patients you could observe going down from 3-4K steps per day to something like 500. This would be noticeable. But actimetry wouldn't capture much data for...

Yeah for sure this is about the constant need to use muscles to balance out the vibrations and movements, completely different from the droning buzz and minor shaking that a healthy body can get used to. And highlights the key difference between somnolence and fatigue. Those are just different...

Ah we know why ;) They know why ;) But they can lie about it anyway. Because really the problem is not with them. They are clearly deranged but their misbehavior is enabled and defended at the highest levels. Broken systems unable to fulfil their basic functions.

For sure this is all related. They haven't published anything new for 2 decades and are just coasting on their original claim. They won't be producing anything new in the next decades either. All they have is working behind the scenes. It's done very well for them so far. They can only work to...

The UK COVID inquiry pretty much went the same. On the topics of airborne transmission and the risk of Long Covid, basically everyone involved either have giant memory gaps, or in the conduct of their work never considered things they also don't quite remember well, that they admit weren't...

Then again: "nuh uh". It's their most powerful argument. It works every single time. Which means the problem is not with them, it's with the systems and institutions that stand by this. With trialists who perform studies with null or negative results but still recommend them. With organizations...

Well that article obviously can't be true since he had loudly announced in 2002 that he had retired from research on ME and this was published in 2009. It couldn't be that he *gasp* lied?!

Missed this from August, CIHR has funded a taurine trial at the University of Alberta. They will waste $3.3M on this useless dud. This is scandalous misuse of resources, but what else is new...

Let me guess the next move... "psychologically-led rehabilitation can lead to people being able to work more than they think, but it can't make them accept that they can". Doesn't matter that it's literally all about the latter. By their own admission. In their own definitions. The quacks...

I don't know. Much of this started with claims of death threats, mail bombs, comparing us to terrorists, Wessely saying he felt safer on the ground during the Iraq war (he obviously never left the safe fortified compounds but whatever) than with us and so on. If anything, they've toned it down...

Ah so he just started his business and is basically using this as a disguised advertorial. Smart. Well, petty scammer smart but still, smart. As long as you don't have much of a conscience anyway.

It's also evidence that this model doesn't work, but when you can turn a loss into a profit using a single minus sign, then it's all good. It's just not said enough that the accounting equivalent of what the quacks do is literally considered fraud in almost all cases. And not just fraud but...

His argument is weak and absurd but what's most notable is that he speaks of struggling for 5 years on his 'recovery" when the rehabilitation model is usually in trials as a few days of intervention, maybe a few weeks or months. The idea of doing years of this is ridiculous. It 95%+ of cases it...

That's why they chose to publish this in the form of a letter. Those aren't fact-checked, are not reporting. And the letter links to a commentary published in what is basically their own pet journal. Also someone noted that the other psychologist who wrote a letter has a private therapy...

My experience is that the payback mostly relates to what 'system' has been overextended. I suffered a few major setbacks following significant physical exertion, from sensory stimuli and from cognitive effort, and they all seem to mostly affect those systems. Although they do all feature some...

I'm actually curious about what would even constitute good evidence for this. How would that even work? What kind of such evidence would be considered good? How would it involve anything other than surveys of severe patients all reporting that the bar for significant worsening is far lower than...

Reminds me of the expression: if everywhere you go to it smells like shit, take a look at your own shoes. But since they carry so much shit on their shoes everywhere they go they leave a clear trail of it that they gleefully point at, as if we can't see that the trail obviously marks out their...