Search results

It would more accurate to describe them as lobbyists but whatever the framing is fair and they are behaving exactly as they accuse of. Scathing and fair piece. It really is important to point out that this study was completely unable to inform anything and had nothing to do with science, it was...

I'm not going to bother linking to it but I saw that Phil Parker posted an article saying that researchers "found" differences between CBT and LP. Which did make me laugh, so at least there's that. Yes, a paper documenting the differences between two similar things, found differences, which is...

I still haven't seen any work coming out of the CDC in the last several years that even amounts to $100K. I'm not sure that's a good idea without there being oversight on what they do with it, which appears to be nothing. The only work products I have seen in the last 5 years are a small update...

Weird that he appears not to blindly trust Wessely, who seems OK with this and probably reassures anyone who wants to hear that this is a problem perfectly under control.

Haha, yeah. This reminds me of people who post fake genius quotes from their kids to social media. They tooootally said this spontaneously, you didn't put those words in their mouths. Literally nobody cares about "conceptualizing" their illness, this is as much horseshit as pretending most of a...

Honestly I think that's one of the reasons why it crept this far. It's completely unbelievable when you explain to people that medicine could take this seriously if it's just as described. And that's on top of how unbelievably cruel and immoral the general neglect of this disease, which is also...

My typo indeed. Morality is so much more flexible than mortality. Patient dead? Can't argue with that. Immoral negligence? Can be endlessly argued as "for our own good", or that actually it's all good, no complaints recorded, it's not allowed. Frankly anything that requires this much individual...

Found the problem.

No kidding but a well-made animation showing what it actually is would probably get more across than hundreds of scientific papers. Just what it is. Nothing more. This is one of those things that are maximally absurd when you just neutrally list what it is without any emphasis, the absurdity...

How to do something without helping. The important thing is completely down to chance, and almost always useless. I had a GP when I got ill. Zero help. I have a GP now, who diagnosed me. Also zero help. But sure, let's add money to the thing that is not able to help, surely that will help. They...

I love it when the highlights just completely contradict themselves. It's both useless and needed. Makes as much sense as useless and cost-effective.

This is just a bunch of marketing buzzwords thrown together without any sense or reason. Buzzwords used to describe the very same thing that has been obsessively pushed for decades as if it's innovative or whatever. Frankly, even asparagus water is more credible than this. It's offensive that...

Esther Crawley being confused that medical professionals are following the advice she has been pushing for decades is... on brand. Denier-in-chief is confused why her peers follow her advice to deny the thing she has spent her career denying. It's amazing that no amount of failure can overcome...

Oh noes, we certainly would not want to have an ideologically-driven commitment to force a population to accept a level of morality and disability, now would we? As long as that population can effectively fight back, anyway. It would really be bad, wouldn't it? Not half as bad as the people...

Until it's retracted, single-minded ideologues will keep pushing it and misleading people. Even though he says this is about LC he thinks he is making a point here, and keeps somehow insisting that any of those trials considered PEM, which he knows nothing about, and none of those trials even...

Nah, they're too predictable, everyone can expect them to barge in uninvited.

Surprising, given Australia's low infection rates, they are one of the few countries that could simply never discuss it given the low number of expected cases. Especially as opposed to some who do have high rates and have to suppress LC to pursue herd immunity.

The use of those words, "may", "could", "can" leads to very silly stuff. Of course those are all symptoms of the acute illness, but they would only know that by checking. Of course not everyone has those symptoms, but they "may" do, which is their own standard for raising a correlation, which...

In one and only one direction, of course. The one requiring too many assumptions to even try to account for.