Search results

I also don't remember this at all. Does anyone know what they're talking about?

given that she is neither the primary nor senior author, it is possible she just contributed some data or had some subsidiary role. I haven't checked the statement of who did what, if there is one, but I wouldn't assume automatically she had huge input into how the research was conducted, unless...

The Journal of Psychosomatic Research is already dealing with the previous White paper, which misreported the follow-up to GETSET. Now they are allowing him to publish another piece of crap. The journal is obviously having an identity crisis. The current and previous two editors have...

this is like Sec of Defense Rumsfeld talking about "known unknowns" and "unknown unknowns" and how that explained something about the violence in iraq after the US "liberation."

and this?

what's this a reference to?

They also don't explain why they made causal statements in the paper when they explicitly write that the study doesn't allow for causal statements. Or why the peer-review process was so inadequate.

Mary McCarthy famously said of Lillian Hellman that "every word she writes is a lie, including 'and' and 'the.'" I'm not going to say that about any investigators involved in this example of atrocious research--Hellman sued McCarthy over the statement, although Hellman died before the suit...

complete bullshit response.

I've been in NY since last week dealing with some urgent family stuff and haven't had a chance to work. Probably won't resurface much for another week. but this is definitely disappointing.

This is of course true. But unlikely to be persuasive to anyone on that side, since they have always failed to acknowledge the notion that any investigators in an unblinded study relying on subjective outcomes would know anything about the results before unlocking.

Professor Chalder would definitely improve any organization and serve a positive function by leaving it or not being part of it in the first place.

Really? Again? Do I have to listen to it and post about Trudie Chalder again for the 1000th time?

I should be able to remember but they do so many strange things and advance such a variety of creative arguments to misinterpret their results that it is hard for me to keep it all together in my head without checking. That particular outcome was not included in the conclusions, even though it...

not if anyone has to go to any trouble, no. but thanks!

How long was the interview??

Did Pariante discuss the cancer analogy as he did in his article?

no clue on the name or title.

I assume that's the researchers' interpretive paraphrasing of what the kids said.

And yet they somehow interpret those studies (at least PACE and GETSET follow-ups) as a success based on outcome-swapping--prioritising "within-group" maintaining "benefits" over time rather than the fact of null results in the between-group comparisons. I have raised that in my correspondence...