Search results

And Stone et al have published studies that show there are also so-called "hardware" or structural changes associated with FND. But they tend to ignore this finding, or else speculate that the hardware changes are downstream consequences of FND rather than causal--although as far as I know no...

But they're still claiming it as a third, and also sometimes a 16% figure is cited (in their calculations, the 16% figure makes it the 2nd most common diagnoses after migraines), which they say includes "rule-in" cases plus those with other psychological issues. So they seem to have three...

it also misrepresents the prevalence of FND. they keep saying it's a third of neurological consultations. In fact, Stone et al have been insistent for years that FND is no longer a category of exclusion but a rule-in diagnosis using "positive signs." Yet when FND is diagnosed through these...

thanks. I was just going to post this as well.

I support Keith's work and plan to support his crowdfunding again. It will overlap with Berkeley's April crowdfunding but last year the overlap didn't seem to present a huge problem. Thanks to all who support either or both of us in these fundraising efforts. Also please recognize that...

good suggestion, thanks

Dr Gaffney wrote me back on twitter a couple of weeks ago, a couple of weeks after I'd messaged and e-mailed him. He asked if I was still working on it if he wanted to comment. I said yes. But I didn't hear back after that. Do you have the link to his tweets about the guardian article?

Thanks!

Ha! I had no idea!!! What did he think it was? Did he come around in the end?

so all these other disorders are categorized and described so differently that they do not come up with any of the search terms he used, but he himself has dug them out of the literature and is pretty sure they are the same as whatever FND is because he's really read a lot about it out of...

wow, I hadn't read up on this before. Does anyone have a copy of the original article? Now that it's taken down, I"d like to read it.

CODES. I wrote several posts about it. The control group had a greater reduction of seizures than the intervention group. But they still claimed it was effective because of a few minor generic secondary outcomes

They dropped actigraphy but still had four objective outcomes. And I don't think the whole trial would have been pointless had they accepted their poor results and not changed their outcomes. They would have had null results and the field could have moved on.

Yes, and Knoop is already doing this with his CBT to prevent severe fatigue in long Covid

i hadn't noticed this paper until now. The whole thing is ridiculous.

I agree that sending abusive messages can cause problems, and if people do that they should be asked not to or blocked or whatever, but in reality it is social media open to all, and that is simply going to happen no matter how much anyone pleads or asks people to refrain. That's not condoning...

Good find! Given that recent reporting, perhaps Garner should get the benefit of the doubt over this specific misstatement. I assume he had this recent claim in mind and conflated "Spanish flu" and "Russian flu" when speaking. I doubt very much he believes the Spanish flu was actually...

who are you referring to at Columbia?

With general news articles like this, I try to focus on what I think are the main takeaways readers will get and whether they're ok. In this case, they are: 1) Exercise can be a big problem for long covid patients, and 2) There's an actual thing called PEM with some scientific data to back it...

I think I'll write to Flottorp about her characterization of me and point out the pedigrees of the people who signed that letter.