Search results

I know for a fact she knows she's wrong and that these studies need to be dealt with. She is just not doing what she knows needs to be done.

I have no idea what Fiona Godlee at BMJ could be thinking.

Thanks Michiel--I thought last year things would have moved along more quickly and there wouldn't be as much need to continue for another year. Given where things are at the moment, it seems like another year would be useful. I hope by then there is enough momentum to feel comfortable that...

Thanks Barry. It is pressured, but most of that is self-pressure. Trying to contain this as a half-time job is challenging. But my struggles pale compared to those of people who are sick, so there's really nothing for others to fret about. Perhaps I shouldn't even raise the issues because I...

I think every bit helps. To be able to argue that Parliament has voted against GET/CBT would be a big onus on those who advocate for such stupidity to make a better case--which of course they can't.

I have thought of something like that.

Thanks, all, for letting me post this--good to spread the word. It will help me feel like I'm providing some more general information to people, not just the specific things I end up writing about. I hope it drives more traffic to the forum as well.

Just to be clear, I basically intend to keep going. I just have to gear myself up to ask people for money again, which I don't like to do.

It's so hard! it's a zero-sum game. To write about this important aspect means I'm not spending the time writing about that important aspect. And then those who want me to write more about that get irritated that I'm writing about this instead

I hope so.

well, I'm tentatively planning to but have some things to figure out.

thanks. fixed.

Does anyone know how the vote works? Is it only among those who attend? Does there have to be a quorum? Does the vote happen right then, at the end of the debate?

me too!

Yeah, that could suggest that they want to use it to promote GET/CBT. It's just unclear what their intention is.

Maybe this differs by discipline. I consider first and senior (last) author to both be exalted positions--as least that's how it's been in my experience in US public health academia. Montgomery is the senior author by virtue of being the last one listed. Traditionally, as Jonathan suggested...

The bulk of the points are repeated. For the rest, I think probably my tone has become a bit softer. .

Did you mean dumb or dump? Both apply.

Ah, thanks.

Hi, Trish--do you know any more about this?