Search results

It's really stunning how it not only proves that the service is worthless, it even debunks the entire model in the process, but they can not only still describe it as a success, no one involved even cares and they are allowed to pretend that up is down because direction doesn't even matter...

So they keep saying, and yet there is no actual evidence of that, and in fact this is completely false. Every bit of research published this year and all clinical programs are stuck in time 3+ decades ago, absolutely nothing was actually achieved or even learned. And this is a blatant lie. It's...

There are layers of problem here. It's not clear if simply dedicating more time would help, if the quality of that time doesn't improve. It should, when real experts are involved it almost always does, but it's not as if the few people who have dedicated their career to this have done...

Everything a pilot, even old things that have been tried thousands of times. It's so hard to tell this apart from genuine satire.

I tried looking for whether there is a formal concept describing this, and it doesn't seem so. It's a combination of several fallacies that hasn't been formalized into a unified concept. Bits of "lies, damned lies and statistics", some mathemagics/scientism, metric creep (as if there is a real...

Doctor: this will help. Patient: I think it helped. Doctor: *snickers* I didn't even do anything Patient: uh, I still think I'm somewhat better, I don't know, I guess Doctor: it's like a miracle! it might have slightly moved the needle, or maybe I bumped into it, either way it's a miracle...

Same guy who would personally insist, along with his whole coterie, that someone meeting ME/CFS clinical criteria means nothing, and yet his whole argument rests entirely on that. Self-diagnosis, too. Ridicule has no guest limit, once you've got one inside they're all invited to the party.

https://knowmecfs.org/ Understanding ME/CFS Myalgic Encephalomyelitis / Chronic Fatigue Syndrome is a serious, complex multi-system neuroimmune illness. This guide covers everything from biology to daily management - grounded in the latest published science. Found this from a reddit thread...

I can't make sense of this, as in it doesn't bother making sense and simply argues the traditional "heads we're right, tails we're also right". In no way does this support the validity of this construct, and if 'real' health problems, according to professionals, don't seem to influence their...

The "ME/CFS Psychotherapy Network" posted a statement on a position paper by the DGPPN/DGPM, I think it's the "German Society of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Nerve Medicine". Statement: . Post on Bluesky from one of the authors: I think this is the statement they are...

Except that almost nothing here is quantified. Assigning numbers to subjective concepts, ratings, does not turn qualitative into quantitative. This is the main mistake the whole discipline has been doing forever, pretending that any of the numbers they toy around with have the meaning they...

I have never seen anyone actually explain that. Out of hundreds of papers and other sources, presentations, articles and such, no one has ever bothered doing that, it's considered self-explanatory. Just like exercise, it's never been anything but "goals are a good thing to have in general, and...

How does everyone involved not understand that this makes no sense in a highly fluctuating illness? All they seem to be doing is apply the traditional statistical toolkit, indifferent to the fact that this toolkit is mediocre at best, and wholly inappropriate in chronic illness. A repeat...

How the hell does BS like this get published? Not only is it not 'widely' used, it is not even used, because it's not a biomarker for any of those things, aside maybe for Cushing's, but that still makes it odd to include among those, and the notion that any of those are 'stress-related...

Oh I would suggest that they do, and that they take ample advantage of the fact that rules are never self-enforcing.

So, yet another useless 'pilot' trial where nothing of value can be concluded, and because it showed no benefit they didn't, but if it had, they would have emphasized how it's promising, but they still conclude that more of the exact same should be done, again, because reasons. Tails they win...

This looks like a sick joke. And it might as well be. How would they know that, when it's entirely circular? The depictions are obviously based on the same material and ideas they are taught. I guess by "realistic" they mean that it's what they expect to see. This is something someone would...

The participants did the exertion test despite it being high exertion, especially so for them compared to controls, and returned and did it again. The whole psychobehavioral model is that we avoid exertion for no good reason, but people keep participating in studies and trials like this despite...

Probably the thing that's missing the most here is that pwME doing such a test will rest before and after and in-between every part of this, while healthy controls will live their normal lives, would even go to work, to the gym, do all sorts of every day life things before and after the test...

This puts a huge damper on the old "effort preference" / "the bastards just don't want to get better" nonsense. The ideologues keep asserting all sorts of nasty things about us, how we're lazy, how we don't try hard enough, how we "catastrophize" and as a result develop fear of doing things...