Search results

I'm feeling like ALT-F4ing this shit or CMD-Q for my fellow mac gang members

These people spent like 22+ years in education to produce this. Would have done society a favor to just drop out and play video games all day.

What's next, resurrecting Acetyl-L-Carnitine? Lipoic Acid? D-Ribose? Good lord we'd know if these things were actually useful by now

Tangential but this is the reason I support UBI. So some poor Joes don't have to 'earn' a salary by analyzing AB tests of crazy Facebook posts so that people like this can grift 10's of millions from social-media-addled rubes.

Just got around to looking at this one. One of takeaways is that high percentage of research from roughly 'non-Western' countries is effectively fraudulent. Fraud really seems like the easy part of the problem for the scientific literature although clearly it is not being policed well enough...

"efficacy of LDN for ME/CFS patients in vitro" Totally meaningless. We don't have any biomarkers - much less any such known to be clinically significant - so the idea of in vitro efficacy means nothing.

Not gonna lie this is one of the most UK things I've ever heard of.

Obvious question - why Ketamine? Also the wording: "research study on fatigue...not a treatment study for fatigue..." - huh??

Not to mention that hospitalized psychosis patients are probably on antipsychotic drugs, perhaps the most common side effect of such being drowsiness.

I mean if these tests gave us any good clues we would have known it by now... In the paper they report the means but fail to put boxplots side by side, which is definitely not very cash money.

Maybe the problem is that it's true for some people and then they go projecting it on everybody else?

Hard to say without reading the article as a whole but one thought is that while people rightly focus on the 'Replication Crisis', there is also what might be called an 'Interpretation Crisis' whereby researchers are able to produce replicable, p-significant results but then interpret them to...

It looks like a formulation designed to tar any criticism as comprehensive bigotry. The typical wesley/sharpe et al formulation is that those who criticize BPS are bigoted against mentally ill people; here it is against: women, non-whites, the disabled, the poor. Of course the implication is...

"Mouse Model"

1. If there isn't good evidence it generally shouldn't be offered under the umbrella of mainstream medicine 2. If studies are not designed to produce reliable evidence they shouldn't be approved or funded 3. See 1.

Awesome. Surely someone would do a prospective study on ME/CFS incidence.

Yeah I think after PACE their best strategy is to avoid any showdowns. As long as funders are gullible enough, they may well be able to get funding even for 'major' trials; then they just tell the funder what they want to hear, but otherwise keep pretty quiet - just publish the paper rather than...

I think this is their post-PACE grifting strategy. Everything is now 'preliminary' and 'needs more research'. Being 'definitive' is a huge problem. PACE backfired because it was hyped and sold as definitive. As such, too many important people and institutions took note of it being obliterated...

"Could the function of an essential subcomponent of a system impact the overall function of the system?" Surely not.

People like the childhood trauma angle but it is clearly pointless. The main reason they like it is that it implies that 'therapy' will help with whatever condition. Obviously this is innuendo, not solid reasoning. What matters is if there is evidence that a treatment helps a condition and...