Discussion in 'Health News and Research unrelated to ME/CFS' started by Andy, May 17, 2019.
I like this comparison...made me chuckle...
"...It’s as if they’d been “describing the life cycle of unicorns, what unicorns eat, all the different subspecies of unicorn, which cuts of unicorn meat are tastiest, and a blow-by-blow account of a wrestling match between unicorns and Bigfoot,...”
Perhaps Ed Yong could do a follow up article about PACE
That would be the same Dorothy Bishop who found the SMILE study to be
"generally well conducted and noted that the findings appeared to be solid."
I am reminded of Prof Paul Ewald's point of view, that the whole genetic causes of disease bandwagon has been vastly overplayed for decades. From Wikipedia:
MS and SW take note
And when it is advantageous for a powerful group of people - e.g. governments, the obscenely wealthy, big business - for science NOT to change there are plenty of scientists who can be bought to achieve that end and delay progress for decades.
What about our own backyard?
There are candidate gene association studies in ME or CFS that are likely spurious, but that doesn't stop many people from believing the findings.
She said that via email to David Tuller?
Here is what she said on the SMC site:
Calling it psuedoscience and having concern it is just publicity for a commercial company...
Are we ready to accept the implications?
Separate names with a comma.