How do we stop charities and influencers spreading bio-babble about ME/CFS?'

[ME/CFS Science Blog]

Another increasing issue is AI-created summaries on social media. Researchers often oversell their findings in the paper, and it seems that AI then inflates this even further.

Don't have an issue with using AI per se (it can be useful in many situations), but the LLMs people use don't think, and focus on text and results more than on the data and methodology. So it creates summaries that sound very impressive and impactful without properly scrutinizing the study, making it much easier to spread misinformation.

 

[Medfeb]

To be honest I had never heard of the Mancini study and I don't regard these as significant research progress. I agree that they have the potential to pollute the evidence base but I think most of us have already forgotten about them if we ever knew about them. Yes, Fukuda is unhelpful if used as criteria for ME/CFS (which it isn't) but the issue of what criteria researchers approved of was raised in relation to ICC, which as far as I know nobody much has used if anyone.

Fukuda or some variant of it is still being used by some as referenced above
ICC is also being used by some but I'd have to dig for examples.