Long Covid-19 and an effective lightning process intervention: A case study, 2024, Arroll et al.

The patient had covid infection in October and miraculously recovered in December thanks to LP, and clearly not due to the passing of time.

PS: anyone who says otherwise is a nasty anti-recovery activist.

 

Haha. This is pure comedy. Most be some form of comedy journal.

 

Tragi- comedy as we know where this is trying to go

 

Association is not causation, but more so cooccurrence is not association.

Otherwise you just need to try lots of different coloured socks when buying lottery tickets to identify the lucky pair that will mean you win big. Unfortunately the human psyche is primed to look out for cooccurrence and the Lightning Process preselection is designed to pick out those most likely to believe that represents causation.

 

Also I notice that as my illness improves, I also become more able to try new things. Like self-help courses or sports. So it's possible that people tend to be attracted to LP at a point in time where they're on a trajectory of improvement, perhaps in the process of recovery or just experiencing fluctuations in the illness. Even a very consistent association between LP and subsequent recovery could be meaningless.

 

I think this is probably also behind the recovered patient exercise gurus advocating their particular exercise programs that we regularly see in ME. As they recover they can do more exercise and they then see the trajectory of increasing activity as a consequence of their specific activity choice.

 

Part of the Lightning Process is that patients are told that in order to get better, they have to tell their 'recovery story'? i.e. they have to say they've recovered when they haven't recovered, otherwise they won't recover.

 

I'll paste what I previously said on the forum:

I'll say that it's very hard to notice that you're doing an activity because you've already improved a small bit, and not the other way around, and I can see why someone would be absolutely sure it healed them if they stay well afterwards and can't test their theory.

 

Completely. Same this is way more obvious, but when my health improved, I thought “wow, now that I don’t track my symptoms anymore I feel so much better”. The reason I lost motivation to track my symptoms, was… because they weren’t bothing me as much anymore.

 

Didn't read the paper, the abstract alone passed my tolerance threshold for unwarranted leaps of logic. Plus I see no need to give the authors a buzz by upping the download stats for their paper

I wouldn't bet against having yet another LP practitioner in NZ soon. Maybe the first author, maybe Arroll himself. I seem to recall him saying somewhere he had done some partial training in the LP himself, maybe in preparation for that public funding he'd like to see? All speculation but somebody must have made quite an investment

https://jclinmedcasereports.com/publication-charges.html

I would bet on Arroll including this on his list of published papers with which to vow unsuspecting audiences next time he pushes the LP at a GP conference (and never mind the dubious quality of all of those papers, which GP is gonna check, right?). Though it'll be interesting to see whether he'll highlight his own name in search of glory or focus on the first author so as to maintain his own carefully construed image of independent, neutral, wise old head so he can meddle more easily behind the scenes

I would also bet on his Otago mates Wilson and Dunbar citing this paper in any future articles

I would further bet on his Scandinavian mates citing this paper in their publications

And round and round the circle goes, feeding on itself

Also worth noting, the journal here is on Beall's list of potential predatory journals. Certainly their peer review wasn't exactly rigorous in this instance