Only just came across this organisation:
Positive.org
from their website:
https://www.positivegroup.org/the-positive-approach/
The Team
The Scientific Advisory Board
Professor Trudie Chalder
https://www.positivegroup.org/the-team/
OK I'm being too optimistic again
Really? Again? Do I have to listen to it and post about Trudie Chalder again for the 1000th time?
In the case of ME the BPS approach even intentionally ignores biology. For example the PEM literature is ignored because it doesn't fit into the narrow scope of the CBT focused BPS approach.
It's ironic that the BPS approach markets itself as being holistic and deep. In reality it's superficial and has a very narrow focus on the same few ideas that are applied to everything. An example is how the solution it proposes is nearly always CBT.
In the case of ME the BPS approach even intentionally ignores biology. For example the PEM literature is ignored because it doesn't fit into the narrow scope of the CBT focused BPS approach.
Really? Again? Do I have to listen to it and post about Trudie Chalder again for the 1000th time?
Lucky you. I just get angrier at them with each new 'study' or repeated fraudulent claim they make.I feel as if I'd struggle to watch through another of these things. I'm so bored of this.
Noted for future legal actions."I would say the exercise clearly is not damaging to people."
The 'rule of thirds' is one of the dumbest ideas I have ever seen in any supposedly scientific field. Anybody quoting it to justify anything should be automatically disqualified from any further involvement on the basis that they are, at best, grossly incompetent.by the rule of a third
A hammer in search of nails.It's ironic that the BPS approach markets itself as being holistic and deep. In reality it's superficial and has a very narrow focus on the same few ideas that are applied to everything. An example is how the solution it proposes is nearly always CBT.
Which looks awfully like fraud to me.In the case of ME the BPS approach even intentionally ignores biology. For example the PEM literature is ignored because it doesn't fit into the narrow scope of the CBT focused BPS approach.
If someone d/ld this, it could be worth posting somewhere that will last, just in case it ends up being useful?
If someone d/ld this, it could be worth posting somewhere that will last, just in case it ends up being useful?
Thanks for tagging - will log on at work on Monday and see just what joys await (can't remember my log in details to elearning!)
“If you can't do a 10 minute walk every day, do a five minute walk every day. But after you've done the five minute walk every day, you can increase it to 10 minutes, and then you can increase it the following week to 15 minutes.”