Hopefully not that important, but I thought I'd post the link: https://listserv.nodak.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind1205d&L=co-cure&F=&S=&P=12748 Ta to Tate Mitchell for posting this, and Tom Kindlon for linking to it on twitter. They don't do that good a job of pointing out a lot of the problems in the papers they cite, so it reads more like a contest to see who can get the most papers published than a careful examination of the evidence. It reads as if they've just accepted the analysis given in most of the papers, rather than looked to see if these interpretations of the evidence are reasonable... so be prepared for some annoying stuff. Also, they say this: Can anyone think of a single double-blind trial for CBT or GET? I don't see how such a thing could be done. Or single blind! Which is a bit of a problem when people are relying upon subjective questionnaire scores as outcome measures, particulalrly when these have been shown not to correlated well with objective measures of disability.