The punishment is obviously not appropriate, but the notion of punishing is.Chinese research is (perhaps rightly) getting a _terrible_ reputation.
Something reasonably needs to be done - is this an appropriate something - probably not.
Welcome to Phoenix Rising!
Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.
To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.
The punishment is obviously not appropriate, but the notion of punishing is.Chinese research is (perhaps rightly) getting a _terrible_ reputation.
Something reasonably needs to be done - is this an appropriate something - probably not.
Strictly speaking, the aforementioned data doesn't tell us anything about recovery. We would need specific data on the subgroup: a particular subgroup could potentially have good outcomes on secondary measures such as employment or health care use while others did worse on average.In PACE, modest improvements observed in the CBT and GET groups (contested by reanalysis) are not mirrored by substantive changes in objective measures of walking ability on a 6-minute walking test or step test (McPhee, 2017). Adding CBT to SMC did not substantially improve function from baseline (McPhee, 2017). In addition, the PACE authors dropped plans to assess patients’ physical activity using electronic monitors (actometers) on the grounds they were too burdensome. Other measurements of physical function were not considered, such as measuring how many hours per day a participant spends upright, or in bed, or laying down (pre- and post-treatment). In addition, there is almost no change in secondary measures (employment or health care use) in CBT or GET groups (McCrone et al., 2012). Such data suggest recovery in PACE is more a design artefact than a clinical reality.
No matter how rigorous their science may be, there will unavoidably be some assumptions - perhaps bias - creep in unwittingly simply by virtue of being human. Good scientists will encourage scrutiny to help identify that, even though it may be difficult for them. Which is why, when so many people's lives are at stake, the data must be openly available,
The citizen's job is to be rude - to pierce the comfort of professional intercourse by boorish expressions of doubt. John Ralston Saul