Jonathan Edwards
"Gibberish"
- Messages
- 5,256
You can buy the t-shirt for this too.....!
View attachment 17265
Well I be darned - they do have wings.
You can buy the t-shirt for this too.....!
View attachment 17265
When Coyne sticks to what he does well, he does it very well.James Coyne has done a blog on this too.
https://jcoynester.wordpress.com/2016/09/11/is-the-science-media-centre-briefing-on-cognitive-behaviour-therapy-trustworthy/
[QUOTE = Quick Thoughts - One of James C. Coyne's Blogs]
Is the Science Media Centre briefing on cognitive behaviour therapy trustworthy?
Excellent.I have learned to be skeptical of UK expertise offered with Dame or Sir in the title.
Here I will only say that Professor Moss-Morris was brought in by the Science Media Centre to offer an expert reaction to the follow-up report from the PACE trial.
... You can go to the Science Media Centre to see Professor Moss-Morris’ expert opinion. She was quite embarrassed to have been brought in and declared a conflict of interest generally missing in this kind of publicity campaign:
You can go to the Science Media Centre to see Professor Moss-Morris’ expert opinion. She was quite embarrassed to have been brought in and declared a conflict of interest generally missing in this kind of publicity campaign:
The whole notion of a single authoritative source about science is disturbing and should be resisted.
Exhibit A: The SMC.
More seriously there is an industry of people employed to do CBT and it is a different conflict of interest model than one designed for drugs. People earn a living and hospitals make profit on selling CBT services. I suspect that CBT is quite profitable for them.
The answer is, of course, infallible.I await this briefing for journalists:
"Science Media Centre - Essential or Indispensable?"
CBT isn't even that cheap. Psychologists charge quite a lot per session. Treating POTS with a med would likely be cheaper. The psychs have somehow convinced the system that they are worth the money.Being urged to believe symptoms are not physical caused me to ignore what turned out to be diagnosable and (maybe) treatable POTs.....thus saving money for the NHS....
CBT isn't even that cheap. Psychologists charge quite a lot per session. Treating POTS with a med would likely be cheaper. The psychs have somehow convinced the system that they are worth the money.
There's a bit of 'good intentions' at work here, too. In the UK there is a concerted effort to reduce overprescribing of drugs — quite a sensible idea in itself. But as with so many things in our centralised, top-down national institutions the idea has gathered an unthinking momentum to the point where anything proffered as an alternative to drugs is assumed to be a Good Thing. Even if it doesn't actually work.
Our healthcare system gets very evangelical about such ideas and common sense tends to go out the window.
But the reducing drugs and relying on CBT for psychosis is simply dangerous yet some groups were spinning trial results that didn't support that view as if they did.
CBT was a bit like talking to a nice, sensible friend.....who in retrospect you realised had their own secret agenda.
Better off getting a dog.CBT was a bit like talking to a nice, sensible friend.....who in retrospect you realised had their own secret agenda.
Definitely. Don't get a cat, they always have their own secret agenda.Better off getting a dog.
Right... it's not that cheap - hence more money in the pocket of those who practice it instead of running more and more tests and funding the studies that do not yet (at least a few years ago) offer a hope of identifying this condition.CBT isn't even that cheap. Psychologists charge quite a lot per session. Treating POTS with a med would likely be cheaper. The psychs have somehow convinced the system that they are worth the money.