Hello,
Debate WITHOUT sour comment is just what we need to get our creative juices flowing. Not preaching one view over another. Should we not close the mouth & open the mind politely. For goodness sake, aren’t we trying to understand what has happened to our lives and we ALL need to pull together.
1. Numbers were designed to lie – that is the aim of statistics whether you use Euclidian or other base 22 systems.
For Michael: I agree and even though the Clinical Journal of Pain Articles can be difficult to grab they help. The small price for the few select articles I have purchased have been worth their weight in gold as they are right on the money.
I find your posts of great value.
My life is so down the tubes with this thing that I would delight in any genuine progress.
I am hugely concerned with improving my quality of life(QOL) – and should I find a valid approach I would be more than willing to share….the trouble is it doesn’t yet exist.
We may be looking in the wrong areas – and perhaps should be looking towards stem cells (our own) to lift QOL and account for demyelination & the unexplained things nerves can cause / do or whatever the hell causes this.
2. FOR ALL READERS:
My present problem is that body systems cannot be considered in isolation.
We are a WHOLE BEING – a system that interacts (I’m sorry this is put so simply).
For Tayla thanks for the comments….I have had significant issues with opinionated and ill-informed medical consultants. I think we ALL need to remember that a doctor is a paid consultant – not a GOD and this is the reason we need to be so well informed.
Vicc: I have ONE question and would like to address just ONE question at a time from what you have raised. First, an abstract that doesn’t discuss some method / process is an Extension Article written for people without the technical base to understand the article.
Abstracts are designed to get more research dollars – it is a process.
If I read your posts correctly, as I understand the terms, phrases etc I appear to be either full of ******** with some kindred spirits or I have a superfluous thermometer uncomfortably placed.
So to the question Vicc:
I read that Abstracts provide the basic information you need and should you see that any research of any kind has been done with your key words that it is OK and assumed correct. No further work required, even if that research has been corrupted through numbers and crossover from control groups has been allowed.
IS THIS CORRECT?
An abstract cannot contain sufficient information to judge this and there are enough free articles to help with whole article access. You do go to a lot of trouble to defend the shortcut method of just relying on abstracts when you have a barrel to push at people without the support of logic and science.
The numbers are easily made to lie so they can say what they want to get more $.
Just a note: Peer review in medicine doesn’t work. So that is not an out.