David Tuller
Trial By Error: An Exchange of Letters Concerning Professor Chalder’s Latest Disaster of a Paper
By David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH Last week, Brian Hughes and I sent a letter to Occupational Medicine, which recently published yet another of Professor Trudie Chalder's awful papers. Among other problems, Professor Chalder and her four co-authors completely misstated their own findings in the text of the paper. We called for ...
Trial By Error: Mayo Clinic Treatment Plan Cites “Deconditioning,” “Perfectionism,” and CBT
By David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH The renowned Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, has a poor record when it comes to ME/CFS. It has a history of pushing the graded exercise therapy (GET) and cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) approach outlined in the now-discredited PACE trial. These interventions were based on the notion ...
Trial By Error: A Letter to Occupational Medicine From Brian Hughes & Me About Prof Chalder’s Latest Disaster
By David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH Members of the CBT/GET ideological brigades produce a gusher of dreck, and I don't bother commenting on most of their work. Life's too short. So it can be easy to lose sight of how flawed and truly awful each individual paper can be. But even among ...
Trial By Error: More on that Disastrous Employment Paper from Professor Chalder and Colleagues
By David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH A few days ago, I wrote a post about yet another atrocious paper from Professor Trudie Chalder, this one called €œChronic fatigue syndrome and occupational status: a retrospective longitudinal study. Professor Chalder and her colleagues seem constitutionally incapable of writing anything that isn't marred by massive ...
Trial By Error: Professor Chalder Messes Up Again in New Paper on CFS and Employment Outcomes
By David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH Same-Day Update: In re-reading the new paper, I noticed that the discussion section also features errors involving the percentages. It includes this sentence: "About 9% of individuals who were not working at baseline had returned to work at follow-up." And this one: "Further, 6% of those ...
