A few charts we created for this analysis.

If you run a trial and don't properly measure the potential harm that comes out of it, can you really say its successful? And if the trials don't fit neatly into the mechanistic puzzle of the disease, what is the information we get out of it even telling us?

The flawed central idea is that exercise is a panacea, and gradually increasing it could treat Long COVID,
@exceedhergrasp1.bsky.social said. As a result, the research won’t advance our understanding of the disease’s underlying mechanisms, calling it “money down the drain.”

A swath of low-quality trials are often used by doctors and Long COVID clinics to justify the use of exercise as a treatment. Most of the evidence is collected by researchers who seem to be unaware that a large chunk of people with Long COVID experience PEM leading to substantial harm.

The same rhetoric wouldn’t fly for cancer, multiple sclerosis, or other disease so but it appears acceptable for Long COVID. Are the journalistic standards more flexible when the person being interviewed is a former colleague or when they’re trying to sell a book?

She followed up the patient-blaming rhetoric by saying she doesn’t judge people for how they handle the disease.

“I think there can be a tendency to double down on your ‘I am really sick’ and ‘I am really having these symptoms’ and maybe get [sic] develop some kind of reluctance or resistance to having an open mind to what else might work best,” Deacon responded.

Then it shifts to patient blaming. At around 5:26, host Ian Hanomansing cued up a question about the legitimacy of brain retraining, which is criticized by most in the patient community.

The interview still doesn’t name the Lightning Process or discuss why it’s controversial — it is not evidence-based and is accused of exploiting people with Long COVID.

At 4:01 in the interview, after discussing how she joined a clinical trial that didn’t work, the program mentions she didn’t give up. “She turned to a controversial approach that is not currently offered through public health institutions to treat Long COVID.”

I am currently starting a little vacation but will be doing a quick write up about this response, which seems to be worse than the original segment tomorrow or Sunday.

youtu.be/fB8V_1n8eq4?...

They include a bit about Deacon discussing the idea of people being insulted by the neuroplasticity approach. "There might be a tendency to double down on your I am sick and I am having these symptoms and reluctance or resistance to an open mind."

This is how they reference the Lightning Process: "She turned to a controversial approach that is not currently offered by public health institutions to treat Long COVID."

It gets worse.

New version is up. It is 29 seconds shorter. Will be looking to see what the difference is.

This is the note they've added referencing that they're adding context around the program Deacon experienced.

I am currently starting a little vacation but will be doing a quick write up about this response, which seems to be worse than the original segment tomorrow or Sunday.

youtu.be/fB8V_1n8eq4?...

They include a bit about Deacon discussing the idea of people being insulted by the neuroplasticity approach. "There might be a tendency to double down on your I am sick and I am having these symptoms and reluctance or resistance to an open mind."