Encephalomyelitis and Incapacity Benefit

“However, I could not help reflecting after the program had finished that the former NHS financial manager who was incapable of washing or cooking and who took a week to return one telephone call appeared to have no difficulty in giving radio 4 interviews or in putting her case to government ministers.”

How do you know she didn’t save up her “spoons” for 3 weeks in order to give the interview, thinking as she did that it was of the utmost importance? The problem with over-exterting yourself, when your condition limits the number of “spoons” available, is what happens after you have overdone it. In my case this happens when I’m depressed and it can mean 2-3 days where I do absolutely nothing at all.

I think that nasty little dig that undermines the credibility of the rest of your post.

Spoon Theory, and yes, I thought exactly what DeeDee Ramona did.

Most absolutely infuriating thing you can do to someone with an invisible disability? Insinuate they can’t be as sick as all that, if they’re managing to do X. Seriously. It completely undermines both all the hard work they’ve put into symptom management, and their argument for some understanding.

Wrong thread and I`m sorry about that but I won`t be denied my final word.

You were a long time in school Z, but you don`t appear to have learned much. It is the mark of a man that they can sdmit to being wrong. Hiding behind a shouting match call and putting yet further restrictions on free speech is deeply unimpressive. You need to seriously think about making the transition from the schoolyard.

Beakie, It is patently obvious you don`t get out much. When you`ve been to somewhere like Beirut and seen the way the likes of Hamas treat black people we`ll be more inclined to listen to your definitions of racist scum.

I’m sorry E, if you didn’t mean it like that.

It made me see red, as Lorna has pointed out, this is single most hurtful, upsetting and undermining thing you can say to someone with a disability not obvious to the naked eye.

I mean, they may have visited her home, recorded her lying down on the sofa and then she may have spent days recovering.

You may have meant well - thing is, there will be 5 million igorant w*****s who will say the same thing and what they are doing is slyly insinuating that she’s not all that sick.

Now, since I’ve been sternly warned today to watch my spoons by the doc, I’ll stop here.

Let’s talk about the SNP instead (Scottish Nationalists). Might I add - nothing whatsoever to do with any other party south of the border, either in organisation or philosophy.

They are who centrist and centre-right Scots vote for (we don’t have conservatives up here outside the Agriculture industry).

They are also much nicer people than Nick Griffin and his Motley Crue.

I’m not going to engage any further in that particular debate. I have made my decision and it is final.

Now, I believe you guys were discussing incapacity benefit and Encephalomyelitis…?

Nah Z we were talking about 80s Hair Metal outfit Motley Crue. I believe OSB is a fan *ducks* .

DeeDee, You Scots are very proud, which I`m pleased about, but you`re also a bit excitable. You can pretend you don`t like the English but it`s not really true. In most circumstances we get along famously. Scotland has contributed hugely to the Union, for which I, for one am very grateful. I really would be devastated if you opted for independence so I don`t want talk about the SNP.

The lefties are blase about the Union. If Labour weren`t dependent on Scottish and Welsh votes in Westminster there would have been fragmentation by now. The BNP aren`t the problem. This is still a democracy, it`s people who can be persuaded to vote BNP who are the problem. Censorship, nannying, not respecting the Union, treating the Armed Forces like shite and all the other nonsenses the lefties ( who are so convinced of their moral and intellectual superiority ) are so fond of are, in reality, playing into the hands of the BNP.

Thanks for the support, E

Taking your ball home now Z ?. Is it a primary schoolyard your stuck in ?

Well, OSB, as I said in my statement that I’ve posted:

Repeat offenders will be given a warning, then a temporary ban if they persist, and then if necessary a permanent ban.

And since you seem to be persisting in your approach, consider this to be the aforementioned warning. Either chill out or face a ban from the site.

You can do as you like Z. I don`t have computer skills to do a thing about it.

You`re wrong, you don`t have the bollocks to admit that you`re wrong and your only supporter is Beakie. He`s just accused Mo of being feeble minded when he should be placing that cap, very firmly, on his own head.

“Chill out” ?. Men that you`re not even fit to have brushed the boots of have died to ensure that we have a right to free speech. I used to be quite fond of our unwritten constitution but now I`m kind of wishing we had one which enshrined a right to say what you think. If you can`t fathom why I`m furious you`re a cretin.

Ban me.

Very well OSB, your account is banned for the next 72 hours. After those 72 hours, please make your points in a more civil manner.

OSB is one of the most authentic, intelligent and humane voice I have come across - I honestly can’t think of any other commentators in the blogsphere that I have learnt more from [with all due respect to E, Beakie, and Mr Ian].

I am astonished that a forthright and interesting discussion about freedom of speech has come to this [notwithstanding the odd barbed comment].

We all know you are a very intelligent Zaruthustra, and this site is a great credit to you and the other regular contributors, but I urge you to reconsider this draconian course of action.

Shame on you for banning OSB.

I thought the OSB and Mental Nurse were the founding members of the site? It was certainly their double-act banter and differing viewpoints and that drew me to the site. When I first visited it was like sitting in the coffee room at work, chatting in a relaxed and irreverent manner without minding your P’s and Q’s. A bit like being with your mates in a local pub where arguing and deriding each other is part of the bonding process. Recently things have seemed more like a mutual admiration society. Finally we see some sparks fly in a good debate and… CENSORED!

Anyway, I was about to add to this hijacked post by saying….

Beakie is quite right OSB. I can’t argue. I am indeed feeble minded, that’s why I take the pills. However, I don’t agree with his continued response that I’m “the kind of person who’d join the BNP anyway. You can’t make Z responsible for your idiocy”.

My idiocy led me to visit the BNP site (may God forgive me… maybe that should read “may your preferred higher power forgive me” lest I offend anyone). It was actually very funny, just like a page out of the Viz. The highlight was an auction for a painting of Enoch Powell which I found hilarious. Unfortunately/fortunately I come from an extremely left wing socialist background so I am unlikely to be persuaded by their arguments. I appreciate this may lead to me being tarred with the Galloway brush. So be it.

Now I have tried to stick to the “site rules” and disagreed with the stated ideas rather than attack an individual but I appreciate that my crazy notions of freedom of speech and freedom to visit political websites will be frowned upon. As ever, censorship has led to promotion of the censored subject and I have subsequently mentioned the BNP yet again. I am therefore happy to forego any warnings and just be banned outright.

Interesting post E.

On ME et al:
As a student nurse I met with a new referral who I had little info on - stil not sure to this day if the ‘team’ set me up - but when I met with her she said the GP had diagnosed her with ME. This was early 90’s and I’d not heard a thing about it - sop I asked my colleagues who equally knew nothing about it - so I did some reading around. I was on the net - but there were about 23 websites running at this time so not much use there. I can’t recall where I got the info from but it was an interesting learning experience for me. The female patient wasn’t so imporessed when I’d bluffed my way thru the initial interview without trying to seem too ignorant. On the second meeting I had some knowledge and ideas - and immediately set to with my treatment plan. It didn’t go down well as I didn’t know the spoon theory then either - but there was no real organised treatment so I was only making up like the rest of the profession. We met again and we went back to basics and started the diary thing - so at least we had some collateral.
I’ll be honest - I wasn’t sure what was going on - and I was also a little skeptical that this person was swinging it a little. Eventually, and not surprisingly, the therapy relationship broke down irretrievably and I never saw her again.

On the IB administration:
I wonder if they’ve thought about changing the way the IB is determined. Currently I believe it relies on a sick note that is used to determine functional impairment - ie how badly your condition debilitates. As such, I’d have thought it more fitting to have health care professionals and not civil servants determine the outcome of claims. I’m not truly sure on the process so please anyone correct me where I may be mistaken.

As for the other issues in this thread on censorship - I suggest a forum thread to air opinions. I have some views and feel entitled to share them - but won’t do so in someone else’s rather good and unrelated post.

When you`ve been to somewhere like Beirut and seen the way the likes of Hamas treat black people we`ll be more inclined to listen to your definitions of racist scum.

Er - it’s my opinion that Hamas are racist scum too. Why would you think I’d have any other opinion?

Mr Ian, I think your suggestion of opening up a forum thread on the banning issue is an excellent one. Feel free to do so. I will happily answer any queries relating to banning issues and so forth on that thread.

Now, the rest of this comments thread is for comments relating to the original article, not for any comments regarding site policy, which should be directed to the forum. Please direct your comments accordingly.

Anyway, I am ducking out of this site for the foreseeable future. Z - please disable my account or whatever you need to do and give it to someone else who can contribute more positively to the site. I’ve had enough.

Hello

Hello
Please note the “other issues” are now open for discussion in the Forum Thread:
http://www.mentalnurse.org.uk/.....om/page-1/

And now back to normal programming….

Was just checking to see if you were bluffing.

This is, quite clearly, out of hand but there are a number of points here and it`s IMPERATIVE that they`re learnt.

I`ve had an ongoing battle with Beakie, and before that the much missed Malcolm Roff, but I`ve always been a bit frustrated that I wasn`t quite articulating my point quite well enough. This episode, to my mind, has illustrated things perfectly. If you spend too long in a theoretical / academic environment or even retreat there after a period at the coalface you become a little lost. ( This isn`t wholly personal criticism of Z and Beakie as it`s a very common phenomenon ).

Z, you`ve lived in the world of referenced argument and counter argument for too long. This is the real world. This is NOT CAMHS. The theory of how to deal with OSB might be play a straight bat, be schoolmasterly, draw up a contract, put him on the naughty step. I`m not 11. In the real world you have to have a few more strings to your bow than that. If you can`t emerge fron the world of theory you wil be a poor practitioner. There wouldn`t be room. or need, for more than one OSB in any professional team but I`m a pretty decent nurse and I`ve got a pretty good idea what I`m doing. If there`s some startling innovation on the horizon, I`m receptive but as for Beakie`s 45 minutes of protected time. Keep it in the staff room. Theory placed on top of policy, placed on top of initiatives, placed on top of reconfiguration, placed on top of research…… might fill the intrays of the office bound but is truly asphyxiating at the coalface. You might think you`ve handled this well but you haven`t, you`re lacking in practical skils.

Worse still your academic credentials will be a passport to career advancement. The counter argument to your decision to ban the BNP link, and not just from me, was nothing short of compelling. Your counter argument that they put dog shit through peoples doors would be complimented if I called it woeful. My jibe about moral and intellectual superiority was directed at the left in general but it can be, quite legitimately, be directed straight at you. You`re ticking a lot of the right boxes to go a long way in the NHS. It might pay off your student debt but the troops will have no respect.

I want to follow up on Mo`s point too. You do pre-date me on Mental Nurse but in a different guise. When Mental first took leave of absence Malcolm Roff and I took over. I produced posts but Malcolm has to take the credit as I was unable to contribute technically. I did, however, offer repeatedly to contribute to the site fees - I`m very fond of this site. Don`t get me wrong Z, I appreciate the immense effort you put in, we all do. If you are paying the site fees then I suppose you now have some ownership, if you`re not your banning of people starts to look even more insufferably arrogant. Regardless, a unilateral declaration of site rules is just ridiculous. Are you Robert Mugabe ?.

I`m not trying to slap you down here, Z. I was young once. I got absorbed when I was in Northern Ireland. I might as well have been in the UVF. I had a theory which would solve the problem - shoot all Republicans and I was desperate to do it. My intolerance, bigotry really, will have made more than a few poor Catholics more inclined to be extreme. However, when I left that pressured environment my objectivity returned. You`re not in a pressured environment. You`re booksmart but that`s not good enough. You need to learn from this and learn quickly or you`ll be diminished both as a person and a practitioner.

Beakie, Sort yourself out. You can`t go home because Diploma boy has a better range of scathing one liners. I like and respect you just as the rest of the site does, stop being so precious.

Actually, ( you`ll be impressed here Beakie and accuse me of reflecting ) I do think, a lot, about my writing style. My handbagging drove Malcolm Roff away which saddened me greatly, I thought the world of him. I also have noted that not many of the service users are eager to engage with me. But, for me, it`s very simple. This is Mental Nurse and it is a forum, primarily, for professionals to debate, moan and LET OFF STEAM. That is not to say that everyone else isn`t more than welcome. They are. But if Clinton / Bliar and Cameron have taught us one thing it`s the fact that you can`t be all things to all people. Mo is spot on, mutual backslapping, Z and the Shrink blowing bubbles up each others arses and the like are just boring.

So please can we just take breath, have a word with ourselves, stop this autocratic, non - negotiable bullshit, restore the right to free speech, I`ll remove a few pebbles from my handbag and we can get on with it as we always did.

Bugger, I`m obsessed again. The forecast is fair but I don`t care if it`s pissing down tomorrow, I`m off to the hills.

Mr Ian, I`ve just realised you`ve gone off to the forum. Personally, I don`t understand why you made make a statement or a link and then not stand by it, but that`s just me. As ever, you make some interesting points. Moderating is a difficult task. Personal attacks can get a bit much. Appeasement has its place ( although I would contend that nurses are probably too adept at it ). Censorship is a very difficult issue, I`m a bit of a hypocrite, I instinctively feel there should be some restrictions on what is broadcast but I`ve no clue as to how I would go about it.

But please, please, please lets remember what we`re talking about here. The freedom of speech is one of our most prized possessions, we have none more precious. It has been hard fought for. Other countries see fit to enshrine it in their constitution. We cannot, we must not, sacrifice it to the whim and the personal prejudice of an individual.

I thought we were talking about Encephalomyolitis and Incapacity Benefit?

The freedom of speech is not censored - just moved to the forum.

I did not create this site. I have never paid any site fees. My technical input has been, precisely, nil. But my contribution has not been inconsiderable. I, completely, fail to see why I can`t comment as I please in this box. The issue of free speech is hugely important to me and, even if you don`t realise it, it is hugely important to you too. I would like it resolving.

Likewise OSB - which is why another thread was created for this very issue.
The freedom to speak is a wonderful thing.
As to the freedom not to hear.

Did you note the link from the Fybromyalgia and Me site? Well I think they’re looking to see opinions on ME .. not YOU. Move it to the forum and I’ll answer your queries. I won’t engage in this thread on those issues.

Meanwhile… back at the topic…
E: I see you’ve moved back to the social construct/natural occurence/indifference trichotomy. I wouldn’t like to answer specifically for ME or any other yet-to-be-understood condition but I do have a theory on the social construct hypothesis:

It exists for a reason. Even if that reason may appear as ‘an excuse’ - that too exists for a reason.
What I would seek to understand is what would the perfunctory origins be for such a condition? I would not deny that any symptomatic physical event exists - but perhaps from underlying psychological necessity.
I do draw significant comparison between disputed conditions such as ME etc and more accepted behavioural psychological conditions like Dissociative Identity Disorder. DID exists as a defence mechanism to (in basic terms) compartmentalise trauamatic events or feelings away from the host. However, equally these can present as something of a contradiction and fail to stand up to harsh scrutiny (eg talking to a 2 year old alter who has an adult vocabulary).
Ergo, psychologically socially constructed conditions exist because they have to for the individual. “How” they exist is far mess important than “why”.

I called you a weak apologist once Mr Ian, but I guess you`re one of lifes natural arbitrators. I am a little disappointed by your response, you opened this can of worms and then you`ve backtracked but I suppose you`re doing your utmost to keep the Mental Nurse family together and that`s got to be worth the effort.

Looking it from a different perspective. Z is young so he thinks he knows best, he was a perennial student so he thinks he knows best and he has a lot of letters after his name so he thinks he knows best. It is also very important that we remember that the vast majority of his adult life he has lived under a government who never fail to resist the temptation to nanny and ban. The consequences of governmental behaviour extend further than we imagine sometimes.

We`ve all been there. God knows I have. It`s part of human development to be put right by a number of your peers who are longer in the tooth and who have been around the block. We need Beakie to clarify where he stands, as I read it he spoke out more in revulsion at the BNP more than in support of a ban on free speech - I could be wrong. However, no one else, it seems to me is in support of these bans.

Thinking back I was once bestowed the power of moderation over this site by Mental. For all I know I could still, theoretically, possess such power. However, I didn`t and don`t have the first idea how to use it. And do you know what, even though my list of prejudices is longer than anyones, I never once thought of trying to use it.

We`re all fond of Z and we`re all profoundly grateful for the fantastic work, both technically and as a poster and commentator, he does on this site. However, sometimes you just need telling.

As some of you may have noticed, I have not actually banned OSB. Anyone wanting to continue this conversation, please go here.

Bloody hell, we`re becoming the government. They wanted to address the benefits issue ( I`ve bored you with all this before ) 11 years ago and then sidelined the review. Taking the easy option rather than grip the main point, rather like we`ve done moving the freedom of speech debate to the forum.

I`m sorry I`ve hijacked your interesting post, E. Truth be known I was briefly introduced to a guy with ME a few years back. Beyond that I`ve no experience of it.

With regard to the benefits question. I knew there was a credit crunch coming. I knew there was an energy crisis coming. I didn`t know they`d come simultaneously. I was warning you all over 18 months ago, I don`t think you listened. I`ve done everything I can to insulate myself against the forthcoming hard times. I`ve just had new potatos and carrots from my garden for tea. ( I like gardening but I`m also motivated by the fact I don`t trust this government to ensure we have a decent food supply )

The government is skint, Brown looks like he wishes he`d never laid eyes on number 10, his cabinet don`t respect or, more importantly, fear him and James Purnell is motoring to the right faster than Hughie Green`s old clapometer. They didn`t put anything aside when the coffers were full, they presided over an economy fuelled by credit and did nothing to ensure we have a long term energy supply.

The election won`t help. Whoever comes in will be skint and they`ll struggle from day one. Unemployment will go up. Standards of living will fall. Dis - satisfaction will rise.

I`m sorry Z, the BNP are rubbing their hands in anticipation. 8% is a significant base and it`s going to rise. Lord knows how far, it`s scary. But if you think you`re striking them a blow by objecting to Mr Ian`s musings and links you`re sadly mistaken. You`ve never admitted it but I know you did, all of you who voted Nu Labour have built a foundation for the BNP.

As for the poor souls with ME, they`re going to have it tough I`m afraid.

On the subject of ME. While I was a grad student, one of the other students in my lab group was diagnosed with (relatively) mild ME. Although this was over 10 years ago, his local PCT had a research group going on the topic and so he got signed up for what was then an experimental treatment, ie CBT.

Not CBT like for depression though. The therapist got him first to write down everything he did and time each activity for 2 weeks, also rating it as easy, medium, hard, and resting. After weeks, they totted up the total for each category and divided by 14.

That gave him the number of minutes of each type of activity he was to do every day. On days when he found it tough going, he was to push himself to reach that many minutes, on days when he ad more energy, he was not to do more than that. The aim was to know what was a reasonable amount to push himself by and not to overdo it when he was feeling a bit better.

It worked. He was, once more, able to plan his life, set goals, get his thesis finished - albeit at a much slower pace than if he wasn’t ill. Every few months, in consultation with the therapist, he’d increase one of his forms of activity daily by 15 minutes.

It took years, but he was able to continue with his life and eventually the ME went away.

Since lack of energy and mood sensitivity to energy levels are a big problem for me in depressive episodes, I’ve been using a less strict version of this technique for the past 8 months (eg this week I am going out once after work only, and am getting to bed by 9pm the other days to make up for it, or I won’t be able to move by Saturday) and I can definitely give it the thumbs up.

CBT for ME does not mean telling people to think positive or push themselves too hard. In my friend’s case, it seemed to be, well, we don’t know what causes this and we don’t know how to cure it, but we can try and deal with it and have it not get any worse until it hopefully decides to go away.

E -

“The woman with ME who was interviewed on You and Yours’ was I think getting her self caught up in the is ME a natural type and therefore “real” vs is ME a social construct and therefore imaginary debate”

I’m gonna guess that’s because she’s had to spend a lot of time justifying herself as having a “real illness”. What’d it used to be called? “Yuppie flu”?

“If she were to spend a 1/10 of the effort she puts into advocating for ME sufferers she might be able to get herself to work and spend a half day a week doing voluntary work and then build on that, which would I suspect do her more good for in the long run.”

Thing is, you really don’t know that. And you’re doing that thing again, when you say this, where you insinuate that she her disability can’t be a real problem if she’s got the energy to do X other thing. I mean, you don’t know about this woman’s life. And I don’t know much about ME, but if it’s a condition where you get good days and bad days, remission and relapse, that could account for an apparent difference between what she says she can do and what she seems to be able to do.

“The problem for this unfortunate lady is that ME is what she feels passionate about”

I’d imagine that she knows what her problem is, and I’d imagine she’d say it’s ME, rather than her activism. She’s caught between a rock and a hard place - she can not speak up, and have her life suck, or she can speak up, and be accused of doing too much activism and being able to get better if she only wanted to.

I’m sure you didn’t mean your points as an attack on this woman, but as someone who’s damn sick of explaining that yes, my illness is real, and yes I’ve tried thinking positive and perseverance and all that, especially to people who probably mean well but should know better, it really does read that way.

I have little to add to the above, other than to express the opinion that diagnostic opinions should not be based on a brief snippet from a radio interview.

“If she were to spend a 1/10 of the effort she puts into advocating for ME sufferers she might be able to get herself to work and spend a half day a week doing voluntary work and then build on that, which would I suspect do her more good for in the long run.”

But she *is* doing voluntary work, namely her advocacy. Why is advocacy a less acceptable form of voluntary work than any other? Through it, she can acquire valuable transferable skills that would appeal to many employers…

uote:

Lorna: Thing is, you really don’t know that”

E:And you don’t know it isn’t

I need to pull you up here E - the rules of debate and classical logic stipulate that if you make an assertion, you have to demonstrate it. The onus is on you to show that the woman is putting energy into advocacy that she could use to change her situation, as you made the original claim.

Lorna pointed out, as I did, that the conclusion didn’t necessarily follow.

Neither of us needs to demonstrate anything at all (I won’t say ‘prove’ as that makes me think of theorems).

The reason for this rule of course is that it’s impossible to disprove a negative. Lorna cannot show you that there is no possible instance, no matter how far-fetched, in which your claim would be true.

Also known as the Black Swan theory - you cannot prove there is no such thing, but you can prove there is by spotting one. The onus is on you to go on a birdwatching expedition.

I would not normally be this anal but you are the one who is into all the postmodern theory so I would expect you to have a good grounding in classical logic first. (Socrates, you can help me out here).

In the meantime, I highly recommend Naseem Nicholas Taleb’s The Black Swan. Very interesting book about risk and its perception.

I`m not sure if E`s getting the point but you`re missing the only important point DeeDee. Nu Labour are skint. They have to cut the welfare budget. If they had listened to Frank Field 11 years ago there would be a lot less pain now. James Purnell is sending out his henchmen and you can rest assured they won`t have heard of Black Swan theory and they won`t be reading Mr. Taleb.

Sorry I haven`t got a more positive message for this lady.

Don’t be so sanctimonious Z expressing an opinion is all any of us are doing. Or is it your opionion that no one else has the right to express their opinion except when it agrees with your opinion. And what is a diagnostic opinion any way?

What is a diagnostic opinion? It’s an opinion about a diagnosis, obviously.

As in e.g. “It is my opinion that the lady on the radio does not warrant a diagnosis of ME.”

And you’re entitled to express an opinion that is not my opinion. It’s just that there ought to be some evidence behind your opinion. Something a little more substantial than, “Well, she had the stamina to be interviewed for the radio, so she clearly hasn’t got ME, has she?”

I’m afraid you may be right there OSB.

I was going to comment here but see that Lorna has put everything I was going to say in her comment. The only thing that being on a radio interview proves is that this woman had at some point the energy to get through a radio interview.

If the woman only has so much energy is it not better that she spends her time doing something she feels passionately about that may benefit others?

It is difficult to do anything when you have limited ability to predict your good and bad days ahead of time.

I’m not sure but I think E is falling into the same defensive mode I did very recently.
Being the acclaimed arbitrator I would suggest:
ME is claimed to be a debilitating condition that controls the individual. It’s fallacy is not disproved - as DeeDee says - you cannot disprove a negative. Yet this doesn’t means something is amiss.
I stick with my theorem that there’s a lot more psychological aetiology than physiological. But I’m sure a neurologist will remind me it’s all chemical and neurons.
Somehow, the woman with ME was able to make an interview - or even a phone call - and this does contradict the previous claim somewhat.
She may have saved her spoons or pushed herself to the point of needing a week to get over the event. We don’t know.

BUt my interest would be - how can she regulate herself to be able to appear in interview - yet is unable to sustain an everyday existence?
This is obviously of significant importance if you’re going to talk about reducing the impact of a condition and doesn’t necessarily mean I’m questioning her validity or veracity.
And if she can conserve herself in this way for an interview -

I can see E’s point; that she might be able to do the same for economic gain - but then, how many positions are available for flexi time and on a ‘one or maybe two half-days a week, not sure what I can do yet’ basis? And who will support her in what might likely be a long drawn out process?
I’d suggest it is possible to support her back in to work - but the support system isn’t there to do it in the way that works best in the time it might take.
Ergo, it’s probably not cost-effective and outside of Layard’s analysis as an economically viable treatment.

Hmm… not sure I got this bit over right…
“ME is claimed to be a debilitating condition that controls the individual. It’s fallacy is not disproved - as DeeDee says - you cannot disprove a negative. Yet this doesn’t means something is amiss.”

ie I’m sitting on the fence.

An intelligent and articulate woman whose (potential illness fluctuates. Good days bad days, good weeks bad weeks. Who are we to judge based on very limited evidence. It was a radio interview, I suspoect an inartiuclate mumbler may have been somebody the radio people would have tried to avoid.