Search results

I vaguely remember that Hammond's Private Eye articles are usually not so bad. Then he goes and writes horrendous drivel somewhere else. I wonder if there's a reason for that?

From part 7 of my blog (just reading it again for a trip down memory lane ...)

My 13-part blog series on my trip to the Charite in Berlin: https://forums.phoenixrising.me/blog-articles/blog/tiredsam.20476/ It is Scheibenbogen's place. I personally decided that there was no other option than going to the Charite, if they hadn't seen me I wouldn't have gone anywhere...

That's hardly an example of anything. Within a couple of hours of posting those lofty sentiments: VES tweeted the following angry and over-confident message in a knee-jerk reaction to the latest NICE email.: I'm sure many of us, myself included, saw the NICE email and thought "Fuck this...

He'd only have make the effort to get to grips with it properly once, then he could have a string of articles out of it. Precisely.

Sorry but I'm sick of ME tourists passing by, thinking they'll have a go, then dumping all over the place and buggering off again. Researchers, journalists, charletans of every persuasion, wannabe saviours, sick of the lot of them. I should probably have some porridge.

How do we know he was paid 3 days to work on it? I have a living to earn, and I've spent more than 3 days unpaid preparing for things in the past, it's a question of how much pride you take in your work, whether you can be arsed doing a proper job. I loved his first article, but this second one...

If that's investigative journalism ... Yes, that's why it's crying out for a decent investigative journalist to get to the bottom of it. How do you know? So what is it exactly that you do Tom? Jesus, the guy looks at it for 3 days, shrugs and gives up. And that's his "best shot". Bye then...

Once you have rested and start to feel better, it is very hard to understand that you can't start building up slowly again from there.

Getting some high-level signatories now: Priti Patel signed one minute ago.

Well, we've come a long way from ME articles dictated by the SMC or written by the likes of Rod Liddle. Then we had more ME-friendly articles written about Beverley the Belly Dancer and her ilk, usually celebrating how they had improved and ending with the contact details of a modelling agency...

I can see why journalists and even first-person accounts emphasise how active and positive their subject was before getting ME, in order to contrast it with how inactive they are now. I've done it myself when writing about how super fit and active I was before ME. But an unfortunate side-effect...

Says it all really.

Ha! Excuse me wittering on to myself on this thread, but I'm proud to say I've just discovered that I called it 100% correctly. I just clicked on the link in the OP to look at the paper, and skimming over it I found this: The phrase "medical gaze" is straight out of Foucault, and in this paper...

I can tell just by the language used that whoever wrote this has been influenced directly or indirectly (by which I mean taught the ideas without knowing where they came from) by Michel Foucault's idea of science as a tool of power to oppress. This random youtube video I just found gives a rough...

From the first sentence I knew exactly where this was coming from. And the following: Confirmed it. I've only recently come to learn how "anti-science" the ideologies rooted in post modernism are. Science is only one type of knowledge production, which historically has been wrongly privileged...

I learnt when my kids were very small, that when everything went quiet it usually meant they were up to something.

I'll be awaiting developments before deciding whether to get my flags out on 20th October.

Do you mind? Imagining what those two sound like laughing together is quite unsettling.

Superhero with ME? What a strange concept.