I see that a correction has been issued.
Edit:
Weaksauce, "all sides" narrative replacing original comment.
Correction:
February 9th, 2019
An earlier version of this piece incorrectly described chronic fatigue syndrome as a psychosomatic disorder.
According to the Mayo Clinic, while the cause of the syndrome is unknown, there are several theories, ranging from viral infections to psychological stress. Some experts believe chronic fatigue syndrome might be triggered by a combination of factors.
FFS! why use Mayo Clinic as a wishy washy source when officially the WHO ICD, the DOH, the DWP, CDC etc etc list ME officially as a neurological disease.
They have also missed the point that the whole article relied on ME being a psychosomatic illness in order to justify the rest of the incorrect spurious claims in the article.
The only correction that should be issued is a full retraction of the article, its even more pointless now.
Its like saying in our previous article we incorrectly described Epilepsy being caused by demonic possession we built a whole paradigm of stupidity into the article.
Correction: according to some faith groups the true cause of Epilepsy is unknown there are many theories including it being a neurological disease or caused by demonic possession.
This is where the authors nativity is so apparent when she made the comparison to shaky hands before giving a speech.
Using the example of a friend with ME she claims to have who backed up her psychosomatic claim would be like finding a friend who claims that his Epilepsy is caused by demonic possession.
According to the Mayo Clinic, while the cause of the syndrome is unknown, there are several theories, ranging from viral infections to psychological stress.
I'm pretty sure there are "several theories" banded around about being gay or, jewish or brain size of different races etc, does it mean they stand up to scrutiny?
Surely the job of a journalist, be it a student or not, is to investigate such claims and present them with the so called evidence.
In a previous version of our article about Scotland declaring independence from Mexico we wrongly identified Scotland as being on the mainland americas and under the justification of the Mexican government.
However the rest of our article still stands to inform people about whether Scotland should declare its independence from Mexico.
I see this piece still stands in the article....
That is to say that one may present with seizures, paralysis, infection, pain, amongst many other things, yet there is no biological driver for these symptoms.
Infection is still a symptom and it also psychosomatic according to this article. Apart from that the rest of the statement is troubling as it is based on the
belief that "yet there is no biological driver for these symptoms".
The actual truth here is there may be no
known cause, an unidentified one or simply just an under investigated one or bad diagnosis.
Its clear the author did zero investigation into the subject matter of the article and has no understanding of journalism.
