Resume drafts Unsaved story and dashboard drafts
Comment drafts Unsaved comment drafts
FndNope profile picture

FndNope

Public profile
Moderator
1 post 23 comments 6 discussions 30 Jul 2026
Challenging the FND philosophy seeking truth beyond misdiagnosis. Advocating for real answers, thorough investigation, and respect in neurological care.
Website X
PSP initially diagnosed as FND
Posts
1
Filtered by tag
Organic Clues
A tag exploring clinical findings, objective abnormalities, and alternative disease processes that may point toward biological causes or warrant further investigation in cases labelled as FND.
The Falsification Problem: FND Resolved After CSF Leak Repair
3 weeks ago

A patient diagnosed with FND recovered completely after surgical repair of a CSF leak. Why did the diagnosis remain? This article explores what the case reveals about comorbidity, diagnostic reasoning, and the falsification problem in FND.

Comments
23
Replied to FND's Flawed Analogy: When 'Software' Problems can Hide Undetected Hardware Damage · 15 Mar 2026
Just a reminder for the clinician in the comment section: FND requires positive rule-in signs. Some context about Christoff's wife: even though Hoover’s sign is mentioned here, functional rule-in signs were never found, and the FND diagnosis was made purely because a diagnostic impasse was reached. (the dynamic spinal cord compression part is purely hypothetical, not sure if you make use of dynamic MRI's in your practice at all?) In the South African context, the term “biokinetical” as per biokineticist reports, refers to genuine mechanical movements that consistently and repeatedly produce facial asymmetry. These movements have been evident (in her case) for the past 30 years, long before the onset of any neurological symptoms.

Replied to FND's Flawed Analogy: When 'Software' Problems can Hide Undetected Hardware Damage · 15 Mar 2026
I think everyone understands that we are dealing with analogies here, and the post itself even pre-empts the “it is just an analogy” criticism. However, the discussion here involves hypotheticals, and it does not take much imagination to see that the analogy can also be extended from a sceptical perspective. It is well known and openly discussed by neurologists such as Jon Stone that organic conditions can sometimes mimic functional presentations. Because of that, considerable care is required when applying a diagnosis like this. My greater concern, however, is the suggestion from Anonymous that only neurologists should be allowed to discuss issues like this. If dialogue is discouraged in that way, the topic risks becoming a sacred cow rather than something that can be openly examined. This also avoids the elephant in the room. Yes, Functional Neurological Disorder is accepted within mainstream medicine and used as a clinical diagnosis. But the field itself does not hide the fact that the underlying explanatory framework is still evolving and remains partly hypothetical. In that sense, we are inevitably dealing with models and abstractions rather than a fully settled mechanism.

Replied to Personal Account of Misdiagnosed Neurological Condition by a Medical Student · 05 Mar 2026
The part that scares me, is that by the logic of strict FND proponents (in this thread), early or atypical ALS could be dismissed as FND in some cases—especially if initial presentations are fluctuating, involve weakness/speech/swallowing issues without clear upper/lower motor neuron signs on exam, or if routine MRIs/early EMGs are normal or nonspecific.

Discussions started
6
Started Denying medicine on 21 Jul 2026

Researchers say medicine doesnt work for FND but thats pure conjecture when no one fully knows what causes these symptoms or how the brain is glitching. We cant keep denying people treatments that might help just because of an unproven hypothesis. If it works for someone its usually just treating their claimed comorbidities like pain mood or sleep not the core FND itself. Stop gatekeeping based on theories. Personal results matter more than the current official line.



Started Has FND Advocacy Lost Its Soul? on 11 Jul 2026

Whenever I read an FND advocacy page, I like to go back in time using the Internet Archive to see how the narrative has evolved. Comparing older versions with current ones often reveals not just changes in wording, but shifts in priorities and values.


  1. Original page: http://web.archive.org/web/20160904034822/https://www.fndaction.org.uk/diagnosis/
  2. Current page: https://www.fndaction.org.uk/diagnosis/


The 2016 page had soul. It was written by patients, for patients. It openly acknowledged the harm people experienced: being made to feel their symptoms were "their fault," being dismissed, left without support, and let down by inconsistent care. It felt urgent, validating, and unapologetically activist.


The current page feels sanitized and clinician focused. It reads as though it was edited by neurologists concerned about sounding too speculative or unscientific. The raw expression of patient suffering is gone. The frustration with poor care is gone. In its place are lengthy discussions of diagnostic pitfalls, positive signs, research priorities, and carefully worded disclaimers. It is all very proper, but it also feels cold and defensive.


Rather than centering the needs of people living with FND, the page seems more concerned with protecting the reputation of the diagnosis. The charity appears to have exchanged genuine patient advocacy for mainstream medical respectability, and in doing so, lost much of its original purpose and emotional impact.


The end result is a page that may be more technically accurate, but is significantly less human. It serves clinicians and the diagnosis better than it serves the patients who are suffering.


Started Site Improvement Ideas & Feature Requests on 02 Jul 2026

Hey everyone

This site is very new and evolving quickly.

What features, enhancements, or changes would you like to see?

Reply under this post with your ideas!

All suggestions welcome - let's build this together!


Started Reporting Bugs on 02 Jul 2026

Hey everyone

This site is very new and evolving quickly.

If you spot any bugs (broken links, formatting issues, mobile glitches, comment problems, etc.),

please reply under this post.

Include:

  1. Device + browser
  2. What happened
  3. Screenshot if possible


Thanks for helping improve it!


Started Weirdest Things People Blame on FND on 23 Jun 2026
6 replies

This is the place to share the craziest "my FND did this" claims you’ve seen, hair loss, sudden allergies, psychic powers, eyes changing color, poltergeist activity, speaking unknown languages, etc.

Drop the most ridiculous ones below!


Started Other skeptical sources on 19 Jun 2026
5 replies

When we initially investigated FND, we were surprised to find almost no official skepticism.


Dr. David Tuller, through his “Trial By Error” series on virology.ws (https://virology.ws/tag/fnd/)He has challenged inflated prevalence claims, the reliability of diagnostic signs, and aspects of FND’s psychological framing.


Are there any other skeptical sources out there?


Back to all posts
Tags
Diagnostic Dogma 4
Hypothesis 3
Misdiagnosis 3
Clinical case 2
Diagnostic Overshadowing 2
In the news 2
Presentation 2
Bayesian brain model 1
Clinical Reasoning 1
Diagnostic History 1
Differential 1
Organic Clues 1
Rule-In Signs 1