Anthony
Public profile
0 posts
1 comment
0 discussions
11 May 2026
I'm Anthony, a physicist specialising in fast neutron degradation of graphite lattice structures. It's not a field many people encounter, but unlike some professions, we tend to welcome open criticism and debate, especially when reactor safety is involved.
Posts
0No posts available yet.
Comments
1Anon Neurologist (AN):
1) why are you anonymous ? what are you hiding?
2) you say: "She has a classic textbook example of FND"
My wife had this too, a "classic textbook example of FND", a diagnosis from Glasgow neurology dept.
However, the many who have researched this topic may also conclude that: "classic textbook example of FND" can mean whatever the neurologist of the day wishes it to mean. So, what does it really mean?
Miranda nails it, spot on "Every doctor I see sees FND on my chart and simply does not bother investigating further".
That is what an FND diagnosis means to many: THE END OF THE LINE.
I am a scientist (not medical), all through education/profession it was drummed into me to seek, take in evidence and never close my mind.
The FND 'Rule In' addition to DSM-5, to me, was completely illogical, contrary to all my reasoning - and has had ramifications. I'm sure it's saved 'loads-of-money' for cash stricken health authorities, and I’m sure many have benefited, those unfortunate enough to never know WHY they were diagnosed with FND. But for the many miss-diagnosed, it's a nightmare.
My wife was told by a professor in Paisley RAH she had FND (and he wasn't a neurologist, so was he competent, one may ask? AN suggests he probably wasn't !) and that continued through into neurology at Glasgow QEUH. All testing stopped.
It was now cognitive therapy, put your left leg in, your left leg out, shake it….. and all that, antics resurrected from the Victorian era by a famous FND profit in Edinburgh.
She was Stone-walled.
As scientists, finding out WHY she had FND symptoms was paramount. Neurology ignored all evidence, even evidence in her medical records; the gaslighting began.
With dark field microscopy, in a new EU accredited lab (an acceptable technic in common use for other ailments), we saw, for the first time, WHY she had FND symptoms. Babesia and Bartonella in her red blood cells and Borellia fragments (this was post treatment; by-the-way not FND treatment, in case you thought that FND treatment had done anything).
Yes, she had FND, a "classic textbook example of FND" but unless WE had initiated further investigations/tests to find out WHY she had FND, my wife would still be a vegetable.
Come on neurology, wake up, we ALL make mistakes and nothing’s perfect. FND being the end of the line is simply wrong for a lot of people, and a lot of people are working this out.
All I see from AN's writing is the same arrogance as in the gospels according to fndhope.org.uk
(In case this posts as 'anonymous', I am not, I am a physicist specialising in fast neutron degradation of graphite lattice structures, and my name is Anthony. I don't expect many to understand my specialism but, unlike neurologists, I do not get upset when there is open critique about my profession, reactor safety).
Discussions started
0No discussions started yet.