-- Here is the honorable Bob, who still doesn't say what qualifies him: --
we need to be very clear about what we are talking about... we can't just tell someone they are wrong when they have experienced a personal recovery... and we can't just say, as our argument, that ME is not a psychological illness... we need to clearly explain all our worries and why we have those worries.
If LP works for an individual then there's no point us getting personal about it.
Arguing that ME is not a psychological illness, or that an individual wasn't really ill, are not helpful arguments to someone who was previously really ill, but who is now experiencing a recovery thanks to the Lightning Process.
Please be clear that I'm not saying that we haven't made intelligent arguments... we have made exceptionally intelligent criticisms...
I can't answer you personally without being personal, just as you avoided personally now repeatedly to show what makes you so qualified to judge LP or psychology.
People who are telling other people they should not criticize people are just trolling or very dumb. Any criticism of an argument is also a criticism of a person making it, albeit indirectly.
What you seem to want is (1) safety from all personal criticism or proof of your qualifications, followed by (2) quasi-rational argument to the effect one should see both sides now and (3) proceed "scientificically" as if you or the average person argueing this topic here is qualified to do so.
Well YOU aren't - if you are honest; Gerwyn and I ARE, and I find your arguments below contempt, personally speaking.
And can we now please, please, please hear what makes YOU so "exceptionally intelligent" and qualified scientifically, no less, to argue on this list that one should see both sides now as regards LP, and that YOU are the one who calls the shots as to who is "scientific" or what is "personal"?