Why is the MS Society AND its members always so negative
I keep wonering and I keep asking ...
Why is the MS Society AND its members always so negative? I almost wonder whether some there would be really disappointed if MS was shown to be curable.
Thirty years ago there was only one health issue in the news (and all the time too): AIDS! Thirty years ago AIDS was thought to be incurable; why? Because it was. Today, after much sensible research and enormous collabiration, we hear of people walking away from HIV infection. Yeah, science has done a great job.
MS seems to be a different matter. They have been banging away at that for a great Many decades. Dr Thibault's suggestion that, having gone down the wrong road, their is too much face to be lost by admitting that they were wrong, sounds so plausable but it is such a pitty that it's right.
Can anyone offer up an explanation as to why The (British) MS Society seems just so useless. I already realise that they are in the image of much of the membership.