I don't accept that sitting on the fence which is IMO a generous interpretation of the article, is fair for us. It allows people a get-out-of-jail card if they want to continue to believe we're the whingy troublemakers of ill-dom and that the establishment is doing its best with a problem (or people) which is just really "too difficult".
Mention of the NICE JR is one-sided with no response canvassed, ditto Santhouse's quotes. The WPI test is mentioned but curiously, not the IC's kneejerk response test fiasco; I guess that didn't show up in Boseley's quick Googling or maybe she had the "save State embarrassment" filter turned on. No other biomedical evidence gets a mention, leaving the dangerous fallacy of ME the "mystery illness", unchallenged.
Lynne Gilderdale's case is described as "extraordinary", in other words, it's highlighted because it's supposedly an exception to the rule and not in any way representative of the abuse and neglect going on. The CEO of astroturf AfME opines school absenteeism and describes us as "washed out". Whitewashed out, more like.
Most of the negative language used is directed against patients. The word "radicalised" is nowadays most often used in connection with Islamic terrorism, so the psych school scores again with activism misleadingly associated with violent extremism, with a cowardly lack of specificity. Boseley condemns the whole field and entire internet presence of patients as "inflammatory" and too "traumatised" to attract the interest of researchers yet this sort of sensationalism has only ever attracted more and more psychobabblers and quacks, seemingly eager to wag a finger (but we mustn't wag one back and be good little sheep). The fact of the matter is that the field is grossly non-level, you can't use science by itself to solve a political problem, and we would take to the streets like any other civil rights groups if we weren't so damned sick.
So if this were any other hard done by, acutely vulnerable minority, would this "sometimes they ask for it" and "it's all too difficult" subtext be acceptable?