 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | The contents of the Functional weakness page were merged into Functional symptom on 14 February 2019. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
I
editI have updated this small page which did not present a typical consensus view about this topic. Whilst some conditions have moved from functional to 'structural'. most have not. This is a very big subject and this page should I think just act as a brief signpost for the topic rather than be a large article in itselfBoris69 (talk) 11:45, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Clarity of second sentence
editI tried to understand what this sentence was trying to say... but have failed!
“Functional symptoms are increasingly viewed within a framework in which psychological, physiological and biological factors should be considered to be relevant.”
I think it’s saying that functional symptoms are increasingly being taken seriously, and that treatment and diagnosis of functional symptoms take account of psychological, physiological and biological factors.
Maybe. I’m not really sure! Fredsherbet (talk) 22:04, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Bias
editThis article is biased and one-sided. It is also anti-scientific explanation of a scientific concept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.91.135.79 (talk) 09:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- I've been a surgeon for 40 years and I think it's rather well balanced. Many research articles that are publicly available support it's message and information. Plopfz (talk) 13:45, 28 September 2024 (UTC)