I think it is necessary for me to respond to a concern expressed by a poster or two earlier in this thread. Of all the issues raised by The Observer exposé, doubts about TW's health claims were for most of us the most difficult, sensitive and troubling to even begin to consider.
Indeed why is it ok to discuss TW's health when this is what I always say in the OPs?:
Please be extremely cautious...around the understandable health speculations, especially where details are unclear or still emerging.
Firstly, neither MNHQ nor I are saying above that TW's health can't be discussed, rather we are asking posters to be careful about it. Secondly, it is of note that we added this advisory shortly after The Observer's initial exposé and these threads first began, which is exactly 5 weeks ago now. That is some time ago, the situation has moved on, there have been fifteen more reports from The Observer and many more elsewhere. Further details have emerged giving rise to both increased clarity and increased doubts, including about the claims made about TW's health.
An individual's health is one of the most private things about them. However Sally Walker, writing and being interviewed as Raynor Winn, has chosen to make TW's health a central theme of her three books and of her narrative on countless occasions. This has extended to agreeing to a major film and to wide publicity for the film. TW has openly contributed to this narrative and to the central theme around his health. Following the first exposé by The Observer, Sally and Tim Walker decided to release a rebuttal statement including three medical letters. Rather than putting doubts to rest, on close inspection the letters gave rise to more questions.
We are not raising questions about disabled and seriously ill people in general here. I have always made it clear that would not be in the spirit of these threads. It is important to me that this is a safe and welcoming place for all genuine posters, including disabled people and carers. It has been heartening to find widespread support from posters for that, in a world where there is all too often open and veiled hostility and discrimination towards disabled people.
We are talking about one individual here, TW, because very serious doubts have been raised by credible sources about what has been repeatedly and publicly claimed about his health, not least in comparison to what the medical letters say. On the one hand, and amongst many other assertions, we have SW's claims in interviews that TW had received a terminal diagnosis of CBD with two years to live, and TW's claim to Bill Cole that he had less than 3 months to live. On the other hand, again amongst many other factors, we have sight of three NHS consultant's letters which do not give a firm or terminal diagnosis at all, for example: 'it is clear he is affected very mildly', 'so atypical', 'extremely indolent'.
In the light of this and of the many other revelations from The Observer including about the embezzlement and veracity of the walks, homelessness and near-destitution, I think posters can be forgiven for doubting almost everything the Walker/Winns say. What makes me really angry however is the impact on sufferers of CBD, other degenerative neurological conditions and disabled people in general of the questionable health claims made and, essentially, of the miracle cure of long-distance strenuous walking and a poor diet being described. This for me is what now makes it in the public interest and therefore entirely reasonable to be properly discussed here. We all sincerely wish TW well here, as long as what is troubling him comes from a place of fact not fiction.
References:
‘Hope is extinguished’: CBD patients respond to Salt Path...
Moth Winn’s recovery was a ‘miracle’. CBD patients and th...
‘I felt I was being gaslit’ – the landlord who helped Ray...