Calling all ESA Appeals Experts! Failed medical

Garry_Anderson

healy wrote: »

1. Your theory of targets has been disproved. Targets are not a fact, they are merely your OPINION which is not a FACT.

2. You have still failed to provide any proof of targets, again it is your OPINION not a FACT.

You should take some notice of your own signature.

1&2. Err.. sorry - these targets are a fact e.g.

A million off Incapacity Benefit: how achievable is Labour's target?

Steve Fothergill and Ian Wilson - Sheffield Hallam University

Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research, Sheffield Hallam University, City Campus, Sheffield S1 1WB, UK

Since 1997, welfare reform has been a defining feature of the UK's Labour government. This article assesses the extent to which the new aspiration to reduce the number of incapacity benefit claimants by one million within 10 years is deliverable.

http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/bem029v1

healy

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

1&2. Err.. sorry - these targets are a fact e.g.

A million off Incapacity Benefit: how achievable is Labour's target?

Steve Fothergill and Ian Wilson - Sheffield Hallam University

Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research, Sheffield Hallam University, City Campus, Sheffield S1 1WB, UK

Since 1997, welfare reform has been a defining feature of the UK's Labour government. This article assesses the extent to which the new aspiration to reduce the number of incapacity benefit claimants by one million within 10 years is deliverable.

http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/bem029v1

No targets are not a fact and it does not matter how many times you repeat the same thing it will not make them a fact.

Garry_Anderson

healy wrote: »

No targets are not a fact and it does not matter how many times you repeat the same thing it will not make them a fact.

You obviously have not got a clue what you are talking about.

The Government has set itself the ambitious aim of helping 1 million people off incapacity benefits.

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/noonewrittenoffer-impactassesment.pdf

alwaysonthego_2

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

You obviously have not got a clue what you are talking about.

Well it certainly looks like targets to me :rolleyes:

Can I ask you a serious question Garry, I have looked at your website, what on diddling earth are stomach juices in medical terms?

healy

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

You obviously have not got a clue what you are talking about.

I do know what I am taking about, it is clear to me and others that you have no idea about this subject.

dmg24

alwaysonthego wrote: »

Well it certainly looks like targets to me :rolleyes:

Can I ask you a serious question Garry, I have looked at your website, what on diddling earth are stomach juices in medical terms?

I don't think he does serious questions. He didn't answer mine.

alwaysonthego_2

dmg24 wrote: »

I don't think he does serious questions. He didn't answer mine.

Ha ha no he doesn't!

I am very concerned that a professional site such as Garry's is using very basic medical terms to discuss such a serious subject

Garry_Anderson

I couldn't tell you Always - not being medical expert - but the tubes were large and left me with what looks like three stab wounds.

With the large scars on my front, side and back - with what looks like a lump taken out - it looks like Jaws got me

healy

dmg24 wrote: »

I don't think he does serious questions. He didn't answer mine.

I dont think he does questions at all, he does not need to, everything he says is fact and everything everyone else says is fiction!

Garry_Anderson

What "professional site" - it was done in bits and pieces - now I know you were taking the !!!!.