Its an article about «The young people (who soon shall take over the world), but all we are talking about is their fragile psychic health». It is of course great that the girl presented with CFS got better.
The journalist writes CFS «also known as ME». First the mandatory mistake «CFS» is ME and lot of different things are clumped together. But why in the first place have this anecdote in this kind of article?
There are a couple of really bad things, when the girl described that she kind of could lay at home and find some kind of joy in the diagnosis? What kind of statement is that, and it really makes you wonder about the diagnosis she was given? We know all about the many misdiagnosis. The very troublesome part is some statements that she is convinced that the mental job was what got her out of bed again. Well. of course that part is important, but for many it has limits. Many patients do exactly this job, but maybe improves just a little, nothing or maybe deteriorate. The problem with this kind of statement, is that you lose all the complex factors that impact long-run prognosis. What an average reader without necessary knowledge is left with, is probably that recovery/getting better «is only up to the person». If it only was that simple. She also makes some weird statements that some diagnosis (probably also ME?) been a kind of apology for not giving it all, which you have to. You have to work. It is not about pleasing the world before taking a break, but it gets wrong when life is more spare-time than work»??
Ouch. Good the girl got better, but this is another bad one, and not representative for ME-patients.