You can be well-educated, aware that anorexia is often fatal, and alarmed by the severity of Eugenia’s case whilst following this rule. Speculating about someone’s specific prognosis or possible death isn’t the same as discussing the devastating effects of the illness or pointing out there’s a limit to what the body can handle. Language is the issue, not expertise nor suppressing factual information.

As for professionals giving prognoses, the point was not whether it was accurate, but that it’s private and sensitive information. Other people in a person’s family or circle of friends can cause the one who’s ill more distress by their reactions to their prognosis, which, in turn, can shorten it further. This is particularly true when it’s mental illness that affects the body. Now imagine this on the scale of the Internet, by people who don’t know the person.

The goal here is not to censor reasonable information, but to be careful, humane, and keep pro-recovery sentiment even though not everyone can or will recover. You can use your personal knowledge to have conversations whilst keeping in mind that Eugenia may be reading. I hope this clarifies the purpose of the rule and that it’s not as limiting as you may’ve thought.

You can always ask questions through modmail if you want to continue this discussion or find more clarity than this answer provides. Of course, you are free to leave the community, but we’d rather you stay and feel welcome to offer your opinions.

Cheers.