A woman claims the stress of living without a pension due to changes in the state retirement age has left her covered in bloody sores.
Yoland Howden, 65, says her immune system is "blown to pieces" after finding herself in debt for the first time in her life - causing the sores to break out all over her body and face.
It follows a failed legal challenge by campaigners against the government over the decision to raise women's state pension age.
The retirement age for women rose from 60 to 65 - in line with men - in 1995 and will go up to 66 by 2020, and to 67 by 2028.
The result is that some women, born in the 1950s, who thought they would receive a state pension at 60 have had to wait for longer, causing financial hardship for many.
Campaigners claim the rise is unfair and have called for compensation to be paid to around 4 million women affected by the changes because they were not given enough time to make alternative plans.
Posting pictures of her bloodied body, Yoland tweeted: "So @BorisJohnson @jeremycorbyn @joswinson I am awoken because I am bleeding & my clothes are stuck to me. This is what Stress & worry have done to a 1950swomen & her body. In debt for the 1st time in my life after 5 yrs without my StatePension-hope you're proud of yourselves."
Yoland, from Staffordshire, added in an earlier tweet: "Today I have gone through debt support with stepchange .... first time in my life I've EVER been in debt. I'm so poorly too .... just look at the state of me, my immune system blown to pieces through stress. I don't care who knows any more. BackTo60."
Campaign group BackTo60 supported two women in a legal challenge against the Department of Work and Pensions in the High Court earlier this year, claiming that the rise in state pension age for women was unfair because it discriminated against those born in the 1950s.
Julie Delve, 61, and Karen Glynn, 63, claimed the government had given insufficient notice of the changes so women could not alter their retirement planning.
But judges rejected the challenge in a ruling earlier this month, saying that while they were "saddened" by the stories of hardship, it was not an issue for the courts and the changes had been approved by parliament.
In a summary of the High Court's decision, the judges said: "There was no direct discrimination on grounds of sex, because this legislation does not treat women less favourably than men in law. Rather it equalises a historic asymmetry between men and women and thereby corrects historic direct discrimination against men."
Earlier this week, Backto60 lodged an application for permission to appeal the High Court's ruling.
Following defeat at the High Court, it launched a crowdfunding campaign to raise £72,000 to cover both the legal action and further campaigning.
No date for the appeal hearing has been set.
