|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: A miracle by any other name...?
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
I have just finished reading a wonderful, unputdownable book by the neurophysiologist Doctor Suzanne O'Sullivan. Entitled "It's all in your head"", it's a clear, fascinating succinct over view of the current understanding (and misunderstanding) of psychosomatic disorders such as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and dissociative seizures.
It has prompted two questions in my mind:
1. Given the prevalence of psychosomatic illnesses both now and in the past, is it unreasonable to suppose that at least some of the
people who approached Jesus (and other biblical healers) were probably suffering from somatic disorders with no physical origin - however painful or long-term?
2. If this is a reasonable conjecture, is there any good reason why we should not regard the intuitive recognition and successful treatment of such disorders, without the benefit of modern diagnostic aids, as miraculous?
I'd post a link to the book but I'm coming to the end of a very limited library session. I do hope some of you will take a look at the opening pages of te book.
[ 25. August 2015, 15:42: Message edited by: pimple ]
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
No, I think it's that we don't know as much as we think we do and psychosomatic illnesses are an explanation for something we don't really understand.
There is an awful lot of evidence that CFS/ME is not a psychosomatic illness. The number of psychiatrists who have promoted the view of CFS/ME being a somatic disorder has historically meant that the research has disproportionately been into somatic causes, rather than physical, but as more and more physical research is done, the meta-studies are showing more physical issues and changing that view.
(I have had a friend die of what was diagnosed as CFS/ME. She had a mitochondrial disorder, inherited by her son, which eventually killed her at 40. Another friend diagnosed with CFS/ME has finally been diagnosed as having pernicious anaemia, another with a connective tissue disorder - a slightly milder form of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome.)
Too many misunderstood illnesses have historically been described as psychosomatic, multiple sclerosis, stomach ulcers and lots of female illnesses.
That is not to say that there are not links between stress and symptoms, but not all symptoms are just caused by stress and somatic problems.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
The OP reminds me of the view of Leslie Whetherhead in his book Religion Psychology and Spiritual Healing. In it he claims regular healings at his healing services, and maybe because he is well-known as a bit of a skeptic (he did write The Christian Agnostic) I'm rather inclined to believe him.
However, he believed that the healings were limited to psycho-somatic disorders, which he believed the Church had a mission to heal, since they were connected with spiritual trauma of whatever sort, which is within the scope of the Church's ministry.
He didn't deny what would more generally be called miraculous healing, though he never thought he would be a vehicle for it.
I am attracted to his view, but even so, I see no point is removing all distinctions between these and what may more normally be viewed as miraculous healings. I believe that the Lourdes evaluation process excludes psycho-somatic illness as candidates for miracles, although I'm sure they would want to see them. I can see sense in this.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
Of course a lot of this depends on how you define a "miracle". Is it a physically impossible (or very highly improbable) occurrence? Or is it simply a direct experience of the divine? Noted theologian Jules Winnfield discusses this in his well-known "Luncheon Dialogue".
quote:
Jules: Man, I just been sitting here thinking.
Vincent: About what?
Jules: About the miracle we just witnessed.
Vincent: The miracle you witnessed. I witnessed a freak occurrence.
Jules: What is a miracle, Vincent?
Vincent: An act of God.
Jules: And what's an act of God?
Vincent: When God makes the impossible possible. But this morning, I don't think it qualifies.
Jules: Hey, Vincent, don't you see? That shit don't matter. You're judging this shit the wrong way. I mean, it could be that God stopped the bullets, or He changed Coke to Pepsi, He found my fucking car keys. You don't judge shit like this based on merit. Now, whether or not what we experienced was an "according to Hoyle" miracle is insignificant. What is significant is that I felt the touch of God. God got involved.
Vincent: But why?
Jules: Well, that's what's fucking with me. I don't know why, but I can't go back to sleep.
Vincent Vega is clearly looking for something more like the parting of the Red Sea when he thinks of miracles. Jules Winnfield regards the felt presence of God to be miraculous, even if the event itself could be explained as "a freak occurrence".
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Either would do: either way, something that NEVER, EVER happens, but which costs an obscene amount of opportunity while we try and conjure it up and delude ourselves that we have or that we need to pray, study, sing more, longer, harder, instead of doing anything real about the lack of the Kingdom.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Of course a lot of this depends on how you define a "miracle". Is it a physically impossible (or very highly improbable) occurrence?
...
<snip>
...
Vincent Vega is clearly looking for something more like the parting of the Red Sea when he thinks of miracles. Jules Winnfield regards the felt presence of God to be miraculous, even if the event itself could be explained as "a freak occurrence".
There's a strong post-enlightenment tendency to think of “miracle” as a break in the rules of Nature and science. Within that way of thinking, God says, “I'm going to do something about this”, and interferes from outside Nature in a way that is not explainable within existing models.
The Bible sees it differently. The words often translated as “miracle” are more precisely translated as “sign”, “something unexpected” “display of authority”. The biblical worldview is of Nature realigning itself with God's purposes. As such, they are a natural process, occurring within the rules, pointing us towards a better understanding of reality- involving God.
So to say that a miracle is an impossible event that God made happen won't do. Actually, there's a lot to be said for avoiding the term 'miracle'.
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I don't see anything natural in the miracles of Christ. And anything miraculous in the nature of Christians.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
I don't see anything natural in the miracles of Christ.
I think you're probably looking in the post enlightenment box. Try the pre-enlightenment one, which might have been relabelled post-post-enlightenment box.
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Gotcha. A tad un-nuanced me.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sarah G:
The Bible sees it differently. The words often translated as “miracle” are more precisely translated as “sign”, “something unexpected” “display of authority”. The biblical worldview is of Nature realigning itself with God's purposes. As such, they are a natural process, occurring within the rules, pointing us towards a better understanding of reality- involving God.
Take, for example, this often overlooked Biblical miracle:
quote:
“For,” said Peter, “it is written in the Book of Psalms:
quote:
‘May his place be deserted;
let there be no one to dwell in it,’
and,
quote:
‘May another take his place of leadership.’
Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
In the "Vincent Vega" understanding, nothing miraculous is going on here. Random probability is at work and one of the two candidates will be selected by the end of the process. To the surviving Apostles, who seem to be operating under a "Jules Winnfield" understanding of the miraculous, the hand of God is present in this drawing of lots where their deity "Show[s] [them] which of these two you have chosen to take over this apostolic ministry".
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
A good illustration of why I suggest avoiding using the word “miracle”. Another one would be the retreat from Dunkirk. Sure people were praying, and what they were praying for, although rather improbable, was given to them; but could it really be termed a miracle?
Better to say that it was God's will that Matthias was chosen/most soldiers got away. However things can happen that would cause a reasonable person to conclude that the worldview with best explanatory power is a Christian one. (Mileages vary on whether they do.)
Just avoid the term “miracle”, with all its baggage, in discussing them.
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
One can even have doubts about whether Matthias' choosing was God's will at all. This did precede the coming of the Holy Spirit in power.
And I really don't see how it is either a miracle or a sign in the Johannine sense. It seems to me a pretty ordinary parallel to the kind of thing my congregation does when they call a new pastor--and goodness knows there's nothing obviously miraculous about that (unless you want to count the fact that we've made budget sufficiently to fund a pastor).
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
One can even have doubts about whether Matthias' choosing was God's will at all. This did precede the coming of the Holy Spirit in power.
And I really don't see how it is either a miracle or a sign in the Johannine sense.
And yet Acts is written in such a way as to portray this selection as "an act of God", to borrow Vincent Vega's term.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
No, I think it's that we don't know as much as we think we do and psychosomatic illnesses are an explanation for something we don't really understand.
There is an awful lot of evidence that CFS/ME is not a psychosomatic illness. The number of psychiatrists who have promoted the view of CFS/ME being a somatic disorder has historically meant that the research has disproportionately been into somatic causes, rather than physical, but as more and more physical research is done, the meta-studies are showing more physical issues and changing that view.
(I have had a friend die of what was diagnosed as CFS/ME. She had a mitochondrial disorder, inherited by her son, which eventually killed her at 40. Another friend diagnosed with CFS/ME has finally been diagnosed as having pernicious anaemia, another with a connective tissue disorder - a slightly milder form of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome.)
Too many misunderstood illnesses have historically been described as psychosomatic, multiple sclerosis, stomach ulcers and lots of female illnesses.
That is not to say that there are not links between stress and symptoms, but not all symptoms are just caused by stress and somatic problems.
Thank you for the link. I take your point that psychosomatic illnesses are imperfectly understood. Doctor O'Sullivan would, I think, agree with you. Like you, she uses anecdotal evidence to explain her views. But her chief concern seems to be not with the vaguer forms of unexplained illness, but with conditions she has been able to understand fairly well - to the extent that, having made well-tried and tested diagnostic techniques to rule out the self-diagnoses of some of her patients, she has refused to go along with the appalling tradition of simply dumping them. She will only recommend that a psychiatrist be consulted when she has very reasonable grounds for thinking this will lead to a positive outcome for the patient.
The corollary to this is that she is very concerned that the denial of a clearly recognised somatic illness can lead to a life-time of pain and misery for the patient. She doesn't claim to get it right every time - but I'm convinced that others get it wrong a bloody sight more often.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
The question of divine healing of psychosomatic illness has always interested me in relation to the account of Jesus healing the woman with the issue of blood.
Uterine haemorrhages frequently (not always) have a psychosomatic cause. Many women who suffer from them have undergone some kind of severe psychological trauma, which turns up in the body when it goes unaddressed. That said, it does become physically debilitating because the blood loss can lead to severe anaemia over time.
I wonder about this in relation to this woman who had “spent all she had on doctors, but rather grew worse”. If her haemorrhaging has a psychosomatic cause, it would be normal for the doctors to be unable to do anything about it with physical treatments. Even today, some women suffering haemorrhages require the assistance of a psychiatrist (i.e. to deal with underlying trauma) rather than surgery or medication or the like.
Anyway, this woman touches Jesus and it makes her better. I know this is all speculation on my part, but I am intrigued by the implications for this woman who presumably is made “whole” in a very broad sense.
(I have never heard this point mentioned in a sermon which I suspect is because all the people I have ever heard preaching on this story were men.)
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
Oops! I think my subjective emotional knee-jerk was showing in my last post, Curiosity. Please forgive me. I thought I'd better check my facts before responding. O'Sullivan deals fairly extensively with the subject of ME/CFS in pages 218-243 of her book. And you'd find her far more sympathetic to your take than I gave her credit for. I'd just finished reading the whole book in a couple of sittings and I should have let things brew awhile. It was unhelpful to include ME/CFS in the OP.
That said, my general point seems to have found a happier (?) response from La Vie en Rouge. I had that particular miracle very much in mind, but, being a bloke, was very chary of raising it.
There are others. Impossible from this distance in time to sort the sheep from the goats - or the swine, but it does seem that in several instances Jesus first ascertained what the sufferer truly wanted - and that might have been at odds with what society at large, or the sufferer's parents, or the priests, thought the victim deserved.
Which is why "Your sins are forgiven you!" is so scandalous. No good saying "You're not to blame for your illness" when the world has been telling him/her all their life that they jolly well are. Jesus was nothing if not pragmatic, as well as a godly maverick.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Re psychosomatic.
I happen to work in the area. The term is actually rather unhelpful. It affirms the divisions between psychological, physical and psychosocial in ways that may harm individuals, coping, function and managing.
We're learning a lot from the transfer of information regarding PTSD these days, and how thought processes, particularly stress responses, produce activity in some brain structures which then release hormones which affect the body and then return to affect thought processes. The interaction is very complex, such that it might be just as reasonable to reverse the term to Somatopsych, equally unhelpfully.
The terms CFS and ME are not in currency much in North America for at least the last decade outside of primary medical contexts. There is a tendency to move away from these labels and to not try to capture all of the people with some number of the full set of possible symptoms with a catch-all syndromal diagnosis.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Getting people to change their thinking - how often have any of us tried, with what percentage success?
"Your faith has made you well."
Perhaps the biggest problem with health is the way we - especially the post "Enlightenment" - see it as a purely physical problem. Diabetes? Insulin. Depression? Serotonin. Stubborn Overweight? Calories. Clogged arteries? Cholesterol. Influenza? Germs. Sickle cell? Genetics.
Body as physical machine that starts out with some level of imperfection and deteriorates from there.
What if that model is wrong? What if every one of those 6 examples is wrong? What if in focusing exclusively on the physical we are missing the big picture? The fuller more accurate reality from God's viewpoint may be "your faith is what makes you sick or well, not genes, germs, hormones or calories." And also "When your faith is weak or mis-focused, the faith of others can carry you to health": raising from the dead, for example.
There are some hospitals in China that use no medicines. Here's a 14 minute video showing some Chinese health providers healing a three inch bladder cancer in a few minutes using a thought based practice called Zhineng Qigong. Note, it is the healers, not the one who is sick, that provides the thought pattern that heals the cancer. (Some of you will reject the entire video at the first sentence; your choice.)
Westerners strongly tend to dismiss "psychosomatic" healing as not real illness and therefore not real healing. Unexpected "impossible" healings get dismissed as "spontaneous remission" as if that's something to shrug off as of no interest, instead of something to investigate and try to discover how to get it to happen more often.
I wish we were looking for ways to intentionally trigger "placebo effect" more often and for more serious diseases, and looking into ways to intentionally change thought patterns (which strongly affect hormone release and other physical bodily processes) into health promoting instead of health diminishing habits. And exploring the sometimes amazing healings achieved by shamans and aboriginal healers and China's few medicineless hospitals.
I have seen amazing things at (low key, mainstream) healing conferences. People who are healed of real pain and real disability don't care what name you put on the healing, change of thinking, faith, God's direct intervention - they are healed! Let's find ways to do more healing and avoid fatalistic negatives ("your problem is incurable") and stop ignoring most of beingness to focus on solely physical as if health is purely a physical effect of physical treatment.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091
|
Posted
This story which is very well documented illustrates the power of belief. I believe it was reported in the BMJ (British Medical Journal). I first came across it in Ian Wilson's 'Jesus the Evidence'.
http://www.radiolab.org/story/299045-hypnotist-and-warts/
I think the placebo effect is studied more now due to its relevance to double blind random trials, as well as its ability to explain things like homeopathy. The placebo effect can be so powerful as to make some pharmaceutical companies 'placebo wash' in their studies - that is have more people than are needed in their trials and then exclude those who showed the best response to the placebo. This artificially increases the difference between the placebo and the trial drug - both making the drug look more effective, and the placebo less.
While a bit too sugary for me in places (pun intended), Dr Lissa Rankin's 'Mind over Medicine' is very interesting.
Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Lets be honest about psycho-somatic illness. Most illness is this. Psycho-somatic illness has psychological as well as physical parts to it. In some cases, the psycho will lead, in others somatic. A cold is psycho-somatic because one of the symptoms is often lowered mood. Did you know that painkillers can relieve depression.
The problem is that the somatic part is real, they are not pretend symptoms. While sorting out the psychological component may relieve the physical symptoms, it does not automatically cure the physical aspects. If I cannot eat for a prolonged time, because of psycho-somatic illness, I will still be underweight when the psychological aspects are sorted.
This is important. Take the paralyzed man, he might have been psychosomatic, let us accept he was. That does not explain his healing. If someone had been unable to walk for as long as he had then the muscles in his legs would have deteriorated to a point where he physically could not walk.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
There is no choice Belle Ringer. There is only disposition. That cannot be changed. Which is part of mine. If God wants me to believe things which are untrue, unbelievable, unnecessary, unhelpful for me as necessary and helpful He must do something about it. Which He won't. He can't. Although He has, but not in that direction, not in that way.
God bless you in your disposition. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
The question of divine healing of psychosomatic illness has always interested me in relation to the account of Jesus healing the woman with the issue of blood.
Uterine haemorrhages frequently (not always) have a psychosomatic cause. Many women who suffer from them have undergone some kind of severe psychological trauma, which turns up in the body when it goes unaddressed. That said, it does become physically debilitating because the blood loss can lead to severe anaemia over time.
<snip>
(I have never heard this point mentioned in a sermon which I suspect is because all the people I have ever heard preaching on this story were men.)
I suspect that you haven't heard this solution preached as if you search for intrauterine haemorrhage the causes are things like miscarriage, fibroids, cancer (cervical, ovarian and uterine), sexual abuse, kidney and liver disease, (ignoring things that wouldn't have been around in the 1st century like infections from the coil contraceptive device).
I blame Henry Maudsley and his attitudes to women, as demonstrated by this quotation from Sex in Mind and Education. We are still dealing with lots of hysteria based stuff.
quote:
The real meaning of the physiological changes which constitute puberty is, that the woman is thereby fitted to conceive and bear children, and undergoes the bodily and mental changes that are connected with the development of the reproductive system. At each recurring period there are all the preparations for conception, and nothing is more necessary to the preservation of female health than that these changes should take place regularly and completely. It is true that many of them are destined to be fruitless so far as their essential purpose is concerned, but it would be a great mistake to suppose that on that account they might be omitted or accomplished incompletely, without harm to the general health.
There is a whole lot of misinformation around about women's health still. For example, it is not normal for women's periods to get heavier before the menopause, as most people will tell you; menstruation generally gets lighter. Heavier menstruation may be a sign of fibroids, which if left too long means the only treatment is a hysterectomy or leaving the woman with extreme anaemia until the menopause.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Well, there's also PCOS, which is rather common, and I certainly gained the impression from my GYN that hormones were to blame in um, a personal experience. And if he was right (why wouldn't he be?) then you could never really distinguish between psych and hormonal causes of hemorrhage, as hormones simultaneously affect both mood and bleeding--besides being invisible to anyone without a laboratory handy.
I rather suspect those who said "psych issues cause hemorrhage" were speaking in the days before hormones were known to be a Thing.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Sorry, I should have included PCOS too, as I have had friends with that one. My point about women's illnesses continuing to be considered as hysterical* or somatic stands.
* For those who don't know, hysterical comes from the Greek for womb and early medical theories that the womb moved around the woman's body when not lodged with pregnancy or lubricated with intercourse.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
A very readable book from a few decades ago is Persuasion ans Healing by the rather wonderful late Jerome Frank. I make all my students read it.
quote:
This popular study of "psychological healing"treats topics ranging from religious revivalism and magical healing to contemporary psychotherapies, from the role of the shaman in nonindustrialized societies to the traditional mental hospital
It can be had for about $6 or £3 including shipping if you're okay with used: Abebooks.
If you'd prefer a novel, The Cunning Man by Robertson Davies is about a physician living beside an Anglican Church, who specializes in psycho-physical illness which can be had for less than $5 used.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
A very readable book from a few decades ago is Persuasion ans Healing by the rather wonderful late Jerome Frank. I make all my students read it.
quote:
This popular study of "psychological healing"treats topics ranging from religious revivalism and magical healing to contemporary psychotherapies, from the role of the shaman in nonindustrialized societies to the traditional mental hospital
It can be had for about $6 or £3 including shipping if you're okay with used: Abebooks.
If you'd prefer a novel, The Cunning Man by Robertson Davies is about a physician living beside an Anglican Church, who specializes in psycho-physical illness which can be had for less than $5 used.
This is very interesting and I'll try to find time to look it up. But the neurologist in the OP is dealing with the need to refer some of her patients to psychiatrists, not psychotherapists. The former, I believe, are more rigidly controlled, though they may well employ some of the techniques used by the latter.
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
Lets be honest about psycho-somatic illness. Most illness is this. Psycho-somatic illness has psychological as well as physical parts to it. In some cases, the psycho will lead, in others somatic. A cold is psycho-somatic because one of the symptoms is often lowered mood. Did you know that painkillers can relieve depression.
The problem is that the somatic part is real, they are not pretend symptoms. While sorting out the psychological component may relieve the physical symptoms, it does not automatically cure the physical aspects. If I cannot eat for a prolonged time, because of psycho-somatic illness, I will still be underweight when the psychological aspects are sorted.
This is important. Take the paralyzed man, he might have been psychosomatic, let us accept he was. That does not explain his healing. If someone had been unable to walk for as long as he had then the muscles in his legs would have deteriorated to a point where he physically could not walk.
Jengie
I thought this quite sensible at first, but I think it rather muddies the waters. What Doctor O'Sullivan is dealing with is patients who have had exhaustive tests for physical conditions which have proved, time and time again, to be negative. That is not to say the pain is not real. But the patient's subjective "need" for a physical, organic diagnosis sometimes overrides the objective need for the only thing that has a real chance of working - the so-called "talking cure". You can't have it both ways. Sometimes the patient insists on continuing medical therapies that have proved to be ineffective, or seeking new ones "just to be on the safe side" - which has the very opposite effect. And some physicians go along with this because nothing is for certain, and they are just as terrified of being sued for an incorrect diagnosis as their unhappy patients are of being branded mad, hysterical, or malingering.
Let's be honest about the way most ordinary think about psychosomatic illness. Very shallowly. You know, Jesus is either "mad, bad or God." People in pain are either "physically ill, fakers, or nutcases." God help us!
[ 04. September 2015, 13:10: Message edited by: pimple ]
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Seven years ago I had full-on, full blown IBS (I used to laugh at that and all such). Here we go everyone thought. Cancer of the everything. As my dry, Yorkshire consultant said when I described the symptoms, 'Worst pain you've ever 'ad in yer life?', 'Yairse', I said. Unbelievable, terrifying, mind robbing pain. Worse than childbirth apparently. Like I'd been shot through, bayoneted and someone was twisting the bayonet. For four hours. With constant dry retching. For two nights or one with a break of one either side. So you never knew. Except the night after it didn't happen, you KNEW it would. The only night you knew it wouldn't was the night after two nights when it did. I fell out of the car one night in the middle of the road with it and just writhed on the street.
Ultrasound. Endoscopy. Blood, stool, urine tests. Nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
Three months. With random attacks for a year after.
Stress apparently. Psychological stress. Expressing itself. Finding a way out. My hands and feet would become incredibly, painfully sensitive too. To any stimulus. Couldn't drive.
I daren't look at an aspirin since. That will bring it on.
Fascinating isn't it?
[ 06. September 2015, 17:04: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
You do know that IBS is linked to bacteria? A bit like stomach ulcers and Heliobacter pylori infection.
Stress may reduce the body's ability to keep those bacteria under control and allow them to cause IBS and/or stomach ulcers, but it's a lot more complicated than just stress.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I had no trace of H. pylori. Nothing. NOTHING scientifically detectable. And I went PRIVATE.
[ 06. September 2015, 17:29: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Martin, that wasn't my point. Stomach ulcers used to be ascribed to stress and poor diet. In 1982 the link between H. Pylori and stomach ulcers was made, but it took to 1995 for this to be widely accepted and 1997 for antibiotic treatment to start being used widely.
IBS has been ascribed to stress since it has been recognised. The first links with bacteria have only happened in the last decade or so and research is ongoing. My previous link was to research from 2012. I suspect that like stomach ulcers there will be a more recognised link with bacterial overgrowth in the future.
It's quite difficult to detect bacterial overgrowth in the lower gut.
There has been a long history of illnesses being seen as psychosomatic or caused by stress: MS and stomach ulcers to name but two, which are now recognised as having other causes.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Oooooooooh! Thank you Curiosity. I was aware of H. pylori causing ulcers.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
For the second time this weekend, stop discussing personal medical conditions and suggesting diagnoses. Now.
/hosting
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Sorry.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
Jengie, with regard to the paralyzed man, your post reminded me of the similar miracle performed by Peter. I can't remember where I read it. In Acts somewhere I guess. Didn't that man have to be supported, either during or immediately after his miraculous run round the block? No time to check it right now - library computer, rationed.
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Nope. Acts 3:1-11- He just hung on to Peter and John.
Now Jesus taking two goes to restore sight to a blind man ...
[ 09. September 2015, 17:01: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
Ah, yes, blindness. There was a very moving chapter in O'Sullivan's book about a lady who couldn't see.
But her eyes followed the doc. around, and when she (the doctor) left, the patient gave her a sketch she'd made, as a "thank you" for having somebody to talk to.
As an intern, the doc might have thought "she really is faking it". But she finds another very radical explanation. And eventually, the blindness does go. Hers and the patient's.
As I said, it's a moving story. Mentally and emotionally. Do read it it if you have the time.
[ 10. September 2015, 17:21: Message edited by: pimple ]
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
The Guardian review - "excellent book" - was good enough for now.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
