| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| alexis |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 06:39:25
I would say I have so far been about 95% successful in conquering RSI through what I have learned from my TMS reading, supplemental reading, and discussions. I think Sarno has made a great contribution, and hope that a lot of other people will benefit from his work, and that continued research will shed more light on what is going on in this process.
What I want to do here is outline what parts of the theory have helped me, because I am not actually convinced by all of it, but found enough to be very useful. I don't want to focus here on what I don't agree with, or what I'm not convinced of, but rather on what I do agree with.
This post is addressed to those on the pretty much skeptical end of the spectrum and will not be very interesting to those who consider themselves solid believers in most of the Sarno theories.
1) The way your brain works in areas not directly related to pain can make your pain worse. I accept this about 95%. I don't know really if it's conscious or subconscious or even if those words are the best summaries for what the brain does, but there's something going on.
2) The way your (my) brain works in areas not directly related to pain can cause new pain. I'm convinced about 80 - 85% here. Same reservations on psychological terminology.
3) The brain can use pain to satisfy it's need for a place to focus. 80-85% convinced.
4) The brain can use pain as a distraction. 75% convinced. I am not entirely convinced on the particular psychological entities (rage, goodism etc.) selected by Sarno as central. I suspect there are more, and that these are likely only very vague summary's anyway. And also that rage may not be as universally central as Sarno has come to believe.
5) Oxygen deprivation is the mechanism which causes most of the pain.Maybe 50%. Maybe less.
6) Psychological terms of the conscious and unconscious are useful if not precise summaries of what is going on. Belief level: 80%. OK, this may sound counter to what I said before, but I accept these summaries sort of like I accept early theories of planetary orbits or even Neutonian physics. No, it may not be "true" in the deepest sense, yet it contains some level of truth and works as a tool to understanding.
7) Facing emotions and not suppressing them can sometimes, and particularly in the face of dealing with TMS, be useful. Belief level: 85%. This is one of my biggest conversions. I used to think people who focused internally on their feelings a bit selfish. My old motto was "Humans Suppress Memories and Emotions for a Reason". I still, believe this, but it is no longer a motto, and I no longer think these abilities so universally positive.
8) Journaling can help. Belief level: 85-90%--even though I didn't do much of it.
9) Non-pain equivalents are TMS equivalents. This is hard because I think the terminology a bit funky. So let's say 50%. I guess I don't see TMS as the high item on the hierarchy, and instead think there should be another supercategory. I would term this something like TMS and blah, blah and blah are are examples of distraction syndrom (or even OCD, perhaps). I'm just not sure. Let's just say I'm more willing to believe some of the equivalents than others. Since this is about what I do accept, not what I don't, let's leave it there.
10) You need to believe 100%. I'll go with a 40% here, because I think some people DO need to believe like this, but I don't think I do. But you do probably need to believe a bit, ranging from maybe 30-100% depending on person.
11) You need to reject the physical. This goes a bit with number 10, so picking a totally fudged number here, lets say 50%. Because I think a lot of us have come to realize that some of our pains are real and that it is our response to those pains that is the problem.
12) Instant book cures. 90%. I've really no reason to believe people are lying. At one time I really didn't believe in lucid dreaming (hard to imagine now) and actually didn't believe people much until I practiced until I experienced it. I have come to have much greater faith in peoples experience.
13) The Sarno method isn't open to scientific testing. 10%. I accept it is more difficult than some testing, but with enough time and money it should be just as testable as most other methods...the work just hasn't been done. I give the 10% just to recognize there are some difficulties.
14) Location substitution. 90%. Seems I've experienced this. Hard to be totally sure what causes it, so down from the 95%.
15) Sarno should be given special respect. About 60%. I think it worthwhile to recognize the founder of the theory and the man with the most experience in practice (at least the most documented experience). But I worry very much about a creation of a cult of the individual in some sectors. In this vein, I would recommend not using even such seemingly innocuous titles as The Good Doctor. If you've lived in a country with, say, a giant Mao statue in the town square, you know why I'm worried.
|
| 14 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| tennis tom |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 21:57:57
Sorry Alexis, I didn't know that you had found volunteer work. A few weeks ago you posted that you couldn't get any because they wanted references. Seems you got busy fast.
You wouldn't need a degree to volunteer for Sarno, like I said his office manager Mary edits his books.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
quoting Alexis:
"But I hardly think the choice is "Go dedicate your life to working with Sarno or shut up and accept every word he says as gospel", which seems to be the argument you are making."---------------------------------------------------------------------
No, that was not my thinking at all. It just seemed like a natural--you were having trouble finding volunteer work and the Good Doctor could probably use your scientific writing skills.
|
| alexis |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 21:48:49
quote:
Originally posted by tennis tom
Alexis, so what do you think of my idea that you volunteer in Dr. Sarno's office?
I ignored this the first time because I assumed it was a joke. I don't live near New York and I have neither a PhD. in Psychology nor an MD which would be pre-requisites for getting the type of funding needed to pursue the work I would want to do. I also am already involved in multiple volunteer and academic activities, as well as beginning some independent business activities, so I'm not looking for extra work that would take about 60-70 hours a week. But I hardly think the choice is "Go dedicate your life to working with Sarno or shut up and accept every word he says as gospel", which seems to be the argument you are making. |
| carbar |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 21:35:45
quote:
Originally posted by tennis tom
I am raising money for a statue of the Good Doctor in front of my house. If anyone want's to contribute, please sent checks to ME. I will be also producing miniatures in 24K plated plastic suitable for dashboard mounting, individually blessed by my girl-friend, a good Catholic girl.
TT, I'm so in on this! Want me to make a website? I'd be happy to pitch in now that I'm RSI-free. It's so fascinating how publicity makes a difference. Us youngin's have been so saturated by advertising for our whole lives that things without buzz almost don't seem real...
Alexis, I love your breakdown of your thoughts on Sarno. Very scientific and reasonable. I think someone new (and skeptical) to TMS would appreciate this very rational perspective.
RE: 9) Non-pain equivalents are TMS equivalents. This is hard because I think the terminology a bit funky. So let's say 50%.
You know, this part of it is really worthy of further exploration by Sarno, et al. Here's something to write about. Re-reading MBP, Sarno glosses over the non-pain equivelents. In my own life, I'm capable of seeing depression and anxiety as distractors from deeper, raw emotion, but I'm not sure Sarno ever explains this in a very scientific way. If we want the psych/therapy community to ever see it this way, it needs more talk.
|
| tennis tom |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 21:26:58
quote:
Originally posted by alexis
[quote]Originally posted by tennis tom
[br
Anything in Sarno's writing you actually question, Tom?
No, Alexis.
It's all so logical and thouroughly explained in reading his books. He even includes clinical studies, the good kind, the ones done on cells in Scandinavian countries.
TMS is very simple. If your pain is dx'ed psychosmatic, then switch your thinking to what emotional issues may be causing them, for example the life-cycle pressure situtions enumerated in the Rahe-Holmes chart.
Even if the pain is legitimate structural, TMS thinking can bring about a big decrease in pain. Dr. Sarno, contrary to current traditional medicine, tells us that our bodies are strong and powerful healing machines, encouraging us not to do unneccessary, costly, and time consuming surgeries, meds, sanake-oils and PT.
It's all so simple, logical and straight forward. No need to make it more complex than is necessary.
Alexis, so what do you think of my idea that you volunteer in Dr. Sarno's office?
Regards,
tt |
| alexis |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 21:02:23
quote:
Originally posted by sonora sky
alexis, are you a psychology student? 
Nope. |
| sonora sky |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 21:00:52
Woah, I don't want to say I'm sorry I asked...  I had to look this one up. For others out there who might need it...
From Wiki:
"Eliminative materialism (also called eliminativism) is a materialist position in the philosophy of mind. Its primary claim is that people's common-sense understanding of the mind (or folk psychology) is false and that certain classes of mental states that most people believe in do not exist. Some eliminativists claim that no neural correlates will be found for many everyday psychological concepts, such as belief and desire, and that behaviour and experience can only be adequately explained on the biological level. Other versions entail the non-existence of conscious mental states such as pains and visual perceptions."
-------------------------
alexis, are you a psychology student? |
| alexis |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 19:02:28
quote:
Originally posted by tennis tom
"eliminative materialiast" that's a new one to me...is that like an anal retentive?
If you were going for an intestinal interpretation, it would be the opposite, don't you think?
Anything in Sarno's writing you actually question, Tom? |
| tennis tom |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 18:43:05
"eliminative materialiast" that's a new one to me...is that like an anal retentive?
The brain to me is the gray thing in our cranium. The mind to me is how it interdigitates with the rest of the sensory-nervous system. This is done two-way exchanges of information using the body's communication network, composed of the the nervous system running from the brain through the spinal-cord.
The messages are tansferred back and forth using an elctro-chemical process of poly-neuropeptides (see Candace Pert). The cranio-sacral fluid carries the electrical impules. Our sensory organs, including the largest organ of the body, the skin, are constantly gathering info on a conscious and unconscious level and sending it to the brain command center and data bank. It truly is amazing how the brain can sort out and store all this imput. There are other things that make the mindbody communication network function like synapeses and propreoceptor's (my favorites) that sense what's going on in the joints.
I'm probably wrong on some of this stuff but it's been along time since I took physiology but each injury I've had has helped remind me.
Alexis, I've got an idea for you. You're not working now and wanted to do some volunteer work. I suggest you go to Dr. Sarno and volunteer to help clean-up his resarch and make it more palatatble to traditional alopathic clinical norms. You seem to have a good handle on "science". This could be a once in a life-time opportunity.
From what I understand, Mary, Dr. Sarno's office manager, does most of the editing of his books. You could do a great service to humanity by helping Dr. Sarno get his clinical act together and put it into terms that would help his peers accept psychosomatic medicine. Dr. Sarno could better explain to you what he means and clarify for you the things that don't work for you regarding TMS theory. What do you think of my idea?
Regards,
tt
From Green River, Utah |
| alexis |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 15:00:50
quote:
Originally posted by sonora sky
I'm curious as to why you chose the term "brain" instead of "mind." Are you using them interchangably or would you distinguish between the two?
I used "brain" intentionally. I'm somewhat but not entirely comfortable with the Freudian psychology aspects in TMS theory. I believe (as I think mis fairly widely held) that there is a neurological/biological aspect (way of understanding) for everything we consider consciousness (or unconsciousness, or subconsciousness). Actually, to be technical I'm not even so sure about terms such as "conscious", but I don't really want to go there right now since I'm a bit of an eliminative materialist and that's a lot messier than we want to get into here...and a bit at odds with some TMS psychology, and really "folk psychology" in general.
So the psychological terminology is sort or a short-hand, and what I would maybe call mind?
It is aspects of this short hand, which, while I find it useful, I'm not entirely convinced of. I suspect these concepts of "rage" and "guilt" and the like are going to ultimately lose their role as the primary explanatory agents.
Keep in mind that I'm not suggesting tossing any of these terms out, just that they don't have the kind of tight meaning that we might like them to, and that other explanations that might work better could come along. And for me, since I probably don't feel the concepts as "real" as some people do, they get a bit slippery when I use them or think about them.
Should I start a new thread called TMS for Eliminative Materialists?
That's a joke. Please--let's not go there. |
| sonora sky |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 14:41:35
alexis,
I'm curious as to why you chose the term "brain" instead of "mind." Are you using them interchangably or would you distinguish between the two?
ss
|
| alexis |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 09:55:31
quote:
Originally posted by h2oskier25
Alexis, I had RSI for 7 years, darn near destroyed my life and career. I never used voice Rec Software.
I was a bad case...used either voice rec software or held a utensil in one fist and pecked out words one key at a time. Very quickly recovered thanks to learning about TMS.
quote:
Originally posted by h2oskier25
The fact that you say you're bored with the whole TMS thing, leads me to think that maybe you're bored with some aspect of your life. I know I was.
For me this is a little different. I actually have a number of new activities (4 new main endeavours) which are competing with TMS issues for my attention. I have to constantly remind myself now to go back and look at these issues, whereas previously I worried about the dangers of obsessing with TMS.
I'm actually working a project due for a final day of a class (in a field I've never before explored) right now. Typing away with not a thought of voice recognition software. Meanwhile I've had to brush aside several urgent issues to work on this. I'm back to middle school attention to the weather forecast hoping for a snow day!
Yikes...back to work.
|
| h2oskier25 |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 09:47:35
quote:
Originally Posted by Tennis Tom
I am raising money for a statue of the Good Doctor in front of my house. If anyone want's to contribute, please sent checks to ME. I will be also producing miniatures in 24K plated plastic suitable for dashboard mounting, individually blessed by my girl-friend, a good Catholic girl.
TT, I too, wish to see an Obama/Sarno ticket. I'll quit my job and campaign for them full time.
RE: the merchandising, I'd like a piece of the Dashboard Hula Sarno doll market, if you don't mind. Will pay all applicable royalties and license fees.
Alexis, I had RSI for 7 years, darn near destroyed my life and career. I never used voice Rec Software. I am completely symptom free in the hands, now, and have only mild recurrences in other body parts during major life traumas. The fact that you say you're bored with the whole TMS thing, leads me to think that maybe you're bored with some aspect of your life. I know I was.
Regards,
Beth |
| alexis |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 09:29:23
quote:
Originally posted by tennis tom
As to a chance that the Good Doctor, er...sorry strike that becoming a cult figure, little chance of that. He's ignored even at NYU by his peers. With the right public relations and image consulting, I'm sure he could be another Andie Weil or Deepak. He's obviously never been interested in going that route, just helping his patients and writing an occasional book documenting his findings.
I don't think one needs to be recognized by a majority of the population to become a cult figure (I don't normally use the word "cult", btw, but "cult of the individual" is an established term, so I make an exception). There are many who achieve this status in small subcultures. It is often their very rejection by the wider public that helps to build up this special image of almost infallible character and knowledge among their followers. And the figure does not need to be a willing participant. The following frequently occurs after death.
|
| tennis tom |
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 08:49:38
Quoting Alexis:
"15) Sarno should be given special respect. About 60%. I think it worthwhile to recognize the founder of the theory and the man with the most experience in practice (at least the most documented experience). But I worry very much about a creation of a cult of the individual in some sectors. In this vein, I would recommend not using even such seemingly innocuous titles as The Good Doctor. If you've lived in a country with, say, a giant Mao statue in the town square, you know why I'm worried."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Nice analysis Alexis, I must say I agree with you about 50%. As to a chance that the Good Doctor, er...sorry strike that becoming a cult figure, little chance of that. He's ignored even at NYU by his peers. With the right public relations and image consulting, I'm sure he could be another Andie Weil or Deepak. He's obviously never been interested in going that route, just helping his patients and writing an occasional book documenting his findings.
Most people will not pay any attention to an "it's all in your head approach". They need psychosomatic symptoms to protect them from life.
I would vote for him for president if he ran. In my book, a Barry Obama/Doc Sarno ticket would be a sure-fire winner. Some ideas for campaign slogans could be: "A Fresh/Clean New Face and A Fresh/Clean Old Face" or "It's All In Your Heads and That's Where We Want to Be."
If Barry or Hill get elected they could make him Surgeon General or head of the NIH.
I am raising money for a statue of the Good Doctor in front of my house. If anyone want's to contribute, please sent checks to ME. I will be also producing miniatures in 24K plated plastic suitable for dashboard mounting, individually blessed by my girl-friend, a good Catholic girl.
|
|
|
