TMSHelp Forum

TMSHelp Forum

All Forums

TMSHelp

TMSHelp General Forum

TMS and TMS equivalents

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format Mode:

Format:

Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON

Smilies

[quote][i]Originally posted by armchairlinguist[/i]
[br]There has been a lot of discussion on the forum lately about some of the stranger symptoms that can crop up in the context of "is this TMS, or isn't it?"

I woke up this morning thinking about how Sarno is very careful to preserve the distinction between TMS and TMS equivalents. We on the forum may throw around "depression is TMS" or "dandruff is TMS" or, recently "ulcers are TMS", but Sarno would, I think, glare sternly at us and remind us that TMS only describes muscle and nerve dysfunction: primarily pain, and also numbness or tingling. It is this type of syndrome that he refers to as a 'fundamentally benign process', as TMS.

He writes quite differently about TMS equivalents. He clearly states that the same process that produces ultimately benign pain in some produces other kinds of symptoms in others, and that these symptoms are NOT TMS even though they are results of the same mindbody processes (equivalent). This includes ulcers and other gastrointestinal symptoms, dandruff, and affect symptoms like depression. Some of these, like dandruff, are also quite benign, but many more of them are not. And I would venture to say that his advice not to take medicine for TMS pain may not be advice he would apply in the same way to equivalents (though since I'm not Sarno it's dangerous for me to speculate what he would say), although he does show reservations about taking such medicines without awareness because of a concern about the symptom imperative.

MBP also contains some material about the possibility that cancer and/or heart disease may be influenced by mindbody processes. If this link is valid, it would probably benefit cancer/heart patients to undertake some kind of emotional work, but by the time they have cancer, it certainly isn't going to benefit them to skip their chemotherapy and ignore their symptoms.

What I'm getting at is that Sarno seems to have laid out a continuum in mindbody processes from the purely benign (TMS) to the possibly damaging (most equivalents) to the potentially lethal (mindbody-influenced organic disease processes). It might make sense to try to keep this in mind more, and try to separate one part of the continuum from another a bit better in our discussions.

I'd be interested to hear about what people think about this.

--
Wherever you go, there you are.
[/quote]

Check here to include your profile signature.

T O P I C R E V I E W
armchairlinguist	Posted - 09/18/2007 : 11:02:28 There has been a lot of discussion on the forum lately about some of the stranger symptoms that can crop up in the context of "is this TMS, or isn't it?" I woke up this morning thinking about how Sarno is very careful to preserve the distinction between TMS and TMS equivalents. We on the forum may throw around "depression is TMS" or "dandruff is TMS" or, recently "ulcers are TMS", but Sarno would, I think, glare sternly at us and remind us that TMS only describes muscle and nerve dysfunction: primarily pain, and also numbness or tingling. It is this type of syndrome that he refers to as a 'fundamentally benign process', as TMS. He writes quite differently about TMS equivalents. He clearly states that the same process that produces ultimately benign pain in some produces other kinds of symptoms in others, and that these symptoms are NOT TMS even though they are results of the same mindbody processes (equivalent). This includes ulcers and other gastrointestinal symptoms, dandruff, and affect symptoms like depression. Some of these, like dandruff, are also quite benign, but many more of them are not. And I would venture to say that his advice not to take medicine for TMS pain may not be advice he would apply in the same way to equivalents (though since I'm not Sarno it's dangerous for me to speculate what he would say), although he does show reservations about taking such medicines without awareness because of a concern about the symptom imperative. MBP also contains some material about the possibility that cancer and/or heart disease may be influenced by mindbody processes. If this link is valid, it would probably benefit cancer/heart patients to undertake some kind of emotional work, but by the time they have cancer, it certainly isn't going to benefit them to skip their chemotherapy and ignore their symptoms. What I'm getting at is that Sarno seems to have laid out a continuum in mindbody processes from the purely benign (TMS) to the possibly damaging (most equivalents) to the potentially lethal (mindbody-influenced organic disease processes). It might make sense to try to keep this in mind more, and try to separate one part of the continuum from another a bit better in our discussions. I'd be interested to hear about what people think about this. -- Wherever you go, there you are.
7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
mizlorinj	Posted - 09/19/2007 : 13:48:32 Shawnsmith, thank you for the book link in this thread. I read the excerpt at the link and it's great. Bought the book on amazon.com Thanks again. More proof more people (docs) are getting on-board with the mindbody being one. -Lori
armchairlinguist	Posted - 09/19/2007 : 10:28:07 Justme, I'm interested that you say that Sarno isn't clear, because I got the majority of the basis for my post out of MBP. Maybe he's not so clear either before or since -- sounds from what stanfr said like he stopped believing the distinction was so important after a while. -- Wherever you go, there you are.
justme	Posted - 09/18/2007 : 20:08:28 I am not so sure I agree either. Sarno does not seem to be very clear about "equivalents" in his books. I just think he doesnt have as clear an explanation for them as he had early on for "regular TMS"(oxygen deprivation to muscle tissues). My beliefs these days, based on multiple readings in the area of somatic psychology, is that the autonomic nervous system is very much at play in all these things. The whole continuum thing scares me, I have to admit. But then again fear is so much a part of TMS. I counseled cancer patients professionally for some time and always danced around the topic of "Did I cause my cancer?". I guess what scares me most is the fact that I probably would blame myself if I got cancer. I guess my best consolation to myself and to prospective cancer patients would be that so much of our thinking is unconscious and not yet fully under our control. We must, on a spiritual level, also learn how to forgive ourselves for our ignorance. Just Me
shawnsmith	Posted - 09/18/2007 : 20:07:36 Raead also the book by Gabor Mate, MD titled "When The Body Says No" The explores the intimate connection between emotion, stress, and disease. The book combines a fascinating yet down-to-earth explanation of the scientific research that has demonstrated the mind/body unity with the stories and experiences of actual people. When The Body Says No is written for anyone interested in understanding the links between mind and body, emotions and health, stress and disease. website: http://www.whenthebodysaysno.ca/ Yes, I have read this book......... ******* Sarno-ize it! Read chapter 4 of Dr. Sarno's "The Divided Mind." Also chapers 3, 4 and 5 in Dr. Scott Brady's "Pain Free For Life" are very important.
stanfr	Posted - 09/18/2007 : 19:46:49 This is old news to me. When i mentioned psoriasis in the same breath as TMS to Sarno, he quickly corrected me. Years ago, when i questioned him about some of the differences between 'traditional' TMS and the CTS that i had just cured, he retorted by saying something like "Those differences are not so important, the impirtant thing is recognizing the psychosomatic origin" Ironically, I see Sarno as being slightly less of a "Sarno purist" than some of the patients! As for the big "C", while it most certainly isn't psychosomatic, at least in individual cases (such as my mother's) i believe that the primary cause was psychogenic, either stress or repressed stress. While the "immune system" is bandied about quite a bit by the 'alternative' crowd, there's no doubt in my mind (im living proof) that the immune system is affected significantly by the psyche. And we all have cancer cells, after all.
JohnD	Posted - 09/18/2007 : 17:58:12 Dr. Z, Have you ever ready any of Bernie Siegels books? He is an oncologist who has worked with cancer patients for years. I would highly recommend it if you haven't already done so. ACL never said that cancer is psychosomatic, she said there may it may be influenced by the mindbody connection.....I would think that for most disease we should assume this is true unless proven otherwise.
drziggles	Posted - 09/18/2007 : 17:35:48 I disagree with you to some extent. I think that, while there is a continuum of TMS-related symptoms, there are some that are truly TMS equivalents, such as IBS, Fibromyalgia, and nonulcer dyspepsia, and which can be treated in exactly the same way as back pain and 'typical' TMS. Others, like GERD, are TMS equivalents that can have serious consequences if untreated long enough, but can probably be treated with TMS techniques early enough on. Once you bring in the C-word, you are in a whole different ball game. While mind-body issues may play a role in treatment of cancer, I do not think it makes sense to say that cancer is a psychosomatic condition, unlike TMS and its equivalents.

TMSHelp Forum

Snitz Forums 2000