| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| mk6283 |
Posted - 07/31/2008 : 11:19:15
I was dealing with a tension headache last night when I came across something pretty interesting that I thought I would share. As the headache was intensifying, I started to wonder how my mind knew how to use the headache against me. I remembered that Dr. Schubiner mentioned that our mind/bodies retain memories of prior traumas (sometimes from many years ago) that can resurface as TMS symptoms at some point later in our lives. I started to think -- did I ever fall on my head as a child? Was there anything in my past that could have prompted my brain to resort to this vise-like mechanism of distraction? Nothing was coming to mind so I did some reading and this is what I found...
Donald Winnicott, a famous pediatrician and psychoanalyst, was once discussing the impact of prolonged labor on the individual, when he stated, "There can very easily be delay at a time when there is constriction round the head, and it is my definite view that the type of headache which is clearly described as a band round the head is sometimes a direct derivative of birth sensations remembered in somatic form." Pretty fascinating. I instantly gave my mom a call and wouldn't you know it -- not only was my labor/delivery a very long one, but forceps were eventually needed as well. Anyway, I knew what was bothering me and why I had the headache, but now I know how my brain knew how to give me a headache! Now that's pretty cool. The headache soon resolved.
Best,
MK |
| 6 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| mk6283 |
Posted - 08/04/2008 : 19:58:27
I think their is a level of misunderstanding going on here. I AGREE with you that the metaphoric aspects of pain (as described by Hay and others) are most likely/often not accurate. [However, I still think they carry some value for patients if they can cause one to think about their pain/illness in the context of emotions and personality traits.] I am addressing the unconscious processes that are involved in SYMPTOM SELECTION, as opposed to the unconscious thoughts that cause/necessitate a symptom and need to be addressed (or "brought to consciousness") if one is to be cured of that symptom.
I am not saying that the headache is happening BECAUSE of the traumatic birth experience, but rather the headache is happening because of some OTHER unconscious process (probably far more recent), yet our brains know HOW to trigger a tension headache because of the unconscious learning that took place while we were just being born. This is what I find so fascinating.
I think the easiest way to understand this is by way of analogy. Nobody just wakes up with chronic back pain. We all experience acute back pain at some point in our lives due to actual strain, overexertion, etc. During those times our brains "learn" HOW to cause that pain and can then resort to it at any time. When back pain becomes chronic (i.e., TMS), our minds are using a learned sensation against us. We may have forgotten that we strained our back once after a football game 15 years ago (and what that felt like), but our UNCONSCIOUS MIND has not forgotten. Similarly, we have consciously forgotten what the traumatic birth process felt like, but our unconscious has not. It can then resort to such a pain/process whenever a symptom is necessitated for whatever conscious/unconscious reason that might be (i.e., a tension headache).
Conclusion: tension headaches MAY often represent a reliving of the traumatic birth experience BECAUSE of some other conscious/unconscious tension. A good study aimed at proving this would be one that was designed such that patients describing CLASSIC tension headaches (vise-like, bilateral pressure, etc.) were questioned as to whether they were born via normal vaginal delivery OR cesarean section. I suppose that my postulate is that such a symptom would be far more likely/prominent in those reporting normal vaginal delivery. Any takers? :)
Best,
MK |
| armchairlinguist |
Posted - 08/01/2008 : 15:33:27
Apparently you weren't paying attention to what I said. I wasn't talking only about conscious memory. Of course we don't remember it consciously.
What I wrote was:
quote:
remembers that particular trauma in any sense, whether bodily or mentally.
I'm (obviously considering I believe in TMS theory) a believer in the importance of the unconscious, and this quote indicates that I accept that there are multiple ways of remembering or knowing things. My own experience and Sarno's success suggest that this part of the theory is at least somewhat valid. However, I find your particular theory notably convoluted and unlikely to be true, and much harder to find support for than the more general theory that unconscious emotions play a role.
Part of the problem is that I don't really buy the general (Louise Hay et al) theory that location of TMS pain is in some way correlated to its emotional origin.
--
What were you expecting? |
| mizlorinj |
Posted - 08/01/2008 : 13:42:37
Aren't all births traumatic for the infant though? Squeezing through a 10cm passage, entering a cold room? Getting stuck in the canal moreso stressful? Cesarean birth even moreso?
Birth is a natural occurrence we all go through, so I'm not so sure it's a cause of stress later on in life.
|
| mk6283 |
Posted - 07/31/2008 : 23:11:37
Ah, but this is a critical point. It speaks to the heart of the matter. I knew some people would disagree because thinking of this kind is at the far extreme end of the spectrum. That spectrum I am referring to is belief in the power/role of the UNCONSCIOUS MIND. Their isn't a single person that can consciously recall the events of their birth (myself included), but that implies nothing about what they have retained unconsciously.
Learning and memory are fascinating and occur across many different planes, the most significant of which is the human unconscious. The truth is that most of our lives are probably unconsciously determined. What TRULY distinguishes TMS from other alternative/mind-body modalities is the belief in this fact. Don't get me wrong, I am far from certain that what I alluded to above is accurate. However, the key point is that I believe that it CAN be accurate (at least some of the time).
Best,
MK |
| armchairlinguist |
Posted - 07/31/2008 : 15:47:31
I'm highly suspicious of reasoning like this. The Occam's Razor here is that headache is a common experience, head pain is very distracting, and thus a headache is a simple and effective distraction choice.
One reason I'm skeptical of this suggestion is that there most likely is no way to know whether an infant actually remembers that particular trauma in any sense, whether bodily or mentally. The only way I can imagine is to round up statistically valid numbers of people with and without recurrent headache problems with reliable records of what happened at their births (difficult to come by) and see if there is a correlation. Even that only would show correlation; both could be results caused by a related but unlooked-for cause.
I certainly don't expect all reasoning on here to meet scientific scrutiny, but when there is such a simple null hypothesis, it is hard to see why you would look seriously at such a convoluted idea.
--
What were you expecting? |
| HilaryN |
Posted - 07/31/2008 : 13:07:56
Wow!
Have you read any Arthur Janov? - "The New Primal Scream"
Hilary N |
|
|
