| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
lastlostmonkey
35 Posts |
 Posted - 02/10/2006 : 09:22:14
|
Hi,
seeing Jim1999's post in the other thread I had a look for information about psychosomatic pain (which is, despite the word's negative connotations, what we are suffering from). I found this in the British Journal of Psychiatry. Good references at the end and a good basis for thinking that Sarno's ideas are not those of a lone wacko (not that that's what I think).
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/188/1/91
there's more if you just put 'psychosomatic' into google. Whole societies...
llm |
|
|
Dave
USA
1864 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2006 : 09:27:00
|
| TMS is really "psychogenic" and not "psychosomatic." The difference is subtle, but psychosomatic implies that the pain is not real, that it is perceived. We know the pain is very real and has a physiological reason (i.e. reduced blood flow) but that its root is psychological. |
 |
|
|
lastlostmonkey
35 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2006 : 09:46:16
|
Ah, OK, yes. The article doesn't seem to make a distinction, there is a mention of back pain without the corresponding disclaimer that it wasn't 'real' pain, so hopefully it's still relevant.
lastlostmonkey |
|
|
|
Jim1999
USA
210 Posts |
Posted - 02/12/2006 : 22:33:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave
psychosomatic implies that the pain is not real, that it is perceived.
Not necessarily. There are two definitions of psychosomatic. One is that the symptoms are imaginary. This is the definition you're using, and it is popular with the general public. The second definition is that there are real physical symptoms with a pscyhological cause. My medical dictionary and my psychology dictionary both define psychosomatic this way only. The article might be using psychosomatic in this sense.
Jim |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
'Psychosomatic pain' article
