James Coyne standing up for pts with ME like no one else

A

Aurator

Senior Member
Messages
625
alex3619 said:
Not just psychiatry! Why does medicine in general ignore this?
Click to expand...
Possibly because a substantial number of medical practitioners have a very different view of PwME (essentially as neurotic) from the one we'd like them to have (seriously physically ill), and though the ones who care to look at all no doubt see the bad science they probably see the treatment arising from that bad science as quite suitable for patients who always seem to be darkening the doors of their surgeries or clinics complaining of innumerable vague ailments but who seldom have anything detectably wrong with them.

PwME are nothing but a source of irritation to a significant proportion of the medical profession, and if the treatment the psychologists had come up with was immolation on open pyres I'm sure there are some practitioners who wouldn't consider it inappropriate treatment for this particularly troublesome group of nuisance patients.

How we are perceived by others is often radically different from how we perceive ourselves, and PwME are probably one of the most extreme examples of this phenomenon at work.
 
Last edited:
alex3619

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
Aurator said:
Possibly because a substantial number of medical practitioners have a very different view of PwME (essentially as neurotic) from the one we'd like them to have (seriously physically ill)
Click to expand...
In part, though medicine has been ignoring bad psychiatry for nearly a century. Its like its a blind spot. Perhaps this is because they get taught it at medical school, or have too much interest in perpetuating it (foist this patient off on psychiatrists!) or more likely its a problem in medical culture and governance.
 
Last edited:
Snowdrop

Snowdrop

Rebel without a biscuit
Messages
2,933
alex3619 said:
In part, though medicine has been ignoring bad psychiatry for nearly a century.
Click to expand...

It appeals to people (almost anyone) because it offers answers to things we want so much to understand--even though the answers are glib superficial and don't stand up to scrutiny. They are also the kind of answers that are difficult to prove/disprove so they choose to believe. And it is a belief system and it's based on how they perceive the weak and vulnerable. Not respond with empathy but crush it.

Some of what they state in understanding the human condition may start with a kernel of truth but they overstate and universalise the unique. I think there is significant fear of confronting the vulnerable and feeling helpless. Not used to that feeling it turns into a desire a get rid of the feeling and the object creating it.

And this can stand up to scrutiny as well as any other psychologising on the subject since no proof is needed when making pronouncements of this sort.
 
alex3619

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
Chrisb said:
If only they would ignore it and the bad psychiatrists who perpetuate it. The problem is that "medicine" totally accepts and happily uses the bad psychiatry.

I am probably "splitting hairs" here. It's what I do best.
Click to expand...

Agreed, though the issue is more complex. Medicine is failing to differentiate between sound psychiatry, pragmatically useful psychiatry, and babble.
 
TiredSam

TiredSam

The wise nematode hibernates
Messages
2,677
Location
Germany
Snowdrop said:
They are also the kind of answers that are difficult to prove/disprove so they choose to believe. And it is a belief system
Click to expand...
If you are practising a belief system, it's the height of bad manners to challenge someone else's alternative belief system, because you both have a right to believe what you believe. So why would a bad psychiatrist who believes one thing for which there is little evidence challenge a bad pyschiatrist who believes another thing for which there is little evidence? Both put intuition and personal opinion above evidence anyway, and are likely to close ranks when the whole concept of belief systems masquerading as science is challenged. A demand that they justify their beliefs with evidence is an affront to both of them.
 
Mrs Sowester

Mrs Sowester

Senior Member
Messages
1,055
Cheshire said:
Yes, but the story of that woman has nothing to do with Wessely. not sure it's useful...
Click to expand...
There is a government led campaign to undermine, marginalise (and starve) the disabled in the UK. The SMC are the gov propagandists who feed the media half truths.
Coyne's references to the Civil Rights struggle in the US may seem a little hyperbolic to us understated Brits; but he's not wrong.
 
TiredSam

TiredSam

The wise nematode hibernates
Messages
2,677
Location
Germany
Jim, am surprised and disappointed at this. Do you think it is accurate and/or appropriate?
Click to expand...
Two emotions, zero facts, zero answers, throws the ball back into Coyne's court as if he should now be on the defensive. Typical Sir Simon Speak.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back