Search results

It's funny most of these so called patient support groups are front for doctors Trying to push fnd onto patients

There are some Dr Allen Francis the Psychiatrist who worked on the DSM is often on twitter pointing out Inconsistencies and other mistakes other doctors make about psychiatry.

Even today fraud Freud has his followers (Dr s )

Fraud for Freud. Yes he was a major fraud but got away with it.

Nice articles here just here Sone of the poisitive signs discused in the article can be false negatives false positives which can cloud judgement and show bias. But they never give a theoretical point on why phych based disease can give physical symptoms

The old conversion disorder is still valid. Drugging patients out of their mind is not appropiate then but the snake oil of physio is more appropiate.

Maybe the whole construct is made up and the made up numbers is one piece of the pie. So if they have to admit to one mistake how many others do have to admit to.

From your blog the main arguement in using hoovers test for functional symptoms fro what i read is that functional weakness ia voluntary. Which is the most absurd explanation and can not be tested

Maybe the neuropsyvhs are on the gravy train withbthe neurologists and dont wantbto admit it. Evryone has had some form of traumatic event at one atage of their lives so every9ne can have fnd

He is having a bet either way. He trying to cling on to the idea of conversion disorder and cbt and physio are treatments but if newer research indicated its biological then the fnd construct was rubbish and his whole world of fnd just crumbles so if he was serious he should say he got it all...

Here is another post elsewhere it fits very well with this article Medical gaslighting in the multiple sclerosis community where an MRI might not show any recent inflammatory results but the patient is becoming worse. . Dr. Gavin Giovannini explains in his blog...

Because tests such as hoovers are circular and false positives exist

Does this study push back th idea of functinal overlay or would it be swept under the carpet

Is there also different types of mri such as T1 T2 and Flair. I have read that some conditions require different types or othereise they miss it. Alo the skill of the radiologist is also important. Functional overlay is a bad term when higher res scsns show more damage

This brings up a couple of point to consider 1 if tech in hospitals arent up to date and diagnosis is based upon them how many misdiagnosis is there. 2 Is the current tech enough to diagnosis every condition 3 Would new tech be able to diagnose missed conditions from todays tech

An interesting point made by mike on daves blog nn “A normal MRI of the brain and spinal cord is compatible with progressive MS” Source: https://www.msard-journal.com/article/S2211-0348(20)30795-1/fulltext So if doctors arent up to date or ignore fact then the whole fnd construct is rubbish...

From what ibhave read and tried to understand most of these tests and diagnosises are in the mind of the physician. So what we get is mostly biased diagnosis and lots of missed conditions. So the whole construct is rubish

I wonder how much people give up on the medical proffession until something goes horribly wrong.Then go emergemcy or to another who diagnoses correctly. So the rate of rediagnosis is very low or every other shows their biases and wont rediagnose

One should do a study of misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis because of this silly idealogy.and the human costs and extra costs of not diagnosing it early.

This case highlights some important poits. The biasis of doctors to diagnose a physch condition rather than a biological one on the basis of all tests are negative. The limitations of current technology and the belief of infalibility of technology. The doctor should have said i dont know