1. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 23rd November 2020 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Guest, NICE have published their draft guideline for ME/CFS, click here to read about it.
    Dismiss Notice

Psychodynamic Psychotherapy for Patients With Functional Somatic Disorders and the Road to Recovery, 2020, Luyten and Fonagy

Discussion in 'Health News and Research unrelated to ME/CFS' started by Andy, Nov 20, 2020.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member & Outreach

    Messages:
    11,261
    Likes Received:
    81,183
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Paywall, https://psychotherapy.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.20200010
    Sci hub, no access
     
  2. Sean

    Sean Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,686
    Likes Received:
    22,200
    biobehavioral

    Is this the latest version of psychosomatic?
     
  3. Arnie Pye

    Arnie Pye Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,321
    Likes Received:
    18,157
    Location:
    UK
    Psycho twice? Isn't that overkill?

    I can't help myself. Whenever I see this phrase what goes through my mind instantly is "Doctor thinks patient is lying, making things up, attention seeking, mentally ill, a hypochondriac. But the truth is the doctor's diagnostic abilities are crap."
     
  4. NelliePledge

    NelliePledge Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,583
    Likes Received:
    40,289
    Location:
    UK West Midlands
    How tedious- the word salad has been tossed yet again
     
    TiredSam, Sean, alktipping and 9 others like this.
  5. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    27,594
    Likes Received:
    134,951
    Location:
    UK
    I've only read the abstract, but it looks like yet another brand of psychobabble therapy trying to claim they have something to offer by inventing questionnaires about vague abstracts like 'attachment, mentalizing, and impairments in epistemic trust' so they can persuade patients to answer differently about them at the end of their brand of therapy.

    I do wish they wouldn't.
     
    Sean, alktipping, MFraumeni and 5 others like this.
  6. Mithriel

    Mithriel Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,499
    Likes Received:
    12,102
    Then they say that the patients pain, fatigue movements, seizures, whatever have not changed but the patient says they feel less anxiety so it is all successful and confirms their theory.

    At least I assume so since I can't access the paper. :banghead::banghead::banghead:
     
    Sean, alktipping, MFraumeni and 5 others like this.
  7. Invisible Woman

    Invisible Woman Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    7,581
    Likes Received:
    44,261
    For the love of......

    Would somebody please take the Scrabble tiles off these people?
     
    Mithriel, Sean, alktipping and 6 others like this.
  8. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    27,594
    Likes Received:
    134,951
    Location:
    UK
    Thanks for making me laugh. :laugh:
     
    Mithriel, Sean, alktipping and 3 others like this.
  9. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,177
    Likes Received:
    41,103
    Location:
    Canada
    Well ain't that a piece of very advanced bullshit. See, we don't distrust these people because they're making stuff up and are factually wrong about everything, in the process harming people. No, it's that we have an impairment in our trust in expertise. Well, in experts, because these people are, you know, making stuff up and generally wrong and as such do not have genuine expertise here.

    This is the most damning thing in all of this. Explicit dissent is seen as a challenge, something that needs to be worked around. It's widely known that patients reject this astrology-level horseshit and instead of reflecting on the fact that it is based on absolutely nothing and, as such, unlikely to be accurate, they have to create a whole narrative about how we are impaired in our ability to trust them with their "expertise".

    No means no. This is not a nebulous or ambiguous concept, the standard in medicine is informed consent. Explicitly, and openly, working to work around rejection of consent is just about the most immoral single thing in all of this. No matter the mediocrity and just how straight up delusional this all is, that it is accepted that consent can be ignored, even trampled over openly, guarantees the moral, and technical, failure more than anything.

    It would seriously be useful for psychiatry to turn on itself for a while, to self-examine how easily they fabricate delusional fantasies despite every piece of evidence showing them they are wrong. It's a fascinating case in the failure of expertise, in hubris, in Dunning-Kruger and worse. But the field itself is incapable of self-examination and believes in the very flaws that they need to examine here. Amazing.
     
    Mithriel, Sean, Amw66 and 3 others like this.

Share This Page