Search results

Sorry to be obtuse. I was thinking it was an Ontario initiative rather than national. I have ben looking at papers from th early 1980's suggesting importance of demedicalisation of "illness" issues by such means as exercise and education. The probable driver for this was cost. There seem to have...

Ah, well. Toronto, you see.

it is interesting to reflect that exactly this conversation was carried out in 1989 or 1990 in response to Caroline Richmond's article in a GP magazine in advance of the 1989 paper by SW. The editor provided a helpful picture of a runner. In response to criticism, as I recall it, SW responded...

It seems very helpful of Devine to so depart from the McMaster script as to bring up the "mass hysteria" line. They are usually so much more nuanced. “This is in a way a kind of mass hysteria: the more attention you give a syndrome like this, the stronger it becomes.” It seems a long time...

You don't think the prospect of being sent as a replacement to a battalion that had just suffered 75% casualties could have a psychological effect?

You obviously know about such things. What is the ball-park figure for a professionally made video of that sort. One wonders what the cost/benefit analysis is on this.

I wonder who picked up the bill from Panda Film. And why?

There is an interesting quote from Eisenberg. I wonder if Garner knows it. The role of the Social Sciences Most patients treated by most doctors get well most of the time. That good fortune for patients - and for doctor's reputations - creates a problem for the practitioner. It is difficult...

Probably Jungian. Who said "duality" was dead? Sorry for quoting my own post.

Yes, but the problem with shell shock was that there were people said to be displaying the symptoms who had never been in action. Some had never left the base in the UK. The difficulty seemed to be an inability to discriminate between cases.

“People don’t fully appreciate the ability of the psyche to convince itself that it’s sick" Now there is a quote that could benefit from some analysis. This is clearly someone who was not too good for psychiatry.

Yes, but before we can assess the quality of the science we have first to ascertain what the purported science is. Now that we know that McMaster was working with a "Behavioural Medicine Unit" at St Joseph's Hospital Hamilton from 1975 and that that work was used in the development of the...

You can see the certainly see parallels with shell-shock. I would have to dig out the 1922 report again, but as I recall it the conclusion was that those affected should be kept in their regiment and dealt with by the MO. On no account should they be sent to the Field Hospital. If they did make...

I think that Nigel Hawkes piece indicates the problem. Without the hard evidence it can be claimed that the story about the lecture and the insurance company is merely a smear. It is perfectly possible to believe that X and Y are true but for the idea that X was the cause of Y to be absurd...

I have for some time wondered whether I should respond to the post about the Canada lecture, and on balance think it worthwhile to do so. There seem to be be some problems inherent in the story. Why did BH withhold details of the date and year, the nature of the conference, the name of the...

But is there a psychosocial school, or are there psychosocial schools? The Waddell/Aylward school seems to differ from the Cott school, which seems to be the one with which SW was more closely aligned originally. However the two never seem to acknowledge each others existence, despite both...

Yes. (In reply to Woolie) Wessely and Sharpe simply operated in a system in which they had studied and spent their early careers. They became the public face of the movement because they did make all their sources clear. Perhaps being in the middle of it all they were themselves unclear about...

... and every time you "recover" from a relapse you think: this time it's really it. Clearly we failed to see the opportunities. Media careers, etc.

Interestingly he cites no authority for the proposition. The nearest reference is at the end of the previous (EDIT paragraph) quoting Bortz W M (1984) The disuse syndrome. The Western Journal of Medicine141, 691-694

Thanks. that's what I thought. But I think this paper was where the idea of exercise causing merely "hurt" and "not "harm" in ME came from. Seems like an extrapolation from a false premise.