Empirical Evaluation of Veterans’ Perceived Nonconcordance With Providers Regarding Medically Unexplained Symptoms, 2020, Phillips and McAndrew

Paywall, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0011000019890317
Sci hub, https://sci-hub.se/10.1177/0011000019890317

 

Wow, we are getting deep in the rabbit hole, of trying to apply voodoo maths to make a simple problem, of misdiagnosis and falsely attributing health problems to some imaginary psychology, more complex than it is based on a certainty over the MUS ideology, that they 100% represent psychological problems and that any claim that they are physical is itself evidence of false illness beliefs, with strength of conviction being the main factor of illness, because even without being cited Wessely is well represented here.

It is a core feature of the MUS approach to be deceitful to the patient and for physicians to not tell the patients directly that they think the symptoms are all psychosomatic. This takes a strong position that they obviously are psychological and that this is the only right answer. Nonconcordance here explicitly means falsely attributing health problems to a medical cause.

Some vague recommendations about building a therapeutic alliance, which is impossible when you are explicitly telling your patients complete BS. This is a US-based evaluation but it relies heavily on BPS research, with some familiar names like Moss-Morris, Chalder, Fink and Chew-Graham.

Basically following the growing theme of how to get people to agree that 2+2=5. Some people agree. Some disagree. What difference does it make? Ultimately none when it comes from an ideological position. There doesn't appear to be a point here other than frustration over why some people don't just agree with swallowing BS and trying to figure out how to better persuade.

 

Reminds me of Principal Skinner on the Simpsons. "Am I so out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong."

Perhaps the patients' low satisfaction was due to the ineffectiveness of the treatment?