Exposure to Potentially Traumatic Events, Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms, Pain Catastrophizing, and Functional Somatic Symptoms.., 2020, Zerach et al

Full title: Exposure to Potentially Traumatic Events, Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms, Pain Catastrophizing, and Functional Somatic Symptoms Among Individuals With Varied Somatic Symptoms: A Moderated Mediation Model

Paywall, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0886260520912587
Not available via Sci hub at time of posting.

 

Translation...

Pain isn't real.
People who say they are in pain are mentally ill, attention-seeking hypochondriacs.
The mentally well who develop pain will grin and bear it and pretend it doesn't exist rather than disturb healthy people.
Doctors don't really believe patients who say they are in pain and don't want to treat it.
They don't like treating people they consider to be mad for any form of physical symptom.

My response...

Many members of the medical profession, with a particular emphasis on those in psychology, psychotherapy, and psychiatry, are apparently sadists.
They dodge and weave their way through their careers, avoiding actually believing the patient, and often make little or no attempt to cure the patient, instead they just fob them off endlessly.
When these doctors can't fix the patient they assume the patient's symptoms are not real and the patient is making it all up.
Because patients are so rarely believed, pain isn't treated often enough or ruthlessly enough.

 

It seems reasonable to assume that people who never learned the art of punctuation, as indicated by their first sentence, are unlikely to be able to describe complex ideas. Where should that comma go?

EDIT This may be thought to be nit-picking. It is not. The authors describe "relationships", but fail to make clear what the relationships are between.

 

You gave me PEM from laughing!

 

A question that has crossed my mind frequently when I've read abstracts/papers like the one this thread is about is when do the authors believe that people saying "I'm in pain" is "acceptable", "normal" and "healthy" and not the sign of someone displaying a symptom of mental illness?

 

Potentially traumatizing events? Is this homeopathic psychology? There is no trauma but maybe there is still a trace of it? This is some seriously advanced woo. So even if you never actually experienced anything remotely close to a traumatic event, you probably had potential exposure so let's just assume anyway and don't bother because heads they win and tails you lose.

Oh, they have been "recently exemplified", have they? Very Orwellian way of saying "we cherry-picked potential anecdotes". Still means the same thing, though.

Can be. May be. Would explain. Might. Could. When you use that standard, literally anything can also be anything. That's why we use this thing called science. Try it some day.

And that did not give pause? It clearly shows their questionnaires are completely useless at scoring the thing they think they are evaluating.

Oh, it "highlights", does it? Well isn't that marvelous. That's one remarkably devious way of saying "we have cherry-picked". It literally suggests the absurd reality of taking a text, using a yellow highlighter to emphasize something and arguing that it must mean something that it's been highlighted. Stuff in the labeled box is indeed labeled, confirming that the label is correct. QED.

I can't wrap my head around the process of going into one of the hardest academic disciplines, studying and working hard for years, then toiling hard for more years to do an actual piece of work and this turd is what comes out. These people are nuts and have lost all connection to reality. Actually strike that, it's whoever gives credibility and support to this that has lost all connection to reality. This is no different than publishing astrology in a physics journal.

Get your shit together people because it's all over the damn place.

 

but it is not them, unfortunately, I almost had said