My problem with FND is when doctors and institutions claim that there is no physical or biological cause. The Mayo clinic's website states "Basically, parts of the brain that control the functioning of your muscles and senses may be involved, even though no disease or abnormality exists"
Given that they are making this claim the burden of proof is on them to provide evidence that this is the case. However, the only evidence they have is that they can't find any abnormalities. Given they haven't looked very hard and do sometimes find abnormalities when they look, the claim that no disease exists seems pretty ridiculous. If they had just said "we have this condition that causes these symptoms and we don't know the cause" I don't think anyone would have a problem with it. But instead they claim they know the answer, and that answer is that there is no real abnormalities at all. I think its fair to say the field of medicine would be much better off if they admitted we don't what the cause is and looked for answers.
It's fascinating to see how this plays out in pleasing some patients, when they don't know that it's just the new label for the old conversion disorder.
I recently saw a reddit post from someone diagnosed with FND instead of Long Covid, talking about the "tests" kind of like what's described in this other thread
Non-invasive neuromodulation of the right temporoparietal junction using theta-burst stimulation in [FND] 2024 Bühler et al. It was mainly about how concentrating on doing hand movements lessened tremors in their hands, and things like the Hoover sign. They were quite happy that it sounds neurological and legit, since of course part of FND is insisting that they believe that the symptoms are "real", where real means something completely different to us. The tests are not valid but they look like neurological tests and are done with a serious face so it looks legit if you don't know any better.
And a thread today about Mayo's LC clinic and how they diagnosed them with central sensitization, explaining how it's their model of the nervous system being more sensitive to symptoms, because it's sensitized. It's a circular model, but it's explained in a way that pretends that it's legitimate and neurological, the patient doesn't know that the theoretical basis is still ye olde conversion disorder. Everyone is failed, including the clinicians and researchers, but only the patients know that so it keeps going. Sometimes, apparently. Hey, some people are find with an astrological explanation. And a homeopathic explanation. Or a psychic narrative.
The model has slightly moved away from purely psychological to using either non-organic or non-structural, which is just a cheap way of saying psychological without admitting it to the patient, but as they find evidence they not only retain all the baggage, they actually use the new evidence to claim that all the old baggage was actually correct. So it's a new way of doing pseudoscience, where better science actually strengthens the old beliefs and traditions. It's really impressive.
Having never had to provide any evidence for their models, having been able to simply do away with explaining things in a narrative way, there is no way forward. Until the mythical baggage of the old conversion disorder is made obsolete, patients will never receive meaningful help. Because that's really the crux here. In the FND model, patients are sometimes getting help. It's just not meaningful, makes no difference. And the old claims, like Knoop and his recent letter explaining that his model of unhelpful illness beliefs being helped by CBT, non-meaningfully, doesn't mean psychological just shows how the lies will never stop. They can't not lie, the entire ideology is a lie and whenever they themselves debunk it, instead of admitting it they simply say that it actually validates the lie.
And there's also the post that Nicholson replies to above, which ends with "the brain is very complicated". As if we haven't been telling them so, that they don't know nearly enough yet to push their psychosomatic narratives, but they actually use a fact that weakens their ideology as evidence that it strengthens it. It's really incredible the lies people can tell themselves, especially in a group that exists to support them.