Review Understanding Functional Neurological Disorder: Recent Insights and Diagnostic Challenges, 2024, Mavroudis et al.

PS on that last line: "In that scenario we could ask much more interesting questions not only about the biology of functional neurological symptoms but about the psychology of headache."

I highly doubt that anyone has been stopping this crew from looking into the biology or biomedical of those who they end up labelling as 'functional neurological' so of course it is all the usual rhetoric of pretending their would be some two-way benefit.

I'm probably not surprising anyone / doing a 'spoiler' by clarifying that the article certainly doesn't suggest the wonderful expertise of biomedical scientists who have looked into migraine cures and medications might be drafted in by them to help get to the bottom of their FND patients..

 

“Er…so…erm..FND is caused by lots of things…or everything….or maybe nothing. I dunno. We dunno. BUT we are confident we know what causes it and how. Can I explain that position? No. Now…can I interest you in my expert, evidence-based diagnosis of FND - wait, why are you running away?”

If FND patients shared an aberrant biology wouldn’t that suggest that they have…organic disease?

I can never get this field to make sense.

 

Everything and the kitchen sink, but especially the kitchen sink, because we know. Just pure hubristic gut feeling ruining millions of lives, it's baffling.

I am complete puzzled at the idea of asking psychological questions about headaches, it's so mediocre in having no scope, no ambition. It's just lazy and mediocre.

 

There is a big US arm of the FND lobby, with key people like Perez at Mass General/Harvard. It might be that it has emerged more recently than the UK arm.

 

Yes - I didn’t word it well but was meaning of the 173 references on here. As it purports to be some sort of review

Only looked at 9 and 8 were UK and stone, sharpe, Carson were in most of them

be interesting to look further and see the actual spread of the rest.