The ulcer is for real, but so much mind-body-behavior is involved in worsening/healing. We have gotten much better at fixing than preventing (fixing is more profitable).

JP MD

A common misunderstanding. Engels produced nothing that could be remotely described as a standard scientific model. What he did do was argue cogently for the necessity and importance of a biopsychosocial model. May seem like nitpicking, but it is important to get these basic facts right.

As to the model itself. I, like most, do not have any in principle problem with such a model, and believe it is an advance in medical thinking.

But the way it is often used is troubling. Far too much is simply ascribed to primary psychosocial causation (in particular somatisation, in all its guises) simply because the clinician can’t find any immediate primary physical cause. Yet even a cursory glance at the history of such diagnostic reasonings reveals a disturbingly persistent pattern of serious error. Just about every major disease has been ’somatised’ at some point by medical science (well, the psychiatric branch of it), and yet they turned out to be primarily (or even entirely) physical disorders. The latest and perhaps most infamous major example being stomach ulcers, which were supposedly (indeed, undisputedly) the archetypal conversion disorder. Except they were not.

Lack of clear primary physical causation (even when coupled with the presence serious emotional distress) is not solid evidence of somatisation, it could just as easily be evidence of the current limitation of biophysical medical science or the particular clinician, or both.

/rant

Evil Monkey from Neurotopia posts on face blindness or prosopagnosia, and how they have found a gene that results in a heritable form. They have not, to my knowledge, found a gene for why I can’t remember the girl who…

The first factor, and one of the most important, is the Science and medical field’s acceptance of psychology. While studies have for years touted that the mind and body are interconnected and hence, one influences the other; it was not until greater sophistication in medical tools such as imaging or scans that won skeptics over. Now, most doctors and clinicians may be inclined to admit several things. One, the brain controls most of our bodily functions. Two, intangible variables such as mood and stress affect the body and hence, the ability to fight off disease.

The second factor is inter-related to the first. In the last twenty years or so, social scientists, psychologists and other researchers have turned their attention to not just illness but wellness as well. There was a hallmark study, completed in the mid 1990’s .It was entitled “The Macarthur Study on Successful Aging” (Rowe, JW. MD., Kahn, RL., MD). What made this research so remarkable was that it was the first time researchers thought to ask about what gave people pleasure. We know now that social interaction, friendships and even religiosity contribute to personal happiness and satisfaction which, in turn, helps to maintain physical well-being.

Third, doctors are being proactive about the eternal problem of the patient’s medicinal non-compliance. Literature in many peer journals have for years explored and found the reasons why people do not take their medication as prescribed. While in the past noncompliance may not have bothered the doctor as much as vexed him or her, times have changed. The population is aging which means that some medications are integral to daily functioning and also, health insurance is tightening the belt.

Research, such as that found in the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (2002, (49): Kardas, P), has shown that while cost is a reason, it is not the only one. While the above study is limited in scope, an important point is that if non-compliance occurs in short term, respiratory illness, then imagine the rate for long term physical and/or psychiatric use.

Some of these factors plus others may have coalesced into creating an atmosphere that allowed the Biopsychosocial Model to be born. What each component shares is greater understanding. There is greater understanding of how the brain functions, both on a physical and emotional basis, about the effect of external influences on the body and of course, a better understanding of patient behavior.

I bring this up because they are as important as the Model itself and therefore, deserve some attention.

I hope you will forgive my rambles. At times, I get curious not just about the new destination but also about the path that was tread.

An overly garrulous,

Always Learning