[Question] Output = Defense ?

**AdamB** · 25-04-2012, 09:28 PM

Forgive me for mumbling:

Hope I'm not stating the trite, but could we for the sake of conceptualizing parts of the deep model with our patients and colleagues put an equals sign in between Melzack's concept of "outputs" and Evolutionary Medicine's "defenses"?

When I'm talking to those of my colleagues who is actually a bit interested or at least is looking for new ways of reasoning about our patients problems and how we might go about them, it might be more intuitive for a non-neuro-nerd to grasp the concept of a "defense" instead of an "output". Not all might be familiar with cybernetics and control theory.

That means that the ultimate (in evolutionary terms) key principle behind all types of our interventions will be to "chill the defense" by directly using the patients sensory and cognitive systems which in turn we hope will influence the endocrine, motor and affective systems in a more "stabilising" way.

**Diane** · 25-04-2012, 10:07 PM

I think that would make sense. It might not overlap exactly, but there would certainly be enough overlap that it could work.

Gil Haight · 26-04-2012, 04:07 AM

Adam,

"That means that the ultimate (in evolutionary terms) key principle behind all types of our interventions will be to "chill the defense"

I wouldn't have a problem with replacing output with defense if we can accept that a defense is a perfectly normal response. "Chilling the defense" would make no sense at all. The problem as I see it comes when the patient inhibits the process. I understand we could be splitting hairs here, but when it comes to the component of output we define here as ideomotion, nothing bad will occur with its expression.
Gil

25-04-2012, 09:28 PM	#1
AdamB SomaSimpler Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Falster, Denmark Age: 40 Posts: 202 Thanks: 425 Thanked 207 Times in 63 Posts	Output = Defense ? Forgive me for mumbling: Hope I'm not stating the trite, but could we for the sake of conceptualizing parts of the deep model with our patients and colleagues put an equals sign in between Melzack's concept of "outputs" and Evolutionary Medicine's "defenses"? When I'm talking to those of my colleagues who is actually a bit interested or at least is looking for new ways of reasoning about our patients problems and how we might go about them, it might be more intuitive for a non-neuro-nerd to grasp the concept of a "defense" instead of an "output". Not all might be familiar with cybernetics and control theory. That means that the ultimate (in evolutionary terms) key principle behind all types of our interventions will be to "chill the defense" by directly using the patients sensory and cognitive systems which in turn we hope will influence the endocrine, motor and affective systems in a more "stabilising" way. __________________ Adam Bjerre "We don't treat anatomy, we treat processes." D. Butler "When we wish to perfect our senses, neuroplasticity is a blessing; when it works in the service of pain, plasticity can be a curse." N. Doidge

25-04-2012, 10:07 PM	#2
Diane Human Primate Social Groomer and Neuroelastician Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Weyburn Sask. Posts: 19,678 Thanks: 1,493 Thanked 3,199 Times in 1,571 Posts	I think that would make sense. It might not overlap exactly, but there would certainly be enough overlap that it could work. __________________ Diane www.dermoneuromodulation.com SensibleSolutionsPhysiotherapy HumanAntiGravitySuit blog Neurotonics PT Teamblog Diane Jacobs.com (personal website) Canadian Physiotherapy Pain Science Division (Archived newsletters) Canadian Physiotherapy Association Pain Science Division Facebook page @PainPhysiosCan WCPT PhysiotherapyPainNetwork on Facebook @WCPTPTPN Neuroscience and Pain Science for Manual PTs Facebook page @dfjpt SomaSimple on Facebook @somasimple "Rene Descartes was very very smart, but as it turned out, he was wrong." ~Lorimer Moseley “Comment is free, but the facts are sacred.” ~Charles Prestwich Scott, nephew of founder and editor (1872-1929) of The Guardian , in a 1921 Centenary editorial “If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you, but if you really make them think, they'll hate you." ~Don Marquis "In times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists" ~Roland Barth "Doubt is not a pleasant mental state, but certainty is a ridiculous one."~Voltaire

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tip Touch in plants -> defense	Diane	General Discussion	5	09-04-2012 11:41 PM
Books on Motor Output	Diane	The Pharos of Alexandria	2	15-06-2006 10:38 AM

26-04-2012, 04:07 AM	#3
Gil Haight Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 269 Thanks: 56 Thanked 51 Times in 25 Posts	Adam, "That means that the ultimate (in evolutionary terms) key principle behind all types of our interventions will be to "chill the defense" I wouldn't have a problem with replacing output with defense if we can accept that a defense is a perfectly normal response. "Chilling the defense" would make no sense at all. The problem as I see it comes when the patient inhibits the process. I understand we could be splitting hairs here, but when it comes to the component of output we define here as ideomotion, nothing bad will occur with its expression. Gil