Enough is Enough

[John W]

Hi Valpo,
I'm curious how you ferret out the "dysfunction" from the pain. Based on what we've learned about clinician's abilities to reliably identify these dysfunctions- several of which you've listed- do you think this is either possible or useful?

[Diane]

Valpo, here is a link to the Welcome forum, where you can start a thread and introduce yourself, what you do, what you're interested in, and where we can welcome you to Somasimple.

[docjohn]

good idea...piss off a guy with an automatic weapon!
this reminds me of a recent job interview I had with a professional team in my area.
i started ruminating on the cns role in modulating pain, and the looks glossed over as fast as the republican candidate chances in Massachusetts.
I feel your pain (and anger), however I am not armed!

[Jason Silvernail]

A few people have focused on my current avatar picture mentioning the weapon as if I might threaten someone with it. I don't appreciate the implication. I'm in the Army, it's a picture of me at a skills competition, that's it. Shall we focus on the clinical and scientific issues?

[Diane]

Seriously Jason, they can't think of any way to fight you - logically - so they indulge in pooh-flinging.

[rkathryn]

I also enjoyed reading this paper and I think people take themselves too darn seriously-- it seems that your terms of "fasciahead", etc were a humorous way to explain your points.

Although we build our businesses on what we do for our clients/patients, it doesn't make us who were are in total-- we are more (or less) than that. People are associating themselves so much so with their work that they can't bear to see anything that opposes (or seems to) what they believe without feeling like their personal lively-hood or sense of self is being insulted.

[Jason Silvernail]

I think you are right Rajam. That's a big part of the problem. My Facebook page has a bit of a postmortem today on this weekend.

[John W]

Jason,
The sparring over there about your article got to be like hitting a concrete block wall with bare knuckles. Or maybe your bare forehead. I literally got a headache from all the convolutions of tortured logic and outright disingenuousness of the arguments.

Anyone who complains of being insulted when you poke a little fun at their ideas after accusing you of participating in an "echo chamber", is being not a little bit hypocritical. I mean, how much more insulting can you be than by telling someone that s/he is incapable of thinking for her/himself? I mean, that's like comparing you to a cult member or adherent of a fascist movement for crying out loud!

But put a dollar sign in the middle of the word fa$cia and you've committed the most heinous ad hominem of the century.

Please...

Speaking of "please"- I implore you to not mess with your avatar.

[Jason Silvernail]

I hear you John.
Not a chance I'd change it now - maybe for a more recent pic in a similar theme...

[rkathryn]

John, you're so right about the word "Fa$cia" which I personally find to be hilarious, especially since I have spent a lot of $$ learning not much of anything about it.

I actually received a private message from someone who I don't know asking me what I thought about people using the word like that and couldn't I see that the term was just so unprofessional and shocking? What a joke!


Here's what this person wrote:

"I am curious: how do you deal with the Fa$cia and Fa$cination comments on somasimple?

Do you think it's proper for any researcher to use comments like that when talking about other academic researchers? I can't imagine anyone in the fascia community speaking of Diane or Barrett that way. Why do they do that?"




And here's my response:

"Personally, I find that word typed as such - Fa$cia - very funny. Especially when I think back to the amount of $$ I spent for MFR training with Barnes. I'm not sure what academic researchers you are referring?

Yes, there have been plenty of insults thrown by members of the "fascia community" of which you refer. A more recent post by someone who wrote on Diane's wall -- "Diane, you are full of ---".

I don't see a separation of fascia and the nervous system, and I can't understand why there's so much bitterness and anger that gets posted by people who can't understand what people like Diane, Barrett & even Silvernail are writing about.

Not to mention that Diane was kicked off of Dr. Chaitow's wall for no reason at all except for questioning some of the theories he teaches. Several months (or maybe almost a year ago) I also contacted him myself to discuss DNM and he reacted quite defensively, so much so that it was quite difficult for him to even understand what I was writing about and that I was writing to share thoughts about the work itself, not to say that all forms of massage therapy are useless! That is a perfect example of the attitude that Diane and others on ss have to deal with regularly.

It's all a wonderful journey that can be taken without getting so worked up or defensive. Even more difficult is that online communication depends heavily on the mind of the reader. So, if you actually change the tone in your mind while reading a post-- for example, if you go back and read my note here in an angry voice and then read again in a happy cheerful voice, you will get an idea of that. There's a study about it somewhere and I can find it for you if you like. Also, if a reader already has an opinion about a person or idea before reading it, they will read the post in that tone. So, if you personally don't like Diane, when you read anything she posts, you will read it as a personal affront.

We have to be careful of that kind of thing when dealing with online communique. We don't really know eachother, so I'm certainly not saying that applies to you at all. I'm just bringing it up b/c it is an important thing to consider."

--Rajam


He has yet to respond to my message. I'll be surprised if he does.

What strikes me as bizarre is the whole separation thing, like it's "US' against "THEM". I find that confusing and ridiculous at the same time.

[Jason Silvernail]

How can just using the word "fa$cia" be construed as a specific insult to a specific researcher? I've published on joint mobilization, should I take it as a personal affront if someone calls it "mobili$ation"? The effort expended to personalize an issue so you can act insulted to take the moral high ground is ridiculous. It's a favorite technique of at least one person we spoke with this weekend.

[docjohn]

didnt mean to implicate pooh slinging. I don't need to resign to that.
tried to inject levity. taken wrong way. excuse the hicup.

[Bas Asselbergs]

No worries Doc. happens in this medium at times.

[Jason Silvernail]

No problem John.

[John W]

Very apt comparison, Jason. There's every bit as much a mobili$ation industry as their is a fa$cia industry- and I'm not just talking about con. ed. because the "tooth fairy" science aspect is alive and well in both of these areas of clinical research.

In fact, I'd say that the bogus research is even more of a problem because it gives the defenders of these methods academic cover. Also, researchers should know better than to keep publishing wishy-washy studies that lack a plausible foundation.

I think a lot of them do know better, but, like many of our clinical colleagues, they sell out to "make a living".