From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: Dr. John Sarno
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 1997
Newsgroups: alt.med.fibromyalgia,alt.support.chronic-pain,
	misc.health.alternative

In <01bce696$7b22eaa0$245971cf@none.fsxnet.com> "Harmon"
<dontspamme@spam.not> writes:

>Steven B. Harris <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
><63ef39$bop@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>...
>> In <01bce682$3cc03e20$275971cf@none.fsxnet.com> "Harmon"
>> <dontspamme@spam.not> writes:
>>
>> >Dr. Sarno believes that back pain, fibromyalgia, and other chronic pain
>> >conditions are due to repressed anger or anxiety which sets up a vicious
>> >cycle. Increased anger/anxiety causes a sympathetic nervous system response
>> >(the "fight or flight" response) which in turn causes constriction of blood
>> >vessels supplying the postural muscles of the back and other body areas.
>> >There is less oxygen going to these muscles causing temporary ischemia, so
>> >the body switches from aerobic to anerobic respiration in the affected
>> >areas. Lactic acid is an end product, and it is the lactic acid which is
>> >actually responsible for the pain (rather than constriction of the nerve
>> >roots or disc herniation as is commonly believed in the case of back
>> >pain).
>>
>>
>>
>> ROFL.  It's sort of like telling you it's all in your head, but more
>> complicated.  A whole book with biochemistry, yet.  For which you pay
>> money.  And after you figure out what the book is really saying, you
>> want to strangle that no-good scam artist Sarno.  Uh, uh, uh!  No, no.
>> Repressed anger there.  Hidden hostility.  No wonder your back is
>> hurting more.
>
>
>Dear Dr. Harris:
>
>Exactly which part of Dr. Sarno's argument below are you disagreeing with:
>
>   1. Anger/anxiety causes a sympathetic nervous system response
>
>   2. The sympathetic nervous system is responsible for the "fight or
>flight" response
>
>   3. The "fight or flight" response is responsible for constricting blood
>vessels in certain parts of the body while dilating blood vessels in other
>parts of the body
>
>   4. Constricting blood vessels means less blood and hence less oxygen is
>supplying these areas
>
>   5. Because the muscles are not receiving adequate oxygen, they must
>switch to anerobic respiration for their needed energy rather than
>use aerobic respiration which requires oxygen (I could get into a long
>discussion of electron transport and oxidative phosphorylation here, but I
>don't want to bore you <g>)
>
>   6. A major end product of anerobic respiration is lactic acid
>
>   7. Lactic acid is responsible for certain types of pain, such as the
>cramps that runners feel in their legs when they are not receiving enough
>oxygen, or the pain of angina due to ischemia
>
>   8. When people develop chronic pain, go to doctors and hear words like:
>"disc herniation" or "compressed nerve roots" or "stenosis," or when they
>think they might need surgery, they become more anxious, thus setting up a
>vicious pain cycle.
>
>I really would appreciate it if you would answer my question, Dr. Harris,
>because I want to ROFL too.




The problem is that anybody can make up pseudo biochemical arguments
like that, if there is no burden of proof.  You see, reading things you
don't agree with on usenet makes your epinephrine levels go up.  This
makes your heart rate and blood pressure go up, and breathing increase.
 More rapid breathing and lower CO2 causes vasoconstriction in your
brain.  Vasoconstriction causing lack of delivered oxygen causes
neurons to miss critical nutrients and misfire.   Misfiring neurons
results in cognitive deficits.  Such deficits result in posting things
about popular books you've read which contain flawed logic.  Flawed
logic gets you flamed by sarcastic medical doctors.  This causes
epinephrine levels to rise still more, completing a vicious cycle....

                                     Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: Dr. John Sarno
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 1997
Newsgroups: alt.med.fibromyalgia,alt.support.chronic-pain,
	misc.health.alternative

In <01bce6d1$df73e8c0$205971cf@none.fsxnet.com> "Harmon"
<dontspamme@spam.not> writes:

>Steven B. Harris <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
><63f0ad$7hr@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>...
>> In <01bce696$7b22eaa0$245971cf@none.fsxnet.com> "Harmon"
>> <dontspamme@spam.not> writes:
>> The problem is that anybody can make up pseudo biochemical arguments
>> like that, if there is no burden of proof.
>
>In which part of Dr. Sarno's 8-point argument (which I previously posted)
>is there no burden of proof? I was under the impression that because these
>facts are available in biochemistry and physiology textbooks (and taught to
>second year medical students), it is common knowledge.
>
>>You see, reading things you
>> don't agree with on usenet makes your epinephrine levels go up. This
>> makes your heart rate and blood pressure go up, and breathing increase.
>>  More rapid breathing and lower CO2 causes vasoconstriction in your
>> brain.
>
>I was under the impression that because crucial organs such as the brain
>are more sensitive to chemical changes, they are much more closely
>regulated by the autonomic centers in the carotid bodies and medulla than
>organs such as the back muscles. Also, any CO2 effects are indirect because
>CO2 cannot cross the blood-brain barrier.
>
>Over to you...



CO2 not only crosses the blood-brain barrier, it is a critical
regulator of cerebral blood flow.

I repeat, the Sarno stuff is complete nonsense.  There are lots of
things that give you HUGE epinephrine and stress levels, and they don't
all automatically give you back muscle, or even other muscle, pain.
People run marathons without getting back pain.  The idea that the same
kind of lactic acid stress happens to YOUR back just sitting in a chair
is, well, silly.  It's going to take a lot more direct proof than some
superficially nice sounding argument.  Sarno's hypothesis might work as
a grant proposal for a study, but it doesn't fly as a basis to treat
actual patients in clinical practice.  It does make him money, though.

                                   Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: Dr. John Sarno
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997
Newsgroups: alt.med.fibromyalgia,alt.support.chronic-pain,
	misc.health.alternative

In <345EA182.84D28275@pacbell.net> Don Royal
<droyaldc.nospam@pacbell.net> writes:

>Steven B. Harris wrote:
>
>
>>  It does make him money, though.
>>
>
>> Steve Harris, M.D.
>
> For the most part I agree with you (as usual).  This part about making
>money has me a little confused though.  Don't you think surgery would be
>billable at a higher rate??<G>
>course we gotta factor in what he's savin on annibacteereal hannsoap
>dcrdc



We don't know if doing surgery is an option for him.  In any case,
laying back and letting the profits from a book come in is a lot more
comfortable than standing under that hot light with your nose itching
and that horrible responsiblity.  I bet.

                                       Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: Dr. John Sarno
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997
Newsgroups: alt.med.fibromyalgia,alt.support.chronic-pain,
	misc.health.alternative

In <345E2157.CD3F3D7B@here.com> Bemis Lovecraft <Not@here.com> writes:

>Harmon wrote:
>
>> In which part of Dr. Sarno's 8-point argument (which I previously posted)
>> is there no burden of proof? I was under the impression that because these
>> facts are available in biochemistry and physiology textbooks (and taught to
>> second year medical students), it is common knowledge.
>
>
>How come I still hurt when I am not angry?  How come a discogram showed
>that two of my disks had popped?  Did my anger make them pop?db


A better question involves all those people with unsymmetrical back
pain--- including not a few who have no pain on one side at all.  I
suppose these people are only half-angry?

Use common sense, people.

                                   Steve Harris, M.D.


-----


From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: Dr. John Sarno
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997
Newsgroups: alt.med.fibromyalgia,alt.support.chronic-pain,misc.health.alternative


In <345E9D96.5D77@islandnet.com> Margaret Meanie <minnie@islandnet.com>
writes:

>Steven B. Harris wrote:
>>
>> In <01bce682$3cc03e20$275971cf@none.fsxnet.com> "Harmon"
>> <dontspamme@spam.not> writes:
>> >
>(snips)
>>
>> ROFL.  It's sort of like telling you it's all in your head, but more
>> complicated.  A whole book with biochemistry, yet.  For which you pay
>> money.  And after you figure out what the book is really saying, you
>> want to strangle that no-good scam artist Sarno.  Uh, uh, uh!  No, no.
>> Repressed anger there.  Hidden hostility.  No wonder your back is
>> hurting more.
>>
>>                               Steve Harris, M.D.
>
>Wow:
>
>I'm blown away. But then, res ipse loquitur. Doctors try to explain
>"functional" and "psychosomatic", which terms aren't in their area of
>expertise or even their jurisdiction.  If they would just refer, things
>would be plain.  But they do tell us there are no treatments.  That's
>where I beg to differ. There are...
>
>Margaret



I don't know any doctors who say there are no treatments for back pain.
Just no treatments that work for everybody.  I didn't say there were no
people with "functional" or psychosomatic back pain.  I just happen to
think they are in the minority.

BTW, of course all pain is influenced by psychological factors.  But
these factors are not even close to the whole story.  No more with an
aching back than a broken ankle.

                                       Steve Harris, M.D.