What do you think?
Rate this book
When the Body Says No: The Cost of Hidden Stress
In this accessible and groundbreaking book--filled with the moving stories of real people--medical doctor and bestselling author Gabor Maté shows that emotion and psychological stress play a powerful role in the onset of chronic illness, including breast cancer, prostate cancer, multiple sclerosis and many others, even Alzheimer's disease.
When the Body Says No is an impressive contribution to research on the physiological connection between life's stresses and emotions and the body systems governing nerves, immune apparatus and hormones. With great compassion and erudition, Gabor Maté demystifies medical science and, as he did in Scattered Minds , invites us all to be our own health advocates.
When the Body Says No is an impressive contribution to research on the physiological connection between life's stresses and emotions and the body systems governing nerves, immune apparatus and hormones. With great compassion and erudition, Gabor Maté demystifies medical science and, as he did in Scattered Minds , invites us all to be our own health advocates.
320 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
About the author
Gabor Maté
42 books5,913 followersDr Gabor Maté (CM) is a Hungarian-born Canadian physician who specializes in the study and treatment of addiction and is also widely recognized for his unique perspective on Attention Deficit Disorder and his firmly held belief in the connection between mind and body health.
Born in Budapest, Hungary in 1944, he is a survivor of the Nazi genocide. His maternal grandparents were killed in Auschwitz when he was five months old, his aunt disappeared during the war, and his father endured forced labour at the hands of the Nazis.
He emigrated to Canada with his family in 1957. After graduating with a B.A. from the University of British Columbia in Vancouver and a few years as a high school English and literature teacher, he returned to school to pursue his childhood dream of being a physician.
Maté ran a private family practice in East Vancouver for over twenty years. He was also the medical co-ordinator of the Palliative Care Unit at Vancouver Hospital for seven years. Currently he is the staff physician at the Portland Hotel, a residence and resource centre for the people of Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. Many of his patients suffer from mental illness, drug addiction and HIV, or all three.
Most recently, he has written about his experiences working with addicts in In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts.
He made national headlines in defense of the physicians working at Insite (a legal supervised safe injection site) after the federal Minister of Health, Tony Clement, attacked them as unethical.
Born in Budapest, Hungary in 1944, he is a survivor of the Nazi genocide. His maternal grandparents were killed in Auschwitz when he was five months old, his aunt disappeared during the war, and his father endured forced labour at the hands of the Nazis.
He emigrated to Canada with his family in 1957. After graduating with a B.A. from the University of British Columbia in Vancouver and a few years as a high school English and literature teacher, he returned to school to pursue his childhood dream of being a physician.
Maté ran a private family practice in East Vancouver for over twenty years. He was also the medical co-ordinator of the Palliative Care Unit at Vancouver Hospital for seven years. Currently he is the staff physician at the Portland Hotel, a residence and resource centre for the people of Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. Many of his patients suffer from mental illness, drug addiction and HIV, or all three.
Most recently, he has written about his experiences working with addicts in In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts.
He made national headlines in defense of the physicians working at Insite (a legal supervised safe injection site) after the federal Minister of Health, Tony Clement, attacked them as unethical.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,146 reviews
January 30, 2024
My Most Honest Review Yet.....
Between my junior and senior year of college, in the summer of 2005, my father kicked me out of the house after staying with him for approximately two weeks. The only job that I had ever had, the one where I spent the last two years working faithfully, somehow managed to mess up my job transfer leaving me without employment. It was painfully obvious that I needed to end things with my fiancée, and I hated my college major, but I was on a scholarship which only lasted one additional year, and I could not switch majors without extending my time at college, time and money that I didn’t have.
There was nothing positive in my life, and there weren’t too many people that cared. When I walked over a bridge on the way to class, I would often think about jumping off. There was a wounded animal that lived inside me. The only thing that seemed to quiet this animal was alcohol. At one point, I had 13 bruises on my body from falling down so much from drinking. I was convinced that I was the saddest person alive, sadder even than anyone in the course of human history. One day, I drove to the cemetery where my childhood friend was located and took as many pills as I could. I drove over to my father with a gas tank on E, telling him that it was too late, and I’m sorry for what I did.
It wasn’t until I was in the hospital that depression was mentioned for the first time. Depression? What? But that was only for people who were emo, the ones that dressed all in black and had black lipstick and nails. That couldn’t possibly be me.
Growing up with my brother and my father, I was never allowed to feel “negative” emotions. No sadness, no loneliness, no disappointment. If I cried, my father told me in no uncertain terms that I was a crybaby and to stop that or go to my room. My father has never once cried in my presence. So I learned that if I felt lonely that there must be something wrong with me, fueling anxiety, creating a wound that would never heal.
One of the most transformative experiences for me was going to a therapy group, Coping with Depression. Everyone there was crazy, but I realized that I thought some of those exact same crazy thoughts. For example, no one cares about me or no one cares if I die. That just isn’t true, but where is that coming from? Well, I was lonely. But newsflash: Being lonely is actually healthy! Everyone is lonely from time to time. That emotion is completely normal. The feeling was correct, but the conclusion was incorrect. That was the common theme among all of the Coping with Depression participants.
Why am I telling you this? Well, the author is going to talk about personality types that repress their feelings, and that used to be me. Second, mental health has to be part of everyday vernacular. It needs to be talked about. There is no shame in talking about our struggles. Third, if this helps even one person, then being this vulnerable was worth it.
This author’s premise is that there are three personality types, Type A (people who are angry), Type B, Type C (the people who repress their feelings and get sick). The author says that he doesn’t like to “blame” the cancer patient or chronic illness sufferer, but that is exactly what he is doing. He asserts that people with breast cancer brought it on themselves.
Respectfully, this author is way off base. He was talking about genetically based diseases and then blaming the patients. Additionally, I knew from the very first chapter that the author was a white male. How do I know that? Well, if women go to the doctor, no matter what the complaint, the doctor will think that she is either crazy, pregnant, or both, in about 95% of cases. It was a running joke at uni that if a female came in with a stubbed toe, that the medical staff would automatically assume pregnancy.
Women are over diagnosed with either depression or functional neurological disorder when in fact they have very serious medical problems. For additional detail, I suggest reading The Pain Gap. Personally, I have been diagnosed with moderate depression when I actually had Celiac Disease and with a Functional Neurological Disorder when I actually needed heart surgery. When I went to the Emergency Department, they allowed me to wait in the waiting room until I was passed out unconscious before they decided to do an EKG. If you review the ratings of this hospital, most of the 1 star reviews are from women and the 5 star ratings are from men. Women and people of color are still treated as second-class citizens in healthcare.
Now if you are a Type C personality or if you are a man who was raised to never cry and repress your feelings, this book might be of some value to you.
2024 Reading Schedule
Jan Middlemarch
Feb The Grapes of Wrath
Mar Oliver Twist
Apr Madame Bovary
May A Clockwork Orange
Jun Possession
Jul The Folk of the Faraway Tree Collection
Aug Crime and Punishment
Sep Heart of Darkness
Oct Moby-Dick
Nov Far From the Madding Crowd
Dec A Tale of Two Cities
Connect With Me!
Blog Twitter BookTube Facebook Insta
Between my junior and senior year of college, in the summer of 2005, my father kicked me out of the house after staying with him for approximately two weeks. The only job that I had ever had, the one where I spent the last two years working faithfully, somehow managed to mess up my job transfer leaving me without employment. It was painfully obvious that I needed to end things with my fiancée, and I hated my college major, but I was on a scholarship which only lasted one additional year, and I could not switch majors without extending my time at college, time and money that I didn’t have.
There was nothing positive in my life, and there weren’t too many people that cared. When I walked over a bridge on the way to class, I would often think about jumping off. There was a wounded animal that lived inside me. The only thing that seemed to quiet this animal was alcohol. At one point, I had 13 bruises on my body from falling down so much from drinking. I was convinced that I was the saddest person alive, sadder even than anyone in the course of human history. One day, I drove to the cemetery where my childhood friend was located and took as many pills as I could. I drove over to my father with a gas tank on E, telling him that it was too late, and I’m sorry for what I did.
It wasn’t until I was in the hospital that depression was mentioned for the first time. Depression? What? But that was only for people who were emo, the ones that dressed all in black and had black lipstick and nails. That couldn’t possibly be me.
Growing up with my brother and my father, I was never allowed to feel “negative” emotions. No sadness, no loneliness, no disappointment. If I cried, my father told me in no uncertain terms that I was a crybaby and to stop that or go to my room. My father has never once cried in my presence. So I learned that if I felt lonely that there must be something wrong with me, fueling anxiety, creating a wound that would never heal.
One of the most transformative experiences for me was going to a therapy group, Coping with Depression. Everyone there was crazy, but I realized that I thought some of those exact same crazy thoughts. For example, no one cares about me or no one cares if I die. That just isn’t true, but where is that coming from? Well, I was lonely. But newsflash: Being lonely is actually healthy! Everyone is lonely from time to time. That emotion is completely normal. The feeling was correct, but the conclusion was incorrect. That was the common theme among all of the Coping with Depression participants.
Why am I telling you this? Well, the author is going to talk about personality types that repress their feelings, and that used to be me. Second, mental health has to be part of everyday vernacular. It needs to be talked about. There is no shame in talking about our struggles. Third, if this helps even one person, then being this vulnerable was worth it.
This author’s premise is that there are three personality types, Type A (people who are angry), Type B, Type C (the people who repress their feelings and get sick). The author says that he doesn’t like to “blame” the cancer patient or chronic illness sufferer, but that is exactly what he is doing. He asserts that people with breast cancer brought it on themselves.
Respectfully, this author is way off base. He was talking about genetically based diseases and then blaming the patients. Additionally, I knew from the very first chapter that the author was a white male. How do I know that? Well, if women go to the doctor, no matter what the complaint, the doctor will think that she is either crazy, pregnant, or both, in about 95% of cases. It was a running joke at uni that if a female came in with a stubbed toe, that the medical staff would automatically assume pregnancy.
Women are over diagnosed with either depression or functional neurological disorder when in fact they have very serious medical problems. For additional detail, I suggest reading The Pain Gap. Personally, I have been diagnosed with moderate depression when I actually had Celiac Disease and with a Functional Neurological Disorder when I actually needed heart surgery. When I went to the Emergency Department, they allowed me to wait in the waiting room until I was passed out unconscious before they decided to do an EKG. If you review the ratings of this hospital, most of the 1 star reviews are from women and the 5 star ratings are from men. Women and people of color are still treated as second-class citizens in healthcare.
Now if you are a Type C personality or if you are a man who was raised to never cry and repress your feelings, this book might be of some value to you.
2024 Reading Schedule
Jan Middlemarch
Feb The Grapes of Wrath
Mar Oliver Twist
Apr Madame Bovary
May A Clockwork Orange
Jun Possession
Jul The Folk of the Faraway Tree Collection
Aug Crime and Punishment
Sep Heart of Darkness
Oct Moby-Dick
Nov Far From the Madding Crowd
Dec A Tale of Two Cities
Connect With Me!
Blog Twitter BookTube Facebook Insta
July 9, 2015
“When we have been prevented from learning how to say no, our bodies may end up saying it for us.” - Gabor Maté, When the Body Says No
I think it’s common knowledge that stress takes its toll on the body and can cause chronic illness. Gabor Maté goes a step further in his analysis on stress’ impact on the body and looks in more depth into autoimmune diseases and how our reactions to life, as well as our upbringings, and our relationships with loved ones, might affect how our body reacts, for better or for worse. This book has a wealth of information that I feel should be essential reading.
Maté’s book was a wake up call in many ways. The author is a well-known and beloved Vancouver physician and he writes with such passion and understanding over the human body, illness and life experiences. The main issue Maté looks at is that of psychoneuroimmunology, the science of the interactions between the mind and the body. Basically, “our immune system does not exist in isolation from daily experience”, and our emotions and physiology are connected. Doctors often ask for our symptoms but few really help us understand that our childhood, upbringing and other factors play a huge part in our health. Maté advocates for a more holistic approach to healthcare.
I found the real examples in this book very informative, and also very sad. There was the story of Gilda Radner, who died from ovarian cancer. One of the things she said, which I’ll try my best to live by, goes as follows: “It is important to realize that you have to take care of yourself because you can’t take care of anybody else until you do.”
In addition to Radner, there were also analyses on Jonathan Swift (Gulliver’s Travels) and Ronald Reagan, who Maté said wrote his autobiography with “emotional poverty, disguised by sentiment.” Emotions were a big part of this book, suppressed emotions being seen as unhealthy expression and aiding in stress:
” Emotions interpret the world for us. They have a signal function, telling us about our internal states as they are affected by input from the outside. Emotions are responses to present stimuli as filtered through the memory of past experience, and they anticipate the future based on our perception of the past.”
“Repressed anger will lead to disordered immunity. The inability to process and express feelings effectively, and the tendency to serve the needs of others before considering one’s own, are common patterns in people who develop chronic illness.”
I learned that perfectionism is harmful. I also learned that so many of us carry other people’s burdens and it can become crippling. I learned more about Alzheimer’s, cancer, dementia, .multiple sclerosis. and other diseases, and was impressed by how Maté managed to communicate what he believes to be the sources of these diseases without taking on an accusatory or judgmental tone. He has so much empathy, and what he does in his writing, as well as informing and guiding us to self-analyze, is helping us achieve self-acceptance and healing.
This book challenged me to take an honest look at myself, at my life, how I do things, and how I react to things.
Finally, a mantra for those of us who perhaps do too much: “I should be a guide, not a god.”
I think it’s common knowledge that stress takes its toll on the body and can cause chronic illness. Gabor Maté goes a step further in his analysis on stress’ impact on the body and looks in more depth into autoimmune diseases and how our reactions to life, as well as our upbringings, and our relationships with loved ones, might affect how our body reacts, for better or for worse. This book has a wealth of information that I feel should be essential reading.
Maté’s book was a wake up call in many ways. The author is a well-known and beloved Vancouver physician and he writes with such passion and understanding over the human body, illness and life experiences. The main issue Maté looks at is that of psychoneuroimmunology, the science of the interactions between the mind and the body. Basically, “our immune system does not exist in isolation from daily experience”, and our emotions and physiology are connected. Doctors often ask for our symptoms but few really help us understand that our childhood, upbringing and other factors play a huge part in our health. Maté advocates for a more holistic approach to healthcare.
I found the real examples in this book very informative, and also very sad. There was the story of Gilda Radner, who died from ovarian cancer. One of the things she said, which I’ll try my best to live by, goes as follows: “It is important to realize that you have to take care of yourself because you can’t take care of anybody else until you do.”
In addition to Radner, there were also analyses on Jonathan Swift (Gulliver’s Travels) and Ronald Reagan, who Maté said wrote his autobiography with “emotional poverty, disguised by sentiment.” Emotions were a big part of this book, suppressed emotions being seen as unhealthy expression and aiding in stress:
” Emotions interpret the world for us. They have a signal function, telling us about our internal states as they are affected by input from the outside. Emotions are responses to present stimuli as filtered through the memory of past experience, and they anticipate the future based on our perception of the past.”
“Repressed anger will lead to disordered immunity. The inability to process and express feelings effectively, and the tendency to serve the needs of others before considering one’s own, are common patterns in people who develop chronic illness.”
I learned that perfectionism is harmful. I also learned that so many of us carry other people’s burdens and it can become crippling. I learned more about Alzheimer’s, cancer, dementia, .multiple sclerosis. and other diseases, and was impressed by how Maté managed to communicate what he believes to be the sources of these diseases without taking on an accusatory or judgmental tone. He has so much empathy, and what he does in his writing, as well as informing and guiding us to self-analyze, is helping us achieve self-acceptance and healing.
This book challenged me to take an honest look at myself, at my life, how I do things, and how I react to things.
Finally, a mantra for those of us who perhaps do too much: “I should be a guide, not a god.”
January 31, 2011
Well, I'm new to this site. I'm currently reading another of this author's books, In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts, about addiction. So I was reminded of the important role this book has played in my life. I read When the Body Says No shortly after being diagnosed with a life threatening autoimmune disease. It's scleroderma, one of the illnesses he talks about. Doctors encouraged me to make peace with life, as well as to stop working immediately. I didn't have long, they said. I had a highly stressful job but I thought my coping mechanisms were working. They weren't. But after leaving my job some of the symptoms diminished. I'm not saying this book saved my life but it caused me to rethink the relationship between stress and illness. And, well, I've survived five years past the doctors' best guess as to my expiry date!
p.s. The book doesn't get five stars because it does get a wee bit dry and unnecessarily detailed on occasion. But I adore this man. I highly recommend his In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts.
p.s. The book doesn't get five stars because it does get a wee bit dry and unnecessarily detailed on occasion. But I adore this man. I highly recommend his In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts.
June 21, 2016
Fine, call me a narrow-minded medic.
What irked me particularly about this book is the fact that every chapter starts with a sad tale of loss, grief, abuse and emotional repression that simply 'happens' to happen in somebody suffering from ALS/MS/various cancers. And from this Mate draws the conclusion (kinda) that denying your feelings will give you scleroderma.
Don't get me wrong here - I know fully well about the proper evidence (like, you know, academic papers and the likes) discussing the evidence behind immunosuppression in chronic stress exposure. That's not news. And correlation does not imply causation. But I'm just really upset that he thinks illustrating a self-help book with 'medical' cases will make the reader go 'from now on, I'll be more assertive'. The suggestion is not a bad one, the emotional blackmail is.
Here. I vented. I probably won't get ovarian cancer, but I do have a pretty good shot at developing MS (blame any typos in this review on early symptoms).
What irked me particularly about this book is the fact that every chapter starts with a sad tale of loss, grief, abuse and emotional repression that simply 'happens' to happen in somebody suffering from ALS/MS/various cancers. And from this Mate draws the conclusion (kinda) that denying your feelings will give you scleroderma.
Don't get me wrong here - I know fully well about the proper evidence (like, you know, academic papers and the likes) discussing the evidence behind immunosuppression in chronic stress exposure. That's not news. And correlation does not imply causation. But I'm just really upset that he thinks illustrating a self-help book with 'medical' cases will make the reader go 'from now on, I'll be more assertive'. The suggestion is not a bad one, the emotional blackmail is.
Here. I vented. I probably won't get ovarian cancer, but I do have a pretty good shot at developing MS (blame any typos in this review on early symptoms).
March 26, 2012
One of my concerns when I started reading this book was whether he would adequately address the idea of personal blame. I was pleasantly surprised on his clear distinction between blaming someone for their illness versus looking at larger dynamics that can add an increased risk to autoimmune disorders. He is fully in the latter category, not at all the former. In other words, he's not simplistic in his approach and does not say just "If this, then that." I appreciated how he walks the reader through the various connections and humanizes it with personal stories of his patients. I learned a lot about the role of cortisol production in our bodies and want to read more on this now. My mother died of a very aggressive cancer a year ago but was the healthiest person (in terms of food and exercise) in our family by far. I've been left with many questions about why she died this way despite her great health and this is the first book that has given me any solid scientific explanation for other emotional dynamics that might have contributed.
November 26, 2021
I've added below a full list of Mr. Mate's peer-reviewed studies, and why he would be entitled to offer tips on cancer treatments:
September 24, 2023
Najlepsze, co przeczytałem w tym roku.
December 13, 2021
Și mi-am promis că nu voi mai citi cărți de self-help. Dar curiozitatea a învins, am vrut să văd ce-i cu tot zgomotul. Ei, era pentru mai nimic.
Nu era nevoie de 350 de pagini ca să spună că reprimarea emoțiilor negative îți influențează negativ sănătatea (pe axa hormoni/sistem endocrin-sistem nervos-imunitate). De altfel, nici nu le-am citit pe toate, de la 130 și ceva am început sa răsfoiesc spre final, era clar că îmi pierd timpul cu aceeași poveste repetată iar și iar, schimbând doar numele și diagnosticul.
Cel mai grav mi se pare faptul că transformă relația dintre stres și boală în cauzalitate directă, în timp ce minimizează constant importanța factorului genetic și a explicațiilor științifice în general. De genul "doar 67%" dintre femeile care prezintă o anume genă dovedită a provoca cancer mamar chiar îl fac. Doar 67%...In schimb, orice poveste tristă de viață validează teoria stresului. Guess what, toți avem și povești triste de viață, se cheamă a trăi, dar nu facem toți cancer.
Nu era nevoie de 350 de pagini ca să spună că reprimarea emoțiilor negative îți influențează negativ sănătatea (pe axa hormoni/sistem endocrin-sistem nervos-imunitate). De altfel, nici nu le-am citit pe toate, de la 130 și ceva am început sa răsfoiesc spre final, era clar că îmi pierd timpul cu aceeași poveste repetată iar și iar, schimbând doar numele și diagnosticul.
Cel mai grav mi se pare faptul că transformă relația dintre stres și boală în cauzalitate directă, în timp ce minimizează constant importanța factorului genetic și a explicațiilor științifice în general. De genul "doar 67%" dintre femeile care prezintă o anume genă dovedită a provoca cancer mamar chiar îl fac. Doar 67%...In schimb, orice poveste tristă de viață validează teoria stresului. Guess what, toți avem și povești triste de viață, se cheamă a trăi, dar nu facem toți cancer.
January 28, 2019
I recognise this book brings hope to people suffering with disease, but it is not reality based hope.
1. There is little evidence of personality types and disease, despite a lot of desperate believers in it. It's still possible such evidence will emerge (and I'd hope it does), but it has not appeared yet, despite much effort. Spiritual healing should be part of any recovery from illness agreed. And chronic stress definitely correlates to many types of illness. But this book is offering unfounded hope, and is misdirecting people.
The mechanism of repression is presented as an obvious truth, when it is anything but. For instance "Depression - a mental state in which repression of anger dominates emotional functioning" is NOT factual, and is entirely misleading.
2. There is little evidence that repression of feelings is a real thing at all. Repression is a Freudian defence mechanism, but note, if you can recall an event, it is not repressed. And this style of psychoanalysis is very old psychology - pretty much all forms of psychology have moved on to more effective techniques. And those still grounded in Freudian models, are much more sophisticated than this repressed anger = disease offering.
3. Interviewing a sick person to find some anger-causing anecdote does NOT correlate that event with the sickness, as suggested by the author. Everyone has traumatic experiences in the past. At one point he even suggests that a mother breaking eye-contact with a child is traumatic. Come on! Human beings are much more robust than that. Numerous times he interviews people who claim to have a decent childhood, before digging for some possible traume, and then KABOOM! that's repressed anger = stress = hormones = tissue damage blah blah ...
4. Much research shows that childhood experiences have little effect on adult character. It was an old Freudian idea that minute experiences of the young develop into character traits (such as shame or joy around potty training). Few psychologists today give much credence to this theory in any extensive capacity.
5. The author presents lots of anecdotes - but these do not make for science. Psychoanalysing (amateurishly) characters like Stephen Hawking or Jonathon Swift, and suggesting that he has found the links in character traits to their respective diseases, is criminal.
6. There is very little evidence that psychology or therapy has much effect on many many diseases, especially the massively abridged pseudo-psychology presented in this book. In fact, the connection with a trained therapist is more likely to produce good results than the particular model of therapy applied (See George Kelly). Picking up this book and trying to apply it will mean digging out things to be angry about from your childhood, and expressing the anger ... If trained psychologists have limited effect on the disease (though they may help to a large degree in dealing with it emotionally), then self help application of this book's rudimentary pseudo-psychology is not going to help anyone.
Please, do add a spiritual and therapeutic dimension to your healing. But tempting as these ideas about repressed anger might be, do seek out the proper science, and a proper therapist. They can help with the trauma of dealing with sickness (no need to add childhood traumas to the current problems!) and can provide the emotional support in sticking with proper treatment programs [some research showed that breast cancer patients had longer survival rates if they underwent group counselling - but it turned out it was not due to the counselling as much as it was due to the women supporting each other in taking the full courses of chemo and other treatments]
If you have serious abuse in your history, don't wait for illness before you seek counselling and support. And don't buy into this reductionist idea of repressed anger. There are better models, and ways of dealing with things.
1. There is little evidence of personality types and disease, despite a lot of desperate believers in it. It's still possible such evidence will emerge (and I'd hope it does), but it has not appeared yet, despite much effort. Spiritual healing should be part of any recovery from illness agreed. And chronic stress definitely correlates to many types of illness. But this book is offering unfounded hope, and is misdirecting people.
The mechanism of repression is presented as an obvious truth, when it is anything but. For instance "Depression - a mental state in which repression of anger dominates emotional functioning" is NOT factual, and is entirely misleading.
2. There is little evidence that repression of feelings is a real thing at all. Repression is a Freudian defence mechanism, but note, if you can recall an event, it is not repressed. And this style of psychoanalysis is very old psychology - pretty much all forms of psychology have moved on to more effective techniques. And those still grounded in Freudian models, are much more sophisticated than this repressed anger = disease offering.
3. Interviewing a sick person to find some anger-causing anecdote does NOT correlate that event with the sickness, as suggested by the author. Everyone has traumatic experiences in the past. At one point he even suggests that a mother breaking eye-contact with a child is traumatic. Come on! Human beings are much more robust than that. Numerous times he interviews people who claim to have a decent childhood, before digging for some possible traume, and then KABOOM! that's repressed anger = stress = hormones = tissue damage blah blah ...
4. Much research shows that childhood experiences have little effect on adult character. It was an old Freudian idea that minute experiences of the young develop into character traits (such as shame or joy around potty training). Few psychologists today give much credence to this theory in any extensive capacity.
5. The author presents lots of anecdotes - but these do not make for science. Psychoanalysing (amateurishly) characters like Stephen Hawking or Jonathon Swift, and suggesting that he has found the links in character traits to their respective diseases, is criminal.
6. There is very little evidence that psychology or therapy has much effect on many many diseases, especially the massively abridged pseudo-psychology presented in this book. In fact, the connection with a trained therapist is more likely to produce good results than the particular model of therapy applied (See George Kelly). Picking up this book and trying to apply it will mean digging out things to be angry about from your childhood, and expressing the anger ... If trained psychologists have limited effect on the disease (though they may help to a large degree in dealing with it emotionally), then self help application of this book's rudimentary pseudo-psychology is not going to help anyone.
Please, do add a spiritual and therapeutic dimension to your healing. But tempting as these ideas about repressed anger might be, do seek out the proper science, and a proper therapist. They can help with the trauma of dealing with sickness (no need to add childhood traumas to the current problems!) and can provide the emotional support in sticking with proper treatment programs [some research showed that breast cancer patients had longer survival rates if they underwent group counselling - but it turned out it was not due to the counselling as much as it was due to the women supporting each other in taking the full courses of chemo and other treatments]
If you have serious abuse in your history, don't wait for illness before you seek counselling and support. And don't buy into this reductionist idea of repressed anger. There are better models, and ways of dealing with things.
January 28, 2022
I don't usually rate books I disliked, but I think this one is actively harmful. The author doesn't appear to understand statistics, and his thesis is essentially that illnesses from ALS to cancer to inflammatory bowel disease are caused by some kind of semi-Freudian repression of the emotions, usually related to childhood trauma. I was hoping for something a little more science-based, and found the sections that are essentially transcripts of him haranguing his palliative care patients until they admit that maybe they do harbor resentment at their parents to be evidence of terrible medical ethics, not to mention personally upsetting.
If you are looking for a science-based book on epigenetics and how stress causes illness, this is not it.
If you are looking for a science-based book on epigenetics and how stress causes illness, this is not it.
January 23, 2018
This book is full of case studies and anecdotal evidence in support of the author’s hypothesis: Stressed out people get sick more (ground-breaking, I know).
I particularly hated this quote:
“Studies in psychology - an art trying desperately to dress itself up as a pure science - often find only what the particular researchers have the eyes to see.” p 42
Really? REALLY? Shitting on psychology while building an argument supported largely by case studies? Pot, meet kettle.
I particularly hated this quote:
“Studies in psychology - an art trying desperately to dress itself up as a pure science - often find only what the particular researchers have the eyes to see.” p 42
Really? REALLY? Shitting on psychology while building an argument supported largely by case studies? Pot, meet kettle.
December 22, 2021
Sunt multe lucruri care nu sunt în regulă cu această carte. Pe deoparte ea este scrisă în 2003 și tradusă în România în 2021, ceea ce face ca unele conținuturi să nu mai fie de actualitate. Mai trist este că unele nu mai erau de actualitate nici în 2003. Știința este autocorectivă și dacă nu ții pasul te trezești vorbind bazaconii. Cel mai probabil mai sunt lucruri cu privire la conținut, care mi-au scăpat, dar le adresez mai jos pe cele care mi s-au părut cele mai flagrante. Foarte multe paragrafe care prezintă informații pretins științifice sunt scrise fără citări (pag.20,123, 204, 255, 332) și multe paragrafe scrise fără sens sau logică (ex. Furia declanșează anxietatea, deoarece coexistă cu sentimente pozitive, cu dragoste și dorința de contact; Alte paragrafe fără sens la paginile 194, 234, 337, 242, 243). Văd din ce în ce mai des că este dificil să exprimăm conceptele științifice într-un limbaj accesibil, dar doar pentru că este greu să facem asta, nu înseamnă că ne permitem să o facem de mântuială.
Ca idee generală, ne sunt prezentate dramatic o serie de cazuri din care autorul concluzionează că din cauza reprimării emoționale timpurii oamenii dezvoltă anumite boli (ex.cancer, artrită reumatoidă). Problema aici este că în cazurile prezentate cele două evenimente corelează, dar nu există (sau cel puțin nu putem încă dovedi științific) o relație de cauzalitate. Ipoteza de lucru nu este greșită, manipularea emoțională și lipsa unor argumente științifice solide este nepotrivită. Și acum voi adresa punctual câteva aspect ce țin de conținut și ulterior de traducere:
Conținut îndoielnic:
1. Pagina 189: Contrar spuselor autorului, cortexul prefrontal nu este singurul loc în care se stochează amintiri emoționale. Oricât ne-am dori să simplificăm povestea creierului, nu se face așa. Las mai jos câteva articole pentru cei interesați care ne arată cum amintirile emoționale, în funcție de valența -pozitiva/negativa- și intensitatea lor, sunt stocate într-o combinație din următoarele structuri: amigdala, nucleul accumbens, cortexul prefrontal, PAG (periaquedycral gray matter), VTA (ventral tegmental area) și cel mai probabil altele care sunt în curs de descoperire. Doar stocarea amintirilor emoționale, fără să mai vorbim de formarea sau accesarea lor, e un proces foarte complicat de descris.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/...
2. Pagina 191: Atunci când cineva ne spune că durerea din intestin în drumul spre creier este calibrată ca urmare a traumatismelor psihice, fără să ia în considerare și alte posibile cauze, și fără să citeze nici măcar o lucrare științifică, îmi e tare greu să cred.
3. Pagina 233: „Gravitatea simptomelor din timpul primului atac a indicat gravitatea reacției emoționale reprimate a acesteia față de situația cu fratele său” rămâne doar o speculație. Această ipoteză nu este testată (nu știu nici măcar dacă este testabilă), iar dacă ea nu este testată face apel la credința noastră în ceea ce spune autorul.
4. Pagina 248: „Partenerul mai puțin puternic din orice relație absoarbe o cantitate disproporționată de neliniște comună. – acesta este motivul pentru care sunt tratate femeile într-un număr mai mare decât bărbații de anxietate sau depresie.” Sunt multe lucruri greșite cu acest paragraf: (1) Inferența că femeia este partenerul mai puțin puternic,(2) Femeile într-adevăr sunt mai des diagnosticate cu anxietate și depresie, dar există multe alte cauze posibile pentru acest fapt (ex. nivel de agreabilitate ridicat) și (3) Exclude multe alte ipoteze care ne-ar pute ajuta să înțelegem de ce femeile sunt tratate mai des de depresie și anxietate (de ex. abordarea terapiilor, strategiile de coping diferite între bărbați și femei și altele). Pentru cei interesați de cum ar putea fi îmbunătățite serviciile de sănătate mentală astfel încât și bărbații să beneficieze mai mult de ele https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
5. Pagina 128 – Malignitatea ovariană nu este a patra cauză principală a deceselor cauzate de cancer la femei. Conform celor mai recente studii 45 % din decesele cauzate de cancer sunt acoperite de cancerul de plămâni, cancerul la sân și cancerul de colon. Cancerul ovarian reprezintă aproximativ 5 % din totalitatea deceselor cauzate de cancer la femei.
Pentru studii mai recente:
https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/resea...
https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/heal...
6. Pagina 255: „Cancerul, scleroza multipla, artrita reumatoida și celelalte boli pe care le-am examinat nu sunt schimbări abrupte în viața adultă, ci culmi ale proceselor pe tot parcursul vieții.” Ce ne facem cu toate aceste boli care sunt prezente la copii, unele chiar de la naștere?
7. Pagina 299: Gândirea negativă: Întregul capitol ne propune să luăm în considerare ce nu funcționează, să ne întrebăm ce nu este în echilibru, ce ignorăm, întrebări care sunt departe de conceptul de gândire negativă. Ceea ce propune autorul cred că ar fi fost mai degrabă gândire realistă/ gândire analitică/ luarea în calcul a dovezilor. Nu poți să schimbi definiția unui concept atât de bine înrădăcinat; sau poți să faci ca titlu de capitol, dar asta nu va produce și o schimbare în capul cititorului. Astfel, ai creat doar un nou concept de carton.
8. Pagina 309: Faptul că un client are capacitatea de a verbaliza amintirile cele mai întunecate din copilărie (ex. că nu este iubit de părinți, că este abuzat sexual) este tocmai dovada că ele nu sunt excluse din memoria acestuia. Concluzia nu derivă logic.
9. Pagina 311: Definiția sindromului de memorie falsă este incorectă. O memorie falsă nu înseamnă că ne aducem aminte cu predilecție aspectele fericite dintr-un eveniment. O memorie falsă, așa cum numele ne spune foarte sugestiv numele înseamnă că avem o credință falsă despre un eveniment din trecut (de ex. oamenii care au fost implicați, ce am simțit în acel eveniment, cronologia evenimentului sau alte aspecte).
Pentru cei care vor să citească mai mult despre memoriile false:
https://blogs.brown.edu/recoveredmemo...
și despre sindromul memoriilor false
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...
10. Pagina 337: „Înăsprirea vocii, respirația superficială, tensiunea musculară sunt semne de anxietate, nu de furie”. Din tot ce știm până acum, nu putem să afirmăm asta. Cele două nu pot fi delimitate, doar în baza răspunsului fiziologic. Și poate la fel de important, e greu să ne imaginăm că emoțiile noastre apar într-o formă pură, nu un mix de anxietate și furie.
Traducere puțin inspirată:
Nu în sine faptul că traducerea nu este corectă/potrivită, ci faptul că traducerea introduce confuzie, fapt care creează o experiență mai puțin plăcută cititorului. Atunci când traduci o carte care adresează și elemente tehnice este important să verifici cu un specialist (sau poate chiar cu mai mulți) pentru a te asigura că păstrezi sensul textului original și că folosești acei termeni deja utilizați.
1. Pagina 130: Anorectie/Anorectic. Deși termenul „anorectic” conform DEX este corect, termenii uzitați sunt de anorexie/anorexică – și dacă este o problemă a nutriției (pagina 307) sau o tulburare alimentară este o discuție lungă; oricum, o discuție importantă care ar trebui să aibă loc între medici și psihologi.
2. Pagina 209: “Creierul afectat de Alzheimer conține niveluri mai ridicate decât cele normale de aluminiu.” Înțeleg propoziția, dar sintaxa îngreunează decodarea mesajului.
Mă gândesc dacă nu ar fi fost mai ușor de înțeles dacă ar fi fost scrisă altfel, de exemplu: “Creierul populației afectate de Alzheimer conține niveluri mai ridicate de aluminiu în comparație cu creierul oamenilor sănătoși/din populația generală.”
3. Pagina 244: “Highly threatening life stressors” nu sunt factorii de stres puternic cu amenințarea vieții, ci factori de stress care constituie o amenințare puternică sau factori de stress foarte puternici/foarte intenși.
4. Pagina 245:“Independent effect” nu este efect de independență. Acest termen adresează un rezultat statistic numit “efect independent/efect simplu/efect principal” al unei variabile.
5. Pagina 247: “Struggling academically” – nu se traduce prin luptă academică; Poate fi tradus prin dificultăți în parcursul academic sau în gestionarea acestuia (sau alte traduceri mai insipirate).
6. Pagina 247: Procedura de “matching” nu se traduce prin asociere. Atunci când faci cercetare procedura de matching constă în compararea unui lot de subiecți tipici/obișnuiți/sănătoși/normali cu un un lot care deține caracteristici atipice (ex. Un statut marital diferit, o boală clinică,), controlând ca alte variabile să rămână similare (ex. vârstă, statut social). În acest context rezultatele la o anumită variabilă dependentă ale lotului tipic sunt comparate cu rezultatele lotului atipic, în timp ce restul variabilelor sunt controlate; that’s the matching.
7. Pagina 248: Self-reports nu sunt rapoarte. Self-reports sunt chestionare prin care subiectul auto-raportează, mai precis, se evaluează singur cât de deprimat, fericit, singur se simte. Prin urmare se pot traduce cel mai acurat ca măsurători auto-raportate.
8. Pagina 248: Atunci când două concepte din psihologie sunt investigate și ele “sunt related”, acestea sunt relaționate/asociate/corelate, nicidecum raportate.
9. Pagina 251: “Susceptible to illness” – Atunci când vorbim de tulburări/boli, oamenii sunt predispuși la a face boala, nu pasibili.
10. Pagina 269: “Non-attuned parenting” nu este parenting nonacordat. În acest context este vorba de un tip de parenting care nu este calibrat sau nu este receptiv la nevoile copilului.
11. Pagina 269: Atașamentul este “securizant” (termen consacrat), nu securizat.
Îmi pare rău că nu am abandonat-o la timp, așa cum am promis că voi face cu cărțile care nu îmi plac, dar voiam să înțeleg de ce e atât de hyped. Cred că am înțeles de ce. Conceptul sună bine, e chiar plauzibil că în spatele unora dintre boli să se afle stresul și dificultăți emoționale. Nu mai contează cât de acurate sunt dovezile aduse în susținere acestei ipoteze, un fel de Paul Olteanu de la noi.
Mă întreb totuși, înțelegem ceea ce citim sau doar citim pentru a citi?
Ca idee generală, ne sunt prezentate dramatic o serie de cazuri din care autorul concluzionează că din cauza reprimării emoționale timpurii oamenii dezvoltă anumite boli (ex.cancer, artrită reumatoidă). Problema aici este că în cazurile prezentate cele două evenimente corelează, dar nu există (sau cel puțin nu putem încă dovedi științific) o relație de cauzalitate. Ipoteza de lucru nu este greșită, manipularea emoțională și lipsa unor argumente științifice solide este nepotrivită. Și acum voi adresa punctual câteva aspect ce țin de conținut și ulterior de traducere:
Conținut îndoielnic:
1. Pagina 189: Contrar spuselor autorului, cortexul prefrontal nu este singurul loc în care se stochează amintiri emoționale. Oricât ne-am dori să simplificăm povestea creierului, nu se face așa. Las mai jos câteva articole pentru cei interesați care ne arată cum amintirile emoționale, în funcție de valența -pozitiva/negativa- și intensitatea lor, sunt stocate într-o combinație din următoarele structuri: amigdala, nucleul accumbens, cortexul prefrontal, PAG (periaquedycral gray matter), VTA (ventral tegmental area) și cel mai probabil altele care sunt în curs de descoperire. Doar stocarea amintirilor emoționale, fără să mai vorbim de formarea sau accesarea lor, e un proces foarte complicat de descris.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/...
2. Pagina 191: Atunci când cineva ne spune că durerea din intestin în drumul spre creier este calibrată ca urmare a traumatismelor psihice, fără să ia în considerare și alte posibile cauze, și fără să citeze nici măcar o lucrare științifică, îmi e tare greu să cred.
3. Pagina 233: „Gravitatea simptomelor din timpul primului atac a indicat gravitatea reacției emoționale reprimate a acesteia față de situația cu fratele său” rămâne doar o speculație. Această ipoteză nu este testată (nu știu nici măcar dacă este testabilă), iar dacă ea nu este testată face apel la credința noastră în ceea ce spune autorul.
4. Pagina 248: „Partenerul mai puțin puternic din orice relație absoarbe o cantitate disproporționată de neliniște comună. – acesta este motivul pentru care sunt tratate femeile într-un număr mai mare decât bărbații de anxietate sau depresie.” Sunt multe lucruri greșite cu acest paragraf: (1) Inferența că femeia este partenerul mai puțin puternic,(2) Femeile într-adevăr sunt mai des diagnosticate cu anxietate și depresie, dar există multe alte cauze posibile pentru acest fapt (ex. nivel de agreabilitate ridicat) și (3) Exclude multe alte ipoteze care ne-ar pute ajuta să înțelegem de ce femeile sunt tratate mai des de depresie și anxietate (de ex. abordarea terapiilor, strategiile de coping diferite între bărbați și femei și altele). Pentru cei interesați de cum ar putea fi îmbunătățite serviciile de sănătate mentală astfel încât și bărbații să beneficieze mai mult de ele https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
5. Pagina 128 – Malignitatea ovariană nu este a patra cauză principală a deceselor cauzate de cancer la femei. Conform celor mai recente studii 45 % din decesele cauzate de cancer sunt acoperite de cancerul de plămâni, cancerul la sân și cancerul de colon. Cancerul ovarian reprezintă aproximativ 5 % din totalitatea deceselor cauzate de cancer la femei.
Pentru studii mai recente:
https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/resea...
https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/heal...
6. Pagina 255: „Cancerul, scleroza multipla, artrita reumatoida și celelalte boli pe care le-am examinat nu sunt schimbări abrupte în viața adultă, ci culmi ale proceselor pe tot parcursul vieții.” Ce ne facem cu toate aceste boli care sunt prezente la copii, unele chiar de la naștere?
7. Pagina 299: Gândirea negativă: Întregul capitol ne propune să luăm în considerare ce nu funcționează, să ne întrebăm ce nu este în echilibru, ce ignorăm, întrebări care sunt departe de conceptul de gândire negativă. Ceea ce propune autorul cred că ar fi fost mai degrabă gândire realistă/ gândire analitică/ luarea în calcul a dovezilor. Nu poți să schimbi definiția unui concept atât de bine înrădăcinat; sau poți să faci ca titlu de capitol, dar asta nu va produce și o schimbare în capul cititorului. Astfel, ai creat doar un nou concept de carton.
8. Pagina 309: Faptul că un client are capacitatea de a verbaliza amintirile cele mai întunecate din copilărie (ex. că nu este iubit de părinți, că este abuzat sexual) este tocmai dovada că ele nu sunt excluse din memoria acestuia. Concluzia nu derivă logic.
9. Pagina 311: Definiția sindromului de memorie falsă este incorectă. O memorie falsă nu înseamnă că ne aducem aminte cu predilecție aspectele fericite dintr-un eveniment. O memorie falsă, așa cum numele ne spune foarte sugestiv numele înseamnă că avem o credință falsă despre un eveniment din trecut (de ex. oamenii care au fost implicați, ce am simțit în acel eveniment, cronologia evenimentului sau alte aspecte).
Pentru cei care vor să citească mai mult despre memoriile false:
https://blogs.brown.edu/recoveredmemo...
și despre sindromul memoriilor false
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...
10. Pagina 337: „Înăsprirea vocii, respirația superficială, tensiunea musculară sunt semne de anxietate, nu de furie”. Din tot ce știm până acum, nu putem să afirmăm asta. Cele două nu pot fi delimitate, doar în baza răspunsului fiziologic. Și poate la fel de important, e greu să ne imaginăm că emoțiile noastre apar într-o formă pură, nu un mix de anxietate și furie.
Traducere puțin inspirată:
Nu în sine faptul că traducerea nu este corectă/potrivită, ci faptul că traducerea introduce confuzie, fapt care creează o experiență mai puțin plăcută cititorului. Atunci când traduci o carte care adresează și elemente tehnice este important să verifici cu un specialist (sau poate chiar cu mai mulți) pentru a te asigura că păstrezi sensul textului original și că folosești acei termeni deja utilizați.
1. Pagina 130: Anorectie/Anorectic. Deși termenul „anorectic” conform DEX este corect, termenii uzitați sunt de anorexie/anorexică – și dacă este o problemă a nutriției (pagina 307) sau o tulburare alimentară este o discuție lungă; oricum, o discuție importantă care ar trebui să aibă loc între medici și psihologi.
2. Pagina 209: “Creierul afectat de Alzheimer conține niveluri mai ridicate decât cele normale de aluminiu.” Înțeleg propoziția, dar sintaxa îngreunează decodarea mesajului.
Mă gândesc dacă nu ar fi fost mai ușor de înțeles dacă ar fi fost scrisă altfel, de exemplu: “Creierul populației afectate de Alzheimer conține niveluri mai ridicate de aluminiu în comparație cu creierul oamenilor sănătoși/din populația generală.”
3. Pagina 244: “Highly threatening life stressors” nu sunt factorii de stres puternic cu amenințarea vieții, ci factori de stress care constituie o amenințare puternică sau factori de stress foarte puternici/foarte intenși.
4. Pagina 245:“Independent effect” nu este efect de independență. Acest termen adresează un rezultat statistic numit “efect independent/efect simplu/efect principal” al unei variabile.
5. Pagina 247: “Struggling academically” – nu se traduce prin luptă academică; Poate fi tradus prin dificultăți în parcursul academic sau în gestionarea acestuia (sau alte traduceri mai insipirate).
6. Pagina 247: Procedura de “matching” nu se traduce prin asociere. Atunci când faci cercetare procedura de matching constă în compararea unui lot de subiecți tipici/obișnuiți/sănătoși/normali cu un un lot care deține caracteristici atipice (ex. Un statut marital diferit, o boală clinică,), controlând ca alte variabile să rămână similare (ex. vârstă, statut social). În acest context rezultatele la o anumită variabilă dependentă ale lotului tipic sunt comparate cu rezultatele lotului atipic, în timp ce restul variabilelor sunt controlate; that’s the matching.
7. Pagina 248: Self-reports nu sunt rapoarte. Self-reports sunt chestionare prin care subiectul auto-raportează, mai precis, se evaluează singur cât de deprimat, fericit, singur se simte. Prin urmare se pot traduce cel mai acurat ca măsurători auto-raportate.
8. Pagina 248: Atunci când două concepte din psihologie sunt investigate și ele “sunt related”, acestea sunt relaționate/asociate/corelate, nicidecum raportate.
9. Pagina 251: “Susceptible to illness” – Atunci când vorbim de tulburări/boli, oamenii sunt predispuși la a face boala, nu pasibili.
10. Pagina 269: “Non-attuned parenting” nu este parenting nonacordat. În acest context este vorba de un tip de parenting care nu este calibrat sau nu este receptiv la nevoile copilului.
11. Pagina 269: Atașamentul este “securizant” (termen consacrat), nu securizat.
Îmi pare rău că nu am abandonat-o la timp, așa cum am promis că voi face cu cărțile care nu îmi plac, dar voiam să înțeleg de ce e atât de hyped. Cred că am înțeles de ce. Conceptul sună bine, e chiar plauzibil că în spatele unora dintre boli să se afle stresul și dificultăți emoționale. Nu mai contează cât de acurate sunt dovezile aduse în susținere acestei ipoteze, un fel de Paul Olteanu de la noi.
Mă întreb totuși, înțelegem ceea ce citim sau doar citim pentru a citi?
December 27, 2011
Finally, a book by a conventional Western doctor wholeheartedly supporting the concept of the body as a holistic organism. It's about time.
Dr. Mate describes, in layman's terms, the newly combined medical discipline called psychoneuroimmunoendocrinology -- the inextricably interconnected systems of psychology, neurology, immunology and endocrinology -- and describes how underlying, ongoing, unconscious stress is directly linked with specific disease.
This book is a wake up call for anyone facing or worried about getting cancer and other heredity diseases. In it you will find the seeds to health...provided you are willing to examine how your lifestyle and current coping skills are directly affecting your health.
You don't have to be a ticking time bomb! Genetics don't determine your risk, the petri dish of your inner and outer life does. This book is a timely examination of the environment in which disease thrives and how we can make our bodies a less welcome environment for ill health.
As someone dealing with physical, mental and emotional burnout, I highly recommend this book as an antidote for the effects of long-term stress and an optimistic view of what you can do to counter the affects of everyday stress on your health.
Dr. Mate describes, in layman's terms, the newly combined medical discipline called psychoneuroimmunoendocrinology -- the inextricably interconnected systems of psychology, neurology, immunology and endocrinology -- and describes how underlying, ongoing, unconscious stress is directly linked with specific disease.
This book is a wake up call for anyone facing or worried about getting cancer and other heredity diseases. In it you will find the seeds to health...provided you are willing to examine how your lifestyle and current coping skills are directly affecting your health.
You don't have to be a ticking time bomb! Genetics don't determine your risk, the petri dish of your inner and outer life does. This book is a timely examination of the environment in which disease thrives and how we can make our bodies a less welcome environment for ill health.
As someone dealing with physical, mental and emotional burnout, I highly recommend this book as an antidote for the effects of long-term stress and an optimistic view of what you can do to counter the affects of everyday stress on your health.
June 13, 2023
I used to love Gabor Maté. We’re both Hungarian and every quote I’ve ever heard from him about healing touched me deep in my bones.
Unfortunately, the reality of Maté is that he is not a psychologist, psychiatrist, or even a trained license mental health therapist. He’s a physician. He’s also very fatphobic and passes along a lot of pseudo-science about the origins of a child’s “disorder/fear/anxiety” based on if the mother was stressed while the child was in utero.
Maté also has a record of being very ableist when speaking or writing about neurodivergent people.
His books are re-traumatizing and contain false information.
Unfortunately, the reality of Maté is that he is not a psychologist, psychiatrist, or even a trained license mental health therapist. He’s a physician. He’s also very fatphobic and passes along a lot of pseudo-science about the origins of a child’s “disorder/fear/anxiety” based on if the mother was stressed while the child was in utero.
Maté also has a record of being very ableist when speaking or writing about neurodivergent people.
His books are re-traumatizing and contain false information.
November 27, 2023
When the Reader Says “Blame”: The Cost of Miscommunication
--The top rated (1-star) review challenged me to read this book more closely, to answer how I could:
a) share the same values/concerns expressed in the review, yet
b) have such a different reading of the book…?
--With this valuable learning experience, my goal here is to present a synthesis of the review and the book, in hopes that other readers will find the process of dissecting miscommunication constructive rather than divisive.
--Social media seems designed for divisive miscommunication, with its:
i) TL;DR (too long; didn’t read) format
ii) In-your-face (and crudely formatted) opinions from strangers (thus lacking context and rudimentary sociability/trust-building)
iii) Tech corporations seeking our attention/data by algorithmically curating content for dopamine spikes
--So, let us all take a deep breath… and carefully communicate word by word, step by step…
1) Shared Values and Concerns:
--The main concern expressed in the review is around blame:
ii) The review actually acknowledges that the book shares the same concern (“The author says that he doesn’t like to “blame”“), so the review needs to then specify how the book unintentionally “blames” patients.
…Does the review clearly specify this, or does it only reiterate shared concerns? The review starts with some personal context, then expresses critiques and concerns [emphases and commentary added]:
2) A “very serious” miscommunication:
--Let’s start with the last part of the review:
i) The review expresses the concern that status quo Western medicine, from history to today, suffers from systemic patriarchy and racism. This is actually a shared concern, which I will provide quotes for.
ii) The review infers the author represents this status quo, thus we shouldn’t be surprised that he “blames” patients.
iii) However, I didn’t see evidence for this inference in either the review or the book. Where does the book mis-diagnose women patients as “crazy” and “pregnant”, or over-diagnose “depression or functional neurological disorder when in fact they have very serious medical problems”?
…We should also be careful here. The review is critical of history-to-present medical misogyny being dismissive towards women (a shared concern), resulting in over-diagnosing women with “depression or functional neurological disorder” (note: the changing history of these diagnoses which also started in dismissive manners).
…However, we should be careful not to be dismissive towards “depression or functional neurological disorder” (in the context of how critical research understand these diagnoses today; the book also critiques the status quo for this prejudice), indeed to perpetuate this prejudice as the review words it: “when in fact they have very serious medical problems”. I’m not trying to “blame” with this nitpicking; I think this is an unintentional wording issue which helps illustrate how easy miscommunication is.
iv) Case after case, the book starts with and accepts “very serious” status quo diagnoses (cancers, severe autoimmune diseases, etc.) in terms of their obvious physical manifestations.
v) The book then challenges status quo diagnoses/treatments’ lingering dismissiveness towards the patient’s overall mental/emotional context, despite the growing research on the role of chronic stress (which is not reduced to the individual in isolation as it encompasses their socioenvironmental relationships) in disease.
…Is this challenge too dismissive of something “very serious”? Should we strictly follow the status quo dismissal of this and just treat patients as anonymous vessels of diseases that need to be “treated” via eradication of the disease (a “military theory of disease” lead by “very serious” status quo men)? This is a challenging question which I will return to.
vi) Besides from expressing numerous crucial and shared concerns, there is one direct critique of the book that is precise. The author is indeed a “white male”. A Jewish, politically-Left-leaning (including anti-imperialist) white male, if we can add a bit more precision to our identity labels.
…Now, I do think it’s worth acknowledging that the mere identity of a “white male” psychologist is a recipe for miscommunication in certain scenarios. I see no reason to introduce “blame” for either side here. My point is if a female writer wrote this book with identical words, we should get past this miscommunication and acknowledge the shared values/concerns.
3) The Politics of “Blame”:
--I strongly share the concern over miscommunication on “blame”; it’s a shame the author did not devote an entire chapter at the very start unpacking this.
--The core of the book challenges the status quo’s lingering separations (black-and-white dualisms) focusing on severed parts rather than complex systems (which are more than the sum of their severed parts, since so much happens from complex interactions: Thinking in Systems: A Primer):
i) Mind vs. body
ii) Individual (isolated) vs. environment
iii) Individual (healthy) vs. disease (foreign)
--“Type C” personality traits is colloquially called “cancer personality”, but the book critiques this on several levels. The obvious one is it is reductionist, as personality traits are only a contributing factor. The second is this is generally an individualist framing, whereas “cancer position” focuses more on the systems, in this case the position of the patient’s relationships with their environments. If the patient’s environments are stressful, why would the book start with “blame” on the individual?
--“Type C” is distinguished by their repression of stress, which means a certain amount of stress is no longer consciously experienced. So, why would the book “blame” someone for something they are not even conscious of?!?! It is not intentional, not deliberate.
…Furthermore, we mostly assume what happened recently are the most impactful. However, the concern here is chronic stress. Stress from fight-or-flight is a natural response, but here it is over-used (chronic). The book is unique in its focus of this learned coping mechanism originating in early life (prenatal/infancy/childhood), since so much growth/learning happens during this time (science is catching up with nature on all the interactions, ex. immune system development from vaginal birth/breast-feeding/skin-to-skin contact etc.). So, why would the book “blame” babies for their repression?!
--Chronic stress confuses the immune system (which has a crucial role of accurately identifying self vs. non-self, in particular harmful non-self objects; auto-immune disorders and cancer arise from this system’s chronic malfunction). Similarly, repression of stress is linked to individuals who do not develop healthy boundaries. Hence, the personality traits of over-working, over-caring, being overly-nice (suppressing anger, key to enforcing healthy boundaries), while the body absorbs all the repressed stress seeping in from these socioenvironmental relationships. Eventually, it may take the body to say “No”.
--We have been too focused on the virulence of the pathogen and not enough on the susceptibility of those who get sick and those who do not. We have been too focused on genes and not enough on the environmental factors that do or do not express the genes (i.e. epigenetics).
…Does the book “blame” the parents then? Well, if they were violent towards their offspring, then that’s one thing. But once again so much of the stress transferred is unintentional, and multi-generational. How far back should we “blame”. Why are we so insistent on normalizing “blame” of individuals, when we are obviously critiquing environmental structures?
--“Blame” is a punitive, status quo framing; we should take care not to perpetuate it/normalize it. In some ways, we can connect it to an authoritarian rendition of “God” punishing “sinners”.
…Status quo power is built on social consent; it requires its subjects to be isolated, inward-looking individuals rather than organized, and it wants to obscure structural critiques of the system. Indeed, status quo power is so structural that even deposing the elite individuals is not enough to revolutionize the system!
...While power preaches “responsibility”, this is a limited, punitive responsibility rather than a liberatory responsibility, since actual autonomy is too threatening to authority.
--While the book does not mention this punitive God analogy, it does offer this:
…For the rest of the review, see the comment section below:
“4) Blaming “Genes” vs. Disease as Story”
--The top rated (1-star) review challenged me to read this book more closely, to answer how I could:
a) share the same values/concerns expressed in the review, yet
b) have such a different reading of the book…?
--With this valuable learning experience, my goal here is to present a synthesis of the review and the book, in hopes that other readers will find the process of dissecting miscommunication constructive rather than divisive.
--Social media seems designed for divisive miscommunication, with its:
i) TL;DR (too long; didn’t read) format
ii) In-your-face (and crudely formatted) opinions from strangers (thus lacking context and rudimentary sociability/trust-building)
iii) Tech corporations seeking our attention/data by algorithmically curating content for dopamine spikes
--So, let us all take a deep breath… and carefully communicate word by word, step by step…
1) Shared Values and Concerns:
--The main concern expressed in the review is around blame:
The author says that he doesn’t like to “blame” the cancer patient or chronic illness sufferer, but that is exactly what he is doing.i) Carefully refuting “blame” is indeed foundational to the book, and it’s a tragedy this was miscommunicated from the review’s perspective (hopefully I can ease this).
ii) The review actually acknowledges that the book shares the same concern (“The author says that he doesn’t like to “blame”“), so the review needs to then specify how the book unintentionally “blames” patients.
…Does the review clearly specify this, or does it only reiterate shared concerns? The review starts with some personal context, then expresses critiques and concerns [emphases and commentary added]:
So I learned [in the past] that if I felt lonely that there must be something wrong with me, fueling anxiety, creating a wound that would never heal.
One of the most transformative experiences for me was going to a therapy group […] Well, I was lonely. But newsflash: Being lonely is actually healthy! Everyone is lonely from time to time. That emotion is completely normal. The feeling was correct, but the conclusion was incorrect. [Note: this is critical self-analysis/self-diagnosis; surely we would not label it as self-blame]
Well, the author is going to talk about personality types that repress their feelings, and that used to be me. [Self-diagnosis, not self-blame…]
This author’s premise is that there are three personality types, Type A (people who are angry), Type B, Type C (the people who repress their feelings and get sick). The author says that he doesn’t like to “blame” the cancer patient or chronic illness sufferer [sounds like the author is presenting theory on contributing factors as part of a diagnosis, since it’s not an 100% cause-and-effect], but that is exactly what he is doing [how?]. He asserts that people with breast cancer brought it on themselves. [Note: the partial diagnosis seems to be interpreted as an accusatory, punitive, you-deserve-this “blame”. This is the tone of the “brought it on themselves” phrase, i.e. you-get-what-you-deserve, a moralizing tone which the book does not use and indeed refutes.]
Respectfully, this author is way off base. He was talking about genetically based diseases and then blaming the patients [note: evading psychological/socioenvironmental factors by using the label of “genetically based” is a key issue addressed in the book, see later…]. Additionally, I knew from the very first chapter that the author was a white male. How do I know that? [Prepare for more shared values/concerns] Well, if women go to the doctor, no matter what the complaint, the doctor will think that she is either crazy, pregnant, or both, in about 95% of cases [inferring that the book does this?]. It was a running joke at uni that if a female came in with a stubbed toe, that the medical staff would automatically assume pregnancy.
Women are over diagnosed with either depression or functional neurological disorder [inferring the book?] when in fact they have very serious medical problems. […] Women and people of color are still treated as second-class citizens in healthcare.
2) A “very serious” miscommunication:
--Let’s start with the last part of the review:
i) The review expresses the concern that status quo Western medicine, from history to today, suffers from systemic patriarchy and racism. This is actually a shared concern, which I will provide quotes for.
ii) The review infers the author represents this status quo, thus we shouldn’t be surprised that he “blames” patients.
iii) However, I didn’t see evidence for this inference in either the review or the book. Where does the book mis-diagnose women patients as “crazy” and “pregnant”, or over-diagnose “depression or functional neurological disorder when in fact they have very serious medical problems”?
…We should also be careful here. The review is critical of history-to-present medical misogyny being dismissive towards women (a shared concern), resulting in over-diagnosing women with “depression or functional neurological disorder” (note: the changing history of these diagnoses which also started in dismissive manners).
…However, we should be careful not to be dismissive towards “depression or functional neurological disorder” (in the context of how critical research understand these diagnoses today; the book also critiques the status quo for this prejudice), indeed to perpetuate this prejudice as the review words it: “when in fact they have very serious medical problems”. I’m not trying to “blame” with this nitpicking; I think this is an unintentional wording issue which helps illustrate how easy miscommunication is.
iv) Case after case, the book starts with and accepts “very serious” status quo diagnoses (cancers, severe autoimmune diseases, etc.) in terms of their obvious physical manifestations.
v) The book then challenges status quo diagnoses/treatments’ lingering dismissiveness towards the patient’s overall mental/emotional context, despite the growing research on the role of chronic stress (which is not reduced to the individual in isolation as it encompasses their socioenvironmental relationships) in disease.
…Is this challenge too dismissive of something “very serious”? Should we strictly follow the status quo dismissal of this and just treat patients as anonymous vessels of diseases that need to be “treated” via eradication of the disease (a “military theory of disease” lead by “very serious” status quo men)? This is a challenging question which I will return to.
vi) Besides from expressing numerous crucial and shared concerns, there is one direct critique of the book that is precise. The author is indeed a “white male”. A Jewish, politically-Left-leaning (including anti-imperialist) white male, if we can add a bit more precision to our identity labels.
…Now, I do think it’s worth acknowledging that the mere identity of a “white male” psychologist is a recipe for miscommunication in certain scenarios. I see no reason to introduce “blame” for either side here. My point is if a female writer wrote this book with identical words, we should get past this miscommunication and acknowledge the shared values/concerns.
3) The Politics of “Blame”:
--I strongly share the concern over miscommunication on “blame”; it’s a shame the author did not devote an entire chapter at the very start unpacking this.
--The core of the book challenges the status quo’s lingering separations (black-and-white dualisms) focusing on severed parts rather than complex systems (which are more than the sum of their severed parts, since so much happens from complex interactions: Thinking in Systems: A Primer):
i) Mind vs. body
ii) Individual (isolated) vs. environment
iii) Individual (healthy) vs. disease (foreign)
--“Type C” personality traits is colloquially called “cancer personality”, but the book critiques this on several levels. The obvious one is it is reductionist, as personality traits are only a contributing factor. The second is this is generally an individualist framing, whereas “cancer position” focuses more on the systems, in this case the position of the patient’s relationships with their environments. If the patient’s environments are stressful, why would the book start with “blame” on the individual?
--“Type C” is distinguished by their repression of stress, which means a certain amount of stress is no longer consciously experienced. So, why would the book “blame” someone for something they are not even conscious of?!?! It is not intentional, not deliberate.
…Furthermore, we mostly assume what happened recently are the most impactful. However, the concern here is chronic stress. Stress from fight-or-flight is a natural response, but here it is over-used (chronic). The book is unique in its focus of this learned coping mechanism originating in early life (prenatal/infancy/childhood), since so much growth/learning happens during this time (science is catching up with nature on all the interactions, ex. immune system development from vaginal birth/breast-feeding/skin-to-skin contact etc.). So, why would the book “blame” babies for their repression?!
--Chronic stress confuses the immune system (which has a crucial role of accurately identifying self vs. non-self, in particular harmful non-self objects; auto-immune disorders and cancer arise from this system’s chronic malfunction). Similarly, repression of stress is linked to individuals who do not develop healthy boundaries. Hence, the personality traits of over-working, over-caring, being overly-nice (suppressing anger, key to enforcing healthy boundaries), while the body absorbs all the repressed stress seeping in from these socioenvironmental relationships. Eventually, it may take the body to say “No”.
--We have been too focused on the virulence of the pathogen and not enough on the susceptibility of those who get sick and those who do not. We have been too focused on genes and not enough on the environmental factors that do or do not express the genes (i.e. epigenetics).
…Does the book “blame” the parents then? Well, if they were violent towards their offspring, then that’s one thing. But once again so much of the stress transferred is unintentional, and multi-generational. How far back should we “blame”. Why are we so insistent on normalizing “blame” of individuals, when we are obviously critiquing environmental structures?
--“Blame” is a punitive, status quo framing; we should take care not to perpetuate it/normalize it. In some ways, we can connect it to an authoritarian rendition of “God” punishing “sinners”.
…Status quo power is built on social consent; it requires its subjects to be isolated, inward-looking individuals rather than organized, and it wants to obscure structural critiques of the system. Indeed, status quo power is so structural that even deposing the elite individuals is not enough to revolutionize the system!
...While power preaches “responsibility”, this is a limited, punitive responsibility rather than a liberatory responsibility, since actual autonomy is too threatening to authority.
--While the book does not mention this punitive God analogy, it does offer this:
“The view of sickness and death as a personal failure is a particularly unfortunate form of blaming the victim,” charged the 1985 editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine. “At a time when patients are already burdened by disease, they should not be further burdened by having to accept responsibility for the outcome.”
[…] blame and failure are not the issue. Such terms only cloud the picture. As we shall see, blaming the sufferer—apart from being morally obtuse—is completely unfounded from a scientific point of view.
The NEJM editorial confused blame and responsibility. While all of us dread being blamed, we all would wish to be more responsible—that is, to have the ability to respond with awareness to the circumstances of our lives rather than just reacting. We want to be the authoritative person in our own lives: in charge, able to make the authentic decisions that affect us [i.e. autonomy]. There is no true responsibility without awareness. One of the weaknesses of the Western medical approach is that we have made the physician the only authority, with the patient too often a mere recipient of the treatment or cure. People are deprived of the opportunity to become truly responsible. None of us are to be blamed if we succumb to illness and death. Any one of us might succumb at any time, but the more we can learn about ourselves, the less prone we are to become passive victims.
…For the rest of the review, see the comment section below:
“4) Blaming “Genes” vs. Disease as Story”
January 16, 2016
This book finally ended. I found it tedious. So much anecdotal evidence and repetitive commentary upon it, I feel the book could have been halved. It's message was clear - stress plus habituation plus organic = illness. For me, my head kept hearing correlation is not causation, and whenever I stepped away from it, I thought of that analysis where more crimes occur in the summer, also more ice cream is eaten in the summer, therefore, ice cream causes crime.
I appreciate the effort. It is common sense even if difficult in practice because life can be so complicated. I appreciate his kind push to take care of yourself: doormat behavior does not make you happy. It just took a lot of words to say it, repeated over 281 pages, to do it.
I appreciate the effort. It is common sense even if difficult in practice because life can be so complicated. I appreciate his kind push to take care of yourself: doormat behavior does not make you happy. It just took a lot of words to say it, repeated over 281 pages, to do it.
January 1, 2019
This was an incredibly difficult book to read, page for page. I imagine it would be moreso if you are dealing with one of the many illnesses Maté discusses (cancer, multiple sclerosis, inflammatory bowel disease, etc.). But it was a great choice to end the year with, to contemplate during a week off from my (emotionally heavy and increasingly draining) work.
Maté makes connections between physical health and emotional patterns of behaviour that should be obvious, but are overlooked by our current collective way of living. Alarming for what it says about health and the shortcomings of modern medical systems. Insightful on a personal level. I hope to carry this fresh perspective with me into the new year.
His In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction is a book I recommend often in real life. I would be more careful recommending this one, and I don't necessarily agree with every idea outlined therein, but consider it more important, perhaps.
Maté makes connections between physical health and emotional patterns of behaviour that should be obvious, but are overlooked by our current collective way of living. Alarming for what it says about health and the shortcomings of modern medical systems. Insightful on a personal level. I hope to carry this fresh perspective with me into the new year.
His In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction is a book I recommend often in real life. I would be more careful recommending this one, and I don't necessarily agree with every idea outlined therein, but consider it more important, perhaps.
December 17, 2023
Some of the science and Western medical treatment protocols are out of date, but the basic information that Mate conveys in his book When the Body Says No is sound. Sometimes the body can no longer tolerate or adapt to circumstances and stops one cold.
Mate states that "people do not become ill despite their lives but rather because of their lives. And life includes not only physical factors like diet, physical activity, and the environment, but also the internal milieu of thoughts and unconscious emotions that govern so much of our physiology, through the mechanisms of stress and the unity of the systems that modulate nerves, hormones, immunity, digestion, and cardiovascular function."
Mate does not ignore what Western medicine has to offer. He tells us that in addition to diagnoses and medical treatments, in order to truly heal one needs to include the emotional and spiritual states as they are part of our whole being. Bodymindspirit are one, not 3 discrete components of a human being.
Rather than give a full summary of this book, I will say that over my 12 years in practice as an acupuncturist I have been witness that healing needs to occur across the spectrum of a being. I began my own journey to wellness in 2006. I had to reconnect to my body, learn to recognize what signals my body was sending, what they said about my state of being, and what the appropriate reaction might be.
IMO one aspect Mate does not cover in this work is that there is a difference between healing and cure. Sometimes a being can be healed and not cured, and sometimes both can occur.
If anyone would like to engage in in-depth conversation about any of these topics, please PM me. This is a great book to promote thought and conversation around the topic of disease truly being dis- (not at) ease with some thing or things in our world. There are a lot of rich discussions waiting to be had.
Publication 2003
Mate states that "people do not become ill despite their lives but rather because of their lives. And life includes not only physical factors like diet, physical activity, and the environment, but also the internal milieu of thoughts and unconscious emotions that govern so much of our physiology, through the mechanisms of stress and the unity of the systems that modulate nerves, hormones, immunity, digestion, and cardiovascular function."
Mate does not ignore what Western medicine has to offer. He tells us that in addition to diagnoses and medical treatments, in order to truly heal one needs to include the emotional and spiritual states as they are part of our whole being. Bodymindspirit are one, not 3 discrete components of a human being.
Rather than give a full summary of this book, I will say that over my 12 years in practice as an acupuncturist I have been witness that healing needs to occur across the spectrum of a being. I began my own journey to wellness in 2006. I had to reconnect to my body, learn to recognize what signals my body was sending, what they said about my state of being, and what the appropriate reaction might be.
IMO one aspect Mate does not cover in this work is that there is a difference between healing and cure. Sometimes a being can be healed and not cured, and sometimes both can occur.
If anyone would like to engage in in-depth conversation about any of these topics, please PM me. This is a great book to promote thought and conversation around the topic of disease truly being dis- (not at) ease with some thing or things in our world. There are a lot of rich discussions waiting to be had.
Publication 2003
June 9, 2021
4.5
Kako je gospodin Bruce H. Lipton savršeno rekao: „Dr. Maté vješto kombinira najnovije spoznaje iz biomedicine s pričama svojih pacijenata kako bi pružio uvid u to kako naša najranija razvojna iskustva oblikuju naše ponašanje, stavove i odnose. Obavezno pročitati!“, tko sam ja da mu proturječim?! Potpisujem sve navedeno jer doktorov doprinos istraživanju povezanosti emocija i stresova u životu te tjelesnih sustava koji upravljaju živcima, imunosnim sustavom i hormonima je jednostavan i svima shvatljiv. A time i zanimljiv i vrlo poučan želimo li što dulje biti zdravi.
Cijeli osvrt pronađite ovdje: https://knjige-u-svom-filmu.webador.c...
Kako je gospodin Bruce H. Lipton savršeno rekao: „Dr. Maté vješto kombinira najnovije spoznaje iz biomedicine s pričama svojih pacijenata kako bi pružio uvid u to kako naša najranija razvojna iskustva oblikuju naše ponašanje, stavove i odnose. Obavezno pročitati!“, tko sam ja da mu proturječim?! Potpisujem sve navedeno jer doktorov doprinos istraživanju povezanosti emocija i stresova u životu te tjelesnih sustava koji upravljaju živcima, imunosnim sustavom i hormonima je jednostavan i svima shvatljiv. A time i zanimljiv i vrlo poučan želimo li što dulje biti zdravi.
Cijeli osvrt pronađite ovdje: https://knjige-u-svom-filmu.webador.c...
December 10, 2021
"We have seen in study after study that compulsive positive thinkers are more likely to develop disease and less likely to survive. Genuine positive thinking — or, more deeply, positive being — empowers us to know that we have nothing to fear from truth."
Mind blown.
I'm so glad I followed Dr. Nicole LePera AKA 'the Holistic Psychologist's recommendation and read this. I felt a million different things as I worked my way through. It's dense but so fucking interesting, it was easy to get to the end. I'd heard of Dr Mate, he shows up in Johann Hari's 'Chasing The Scream' and I thought he sounded so clever and insightful. I can't believe how long I waited to read his back catalogue. I can't stop talking about this book.
Mind blown.
I'm so glad I followed Dr. Nicole LePera AKA 'the Holistic Psychologist's recommendation and read this. I felt a million different things as I worked my way through. It's dense but so fucking interesting, it was easy to get to the end. I'd heard of Dr Mate, he shows up in Johann Hari's 'Chasing The Scream' and I thought he sounded so clever and insightful. I can't believe how long I waited to read his back catalogue. I can't stop talking about this book.
February 28, 2019
Just read the synopsis unless you want to find out about all the wonderful ways you gonna die.
December 16, 2021
Celebrul neurolog Antonio Damasio a demonstrat importanta unei regiuni din creier ( cortexul orbitofrontal) in formarea emotiilor. El a studiat pacientii care au si-au pierdut aceasta zona din creier, consecutiv unui accident vascular cerebral, tumorilor sau loviturilor craniene si a observat ca acestia isi pierd abilitatea de a simti emotii.
Ce se intampla cu acesti oameni? Liberi din a fi distrasi de emotii, ne-am astepta sa devina persoane rationale, logice. Contrar asteptarilor, nu pot lua decizii simple, nu isi pot stabili scopuri , analizeaza avantajele si dezavantajele fiecarei situatii, dar in absenta emtotiilor, nu gasesc nicio motivatie de a proceda intr-un fel sau altul.
Concluzia la care a ajuns, este aceea ca sentimentele sunt „experiențe mentale ale stărilor corpului”, care apar pe măsură ce creierul interpretează emoțiile, ele însele stări fizice rezultate din răspunsurile corpului la stimuli externi. (Ordinea unor astfel de evenimente este: sunt amenințat, experimentez frică și simt groază.)
Emotiile sunt esentiale in supravietuirea noastra.
Gabor Mate ,medic si scriitor, specializat in dezvoltarea copilului si traume, adictii, si impactul lor asupra sanatatii psihice, dar si fizice, inclusiv boli cronice, autoimune, neoplazii, a publicat o carte excelenta despre conexiunea corp-minte-spirit.
Cartea se numeste : When The Body Says No: the cost of hidden stress”. In traducere , cand noi nu stim sa spunem nu sau sa corectam situatii din viata nostra, corpul nostru va face asta pentru noi, prin diverse boli ce limiteaza expunerea la factorii stresanti .Sistemul imun al organismului nu functioneaza independent de viata zilnica. Asa cum a observat si Claude Bernard,” the microbe is nothing, the body host is everything ( nu microbul dicteaza agresivitatea bolii, agresivitatea bolii depinde de organismul gada)- o explicatie pertinenta de ce anumite bacterii/virusuri infecteaza unii oamenii, dar asupra altora nu au nicio putere.
Nicio boala nu are o singura cauza, si chiar si atunci cand exista suficienti factori de risc, unii oameni raman sanatosi, in timp ce altii, care fac sport zilnic, au diete bio, nu beau si nu fumeaza dezvolta boli grave.
Stress= boala.
Nimic nou pe frontul de vest.
Ce se intampla cu acesti oameni? Liberi din a fi distrasi de emotii, ne-am astepta sa devina persoane rationale, logice. Contrar asteptarilor, nu pot lua decizii simple, nu isi pot stabili scopuri , analizeaza avantajele si dezavantajele fiecarei situatii, dar in absenta emtotiilor, nu gasesc nicio motivatie de a proceda intr-un fel sau altul.
Concluzia la care a ajuns, este aceea ca sentimentele sunt „experiențe mentale ale stărilor corpului”, care apar pe măsură ce creierul interpretează emoțiile, ele însele stări fizice rezultate din răspunsurile corpului la stimuli externi. (Ordinea unor astfel de evenimente este: sunt amenințat, experimentez frică și simt groază.)
Emotiile sunt esentiale in supravietuirea noastra.
Gabor Mate ,medic si scriitor, specializat in dezvoltarea copilului si traume, adictii, si impactul lor asupra sanatatii psihice, dar si fizice, inclusiv boli cronice, autoimune, neoplazii, a publicat o carte excelenta despre conexiunea corp-minte-spirit.
Cartea se numeste : When The Body Says No: the cost of hidden stress”. In traducere , cand noi nu stim sa spunem nu sau sa corectam situatii din viata nostra, corpul nostru va face asta pentru noi, prin diverse boli ce limiteaza expunerea la factorii stresanti .Sistemul imun al organismului nu functioneaza independent de viata zilnica. Asa cum a observat si Claude Bernard,” the microbe is nothing, the body host is everything ( nu microbul dicteaza agresivitatea bolii, agresivitatea bolii depinde de organismul gada)- o explicatie pertinenta de ce anumite bacterii/virusuri infecteaza unii oamenii, dar asupra altora nu au nicio putere.
Nicio boala nu are o singura cauza, si chiar si atunci cand exista suficienti factori de risc, unii oameni raman sanatosi, in timp ce altii, care fac sport zilnic, au diete bio, nu beau si nu fumeaza dezvolta boli grave.
Stress= boala.
Nimic nou pe frontul de vest.
March 16, 2022
Când corpul spune nu este o lectură utilă, cu aplicabilitate, revoluționară din punct de vedere biopsihosocial. Este o lectură obligatorie pentru noi toți, o explorare curajoasă a minții umane, o călătorie literară care ne oferă toate motivele pentru ca noi să devenim mai conștienți asupra semnalelor emise de propriul nostru corp și pentru a asculta, a înțelege și a respecta mai mult atât nevoile noastre interioare, cât și pe cele ale oamenilor din jurul nostru.
Cu empatie, curaj, asumare și compasiune, autorul dorește să promoveze învățarea, conștiența și vindecarea, oferind cititorilor un tablou complex asupra identificării și eliminării cauzelor reale ale bolilor din ziua de azi.
„Ne menținem în situații stresante fiziologic, cu o conștientizare redusă a stresului sau cu o lipsă de conștientizare. Factorii de stres din viața majorității oamenilor de astăzi – cel puțin în lumea industrializată – sunt emoționali. La fel ca animalele de laborator incapabile să scape, oamenii rămân prinși în stiluri de viață și în modele emoționale dăunătoare sănătății lor. Cu cât dezvoltarea economică este mai mare, se pare, cu atât suntem mai imuni la realitățile noastre emoționale.”
Traumele din copilărie, cele din familie, moștenite transgenerațional, cele care se perpetueazză în relații și chiar și la locuri de muncă și care provin tot din mediul familial toxic, toate aceste invizibile bagaje emoționale, care însă cântăresc peste capacitatea noastră de asimilare, ne handicapează la nivel psihic și fizic atât de profund, încât rămânem blocați în situații nesănătoase, insuportabile, trezindu-ne prea tărziu (sau poate deloc, căci oamenii au o mare și negativă capacitate de a nu recunoaște și a nu conștientiza adevărurile brutale) prinși într-o relație abuzivă, disfuncțională, într-o slujbă stresantă, pe scurt, într-un stil de viață neconform cu valorile și principiile sănătoase. Adunăm frustrări și experiențe negative, dureri și dezamăgiri, suntem incapabili de a accepta și de a da un nume problemelor cu care ne confruntăm, refuzăm să cerem ajutorul specializat (psihoterapia), reprimăm și negăm la greu, transferăm toate aceste sentimente negative asupra celor din jurul nostru și astfel dăm naștere unor cicluri în care traumele sunt transmise din tată în fiu.
Toți acești factori stresori contribuie la formarea unor boli precum cancerul, bolile autoimune, bolile reumatologice, bolile inflamatorii, bolile psihice ș.a.m.d. Boli pe care, aparent, trebuie să le tratăm cu foarte multe medicamente, însă la ce ajută aceste pilule în momentul în care răul este deja făcut? Pot acestea să repare ce a fost stricat, fără ca noi să identificăm și să înlăturăm factorul stresor? De fapt, în secolul al XIX-lea, s-a demonstrat că vulnerabilitatea organismului-gazdă este responsabilă de cursul unei boli și influențează modalitatea în care un virus/o bacterie are puterea de a acționa asupra organismului. Cu cât organismul este mai slăbit (din cauze mai degrabă interne decât externe), cu atât șansele de vindecare sunt mai scăzute. În acest sens, Gabor Maté oferă un exemplu extrem de grăitor ce ține de etiologia cuvântului healing, pe care poate mulți nu o cunosc. Cuvântul este de origine antică și are semnificația de „întreg”. Astfel, a te vindeca înseamnă, în traducere, a deveni întreg. Cum putem fi noi mai întregi/mai sănătoși? Încercâd să ajungem la o armonie interioară, eliminând stresul care aduce o perturbare a echilibrului intern.
Ideea conform căreia stresul psihic crește riscul apariției bolilor nu este nouă, un exemplu în acest sens fiind relatat chiar în anul 1868 de către bine-cunoscutul neurolog francez Charcot, care a făcut legătura între stresul cronic și apariția simptomelor de scleroză multiplă. Pacienții care au dezvoltat această boală au fost expuși la stres pe perioade îndelungate de ani de zile, capcitatea lor de a reacționa prin răspunsul normal de luptă-sau-fugi fiind grav afectată.
Interacțiunile sănătoase cu cei din jur, inteligența emoțională și relațională sunt extrem de importante, iar acestea pot fi dobândite doar printr-o ingienă relațională riguroasă. În acest sens, este recomandat să ținem seama de câteva aspecte ce vizează dobândirea unei competențe emoționale: capacitatea de conștientizare a emoțiilor (pozitive și negative), capacitatea de a schița granițe și limite emoționale care ar trebui respectate de către cei din jurul nostru, capcitatea de a indentifica și stopa traumele dobândite în familie, astfel încât sa nu se mai ajunga la perpetuarea traumelor transgnereaționale.
„Este ușor de înțeles de ce abuzurile, traumele sau neglijența extremă din copilărie au consecințe negative. Dar de ce multe persoane suferă de boli legate de stres fără să fi fost abuzate sau traumatizate? Aceste persoane nu suferă pentru că au trecut prin ceva negativ, ci pentru că le-a fost refuzat ceva pozitiv.”
Nu în ultimul rând, o informație valoroasă este oferită în capitolul intitulat „Puterea gândirii negative”, în care autorul oferă un mesaj nonconformist și curajos, menit a fi analizat în profunzime: pentru a avea o șansă la vindecare, este esențial să luăm în considerare gândirea negativă care încurajează reflectarea asupra aspectelor care nu funcționează, nu sunt în echilibru. A nu pune întrebări despre potențialele surse de stres și angoasă este în sine o sursă de stres camuflată și ascunsă undeva în inconștient. Optimismul ce duce la constrângeri este o modalitate prin care evităm confruntarea cu anxietatea, o rețetă sigură prin care ne legăm de aceasta.
Modalități eficiente de săcdere a stresului sunt cele prin care devenim autonomi și independenți emoțional. O realitate dură este că nimeni nu poate dobândi autonomie dacă este influențat de dependență, nevoie de atașament, dorință pentru succes duse la extrem.
Cu empatie, curaj, asumare și compasiune, autorul dorește să promoveze învățarea, conștiența și vindecarea, oferind cititorilor un tablou complex asupra identificării și eliminării cauzelor reale ale bolilor din ziua de azi.
„Ne menținem în situații stresante fiziologic, cu o conștientizare redusă a stresului sau cu o lipsă de conștientizare. Factorii de stres din viața majorității oamenilor de astăzi – cel puțin în lumea industrializată – sunt emoționali. La fel ca animalele de laborator incapabile să scape, oamenii rămân prinși în stiluri de viață și în modele emoționale dăunătoare sănătății lor. Cu cât dezvoltarea economică este mai mare, se pare, cu atât suntem mai imuni la realitățile noastre emoționale.”
Traumele din copilărie, cele din familie, moștenite transgenerațional, cele care se perpetueazză în relații și chiar și la locuri de muncă și care provin tot din mediul familial toxic, toate aceste invizibile bagaje emoționale, care însă cântăresc peste capacitatea noastră de asimilare, ne handicapează la nivel psihic și fizic atât de profund, încât rămânem blocați în situații nesănătoase, insuportabile, trezindu-ne prea tărziu (sau poate deloc, căci oamenii au o mare și negativă capacitate de a nu recunoaște și a nu conștientiza adevărurile brutale) prinși într-o relație abuzivă, disfuncțională, într-o slujbă stresantă, pe scurt, într-un stil de viață neconform cu valorile și principiile sănătoase. Adunăm frustrări și experiențe negative, dureri și dezamăgiri, suntem incapabili de a accepta și de a da un nume problemelor cu care ne confruntăm, refuzăm să cerem ajutorul specializat (psihoterapia), reprimăm și negăm la greu, transferăm toate aceste sentimente negative asupra celor din jurul nostru și astfel dăm naștere unor cicluri în care traumele sunt transmise din tată în fiu.
Toți acești factori stresori contribuie la formarea unor boli precum cancerul, bolile autoimune, bolile reumatologice, bolile inflamatorii, bolile psihice ș.a.m.d. Boli pe care, aparent, trebuie să le tratăm cu foarte multe medicamente, însă la ce ajută aceste pilule în momentul în care răul este deja făcut? Pot acestea să repare ce a fost stricat, fără ca noi să identificăm și să înlăturăm factorul stresor? De fapt, în secolul al XIX-lea, s-a demonstrat că vulnerabilitatea organismului-gazdă este responsabilă de cursul unei boli și influențează modalitatea în care un virus/o bacterie are puterea de a acționa asupra organismului. Cu cât organismul este mai slăbit (din cauze mai degrabă interne decât externe), cu atât șansele de vindecare sunt mai scăzute. În acest sens, Gabor Maté oferă un exemplu extrem de grăitor ce ține de etiologia cuvântului healing, pe care poate mulți nu o cunosc. Cuvântul este de origine antică și are semnificația de „întreg”. Astfel, a te vindeca înseamnă, în traducere, a deveni întreg. Cum putem fi noi mai întregi/mai sănătoși? Încercâd să ajungem la o armonie interioară, eliminând stresul care aduce o perturbare a echilibrului intern.
Ideea conform căreia stresul psihic crește riscul apariției bolilor nu este nouă, un exemplu în acest sens fiind relatat chiar în anul 1868 de către bine-cunoscutul neurolog francez Charcot, care a făcut legătura între stresul cronic și apariția simptomelor de scleroză multiplă. Pacienții care au dezvoltat această boală au fost expuși la stres pe perioade îndelungate de ani de zile, capcitatea lor de a reacționa prin răspunsul normal de luptă-sau-fugi fiind grav afectată.
Interacțiunile sănătoase cu cei din jur, inteligența emoțională și relațională sunt extrem de importante, iar acestea pot fi dobândite doar printr-o ingienă relațională riguroasă. În acest sens, este recomandat să ținem seama de câteva aspecte ce vizează dobândirea unei competențe emoționale: capacitatea de conștientizare a emoțiilor (pozitive și negative), capacitatea de a schița granițe și limite emoționale care ar trebui respectate de către cei din jurul nostru, capcitatea de a indentifica și stopa traumele dobândite în familie, astfel încât sa nu se mai ajunga la perpetuarea traumelor transgnereaționale.
„Este ușor de înțeles de ce abuzurile, traumele sau neglijența extremă din copilărie au consecințe negative. Dar de ce multe persoane suferă de boli legate de stres fără să fi fost abuzate sau traumatizate? Aceste persoane nu suferă pentru că au trecut prin ceva negativ, ci pentru că le-a fost refuzat ceva pozitiv.”
Nu în ultimul rând, o informație valoroasă este oferită în capitolul intitulat „Puterea gândirii negative”, în care autorul oferă un mesaj nonconformist și curajos, menit a fi analizat în profunzime: pentru a avea o șansă la vindecare, este esențial să luăm în considerare gândirea negativă care încurajează reflectarea asupra aspectelor care nu funcționează, nu sunt în echilibru. A nu pune întrebări despre potențialele surse de stres și angoasă este în sine o sursă de stres camuflată și ascunsă undeva în inconștient. Optimismul ce duce la constrângeri este o modalitate prin care evităm confruntarea cu anxietatea, o rețetă sigură prin care ne legăm de aceasta.
Modalități eficiente de săcdere a stresului sunt cele prin care devenim autonomi și independenți emoțional. O realitate dură este că nimeni nu poate dobândi autonomie dacă este influențat de dependență, nevoie de atașament, dorință pentru succes duse la extrem.
November 11, 2023
Jay Shetty tinklalaidė apie emocinę sveikatą yra viena geriausių. Būtent per ją aš kažkada netyčia atradau Gabor Mate. Gana liūdnos išvaizdos senukas, kuris kalbėjo apie tai, kaip surasti save. Mane tiesiog užhipnotizavo tai, ką jis sakė. Čia nebuvo eilinės pasakėlės, eilinės nuvalkiotos frazės. Čia buvo daug daugiau. Į psichologiją jis sugebėjo integruoti net filologiją. Nuo tada karts nuo karto vis paklausau Gabor Mate paskaitų, o kai pamačiau, kad Vaga išleido jo knygą - iškart žinoja, kad skaitysiu.
Apibendrinus, ką esu girdėjusi kalbant Gabor Mate, galiu pasakyti - viskas yra susiję. Šįkart kalbama apie proto ir kūno sąveiką. Gabor Mate, pasitelkdamas daugybės žmonių ligos istorijas ir tyrimus, teigia, kad negalima į ligas žvelgti kaip į sutrikusias atskirų kūno dalių funkcijas. Pavyzdžiai ir tyrimai rodo, kad itin svarbu kaip asmuo savo gyvenime tvarkosi su stresu. Neišmatuojamas paklusnumas, nesugebėjimas pasakyti ne, slopinamos emocijos padaro meškos paslaugą - išsivysto ligos. Įdomu ir tai, kad atsiranda nauja medicinos sritis - psichoneurioimunologija. Ji kalba apie kūno ir proto sąveiką. Net Sokratas kalbėjo apie tai, kad kūno ir proto atskirti neįmanoma. Modernieji laikai, greitas gyvenimo ritmas privertė mus užsimiršti, bet sergamumas autoimuninėmis ligomis mums sako stop.
Neslėpsiu, vietomis buvo gana baisu skaityti. Puikiai suprantame, kad streso absoliučiai išvengti neįmanoma, tad natūraliai pradedi galvoti - kokia liga gresia man. Aišku, čia nėra knyga skirta siaubui įvaryti. Greičiau ji apie pokytį, kurį kiekvienas galime padaryti, kad gyventi kokybiškiau ir išvengti tam tikrų ligų.
Gabor Mate pateikia daug pavyzdžių iš savo pacientų gyvenimo ir taip iliustruoja savo mintis. Tikrai ne vienoje situacijoje atpažinsite save. Kalbama apie sudėtingus vaikystės išgyvenimus, santuokos sunkumus ir daugybę kitų rezonuojančių temų. Moksliniai tyrimai taip pat peteikiami gana paprasta kalba. Taip, biologijos yra, bet tikrai nebūtina viską suprasti iki smulkiausių molekulių, kad pagauti esmę.
Tai ne pirma mano skaityta knyga apie psichologiją . Ši knyga yra daug plačiau nei tik psichologija. Mane nustebino kaip suprantamai ir aiškiai galima kalbėti apie gana sudėtingus dalykus ir kaip pavyksta skaitytojo dėmesį išlaikyti visus keturis šimtus puslapių. Čia nebuvo tas Gabor Mate, kurio paskaitas aš žiūriu, bet buvo įdomu. Tikiu, kad priversk kiekvieną susimąstyti kaip gali pakeisti savo gyvenimą, kad jame būtų kiek įmanoma mažiau streso, nes kaina, kurią gali tekti mokėti priešingu atveju yra paprasčiausiai to neverta.
📕 Susitikime IG: https://www.instagram.com/dar.viena.p...
📕 Susitikime Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/dar.viena.puslapi
Apibendrinus, ką esu girdėjusi kalbant Gabor Mate, galiu pasakyti - viskas yra susiję. Šįkart kalbama apie proto ir kūno sąveiką. Gabor Mate, pasitelkdamas daugybės žmonių ligos istorijas ir tyrimus, teigia, kad negalima į ligas žvelgti kaip į sutrikusias atskirų kūno dalių funkcijas. Pavyzdžiai ir tyrimai rodo, kad itin svarbu kaip asmuo savo gyvenime tvarkosi su stresu. Neišmatuojamas paklusnumas, nesugebėjimas pasakyti ne, slopinamos emocijos padaro meškos paslaugą - išsivysto ligos. Įdomu ir tai, kad atsiranda nauja medicinos sritis - psichoneurioimunologija. Ji kalba apie kūno ir proto sąveiką. Net Sokratas kalbėjo apie tai, kad kūno ir proto atskirti neįmanoma. Modernieji laikai, greitas gyvenimo ritmas privertė mus užsimiršti, bet sergamumas autoimuninėmis ligomis mums sako stop.
Neslėpsiu, vietomis buvo gana baisu skaityti. Puikiai suprantame, kad streso absoliučiai išvengti neįmanoma, tad natūraliai pradedi galvoti - kokia liga gresia man. Aišku, čia nėra knyga skirta siaubui įvaryti. Greičiau ji apie pokytį, kurį kiekvienas galime padaryti, kad gyventi kokybiškiau ir išvengti tam tikrų ligų.
Gabor Mate pateikia daug pavyzdžių iš savo pacientų gyvenimo ir taip iliustruoja savo mintis. Tikrai ne vienoje situacijoje atpažinsite save. Kalbama apie sudėtingus vaikystės išgyvenimus, santuokos sunkumus ir daugybę kitų rezonuojančių temų. Moksliniai tyrimai taip pat peteikiami gana paprasta kalba. Taip, biologijos yra, bet tikrai nebūtina viską suprasti iki smulkiausių molekulių, kad pagauti esmę.
Tai ne pirma mano skaityta knyga apie psichologiją . Ši knyga yra daug plačiau nei tik psichologija. Mane nustebino kaip suprantamai ir aiškiai galima kalbėti apie gana sudėtingus dalykus ir kaip pavyksta skaitytojo dėmesį išlaikyti visus keturis šimtus puslapių. Čia nebuvo tas Gabor Mate, kurio paskaitas aš žiūriu, bet buvo įdomu. Tikiu, kad priversk kiekvieną susimąstyti kaip gali pakeisti savo gyvenimą, kad jame būtų kiek įmanoma mažiau streso, nes kaina, kurią gali tekti mokėti priešingu atveju yra paprasčiausiai to neverta.
📕 Susitikime IG: https://www.instagram.com/dar.viena.p...
📕 Susitikime Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/dar.viena.puslapi
December 9, 2022
What the title, When the Body Says No, is referring to is the connection Gabor Maté is making between illness, and stress and trauma. Basically that we may ignore the stress and trauma, but the body may bring it all up to the surface in a different form. It’s the mind / body connection, and how that connection may result in illness in certain instances.
I’m a bit unsure about this book. On one hand Gabor Maté’s theory makes a lot of sense in so many ways. I haven’t read much phycology, hardly any to be honest, but there is something that feels familiar, and true in all of this. The mind has something to do with our physical health, so I think there must be something to this connection. Does it reach as far as Maté claims it does? Well, that’s the question, isn’t it?
And on the other hand, the way the author uses in some instances celebrity biographies to show how this works in practice makes me wonder a bit about this. He makes a medical diagnosis from biographies. This is at best anecdotal evidence, which may show scientists what might be interesting to explore, but doesn’t prove anything. This makes me a bit skeptical.
Of course, he doesn’t rely solely on that. Far from it. He bases his findings on interviews with his own patients, and results from research as well. On top of that the interest in this kind of research seems to be increasing, which suggests that scientists are starting to take this theory more seriously, but I suppose that there is a lot to explore here before it can be said for sure if it is accurate or not. For example, why can some people go through stress, and trauma without getting sick?
So when I feel like there is something to this theory, when I think it makes a lot of sense, is that because of my confirmation bias? I’m not sure. I’m really not. It is an interesting theory, that much is certain.
I’m a bit unsure about this book. On one hand Gabor Maté’s theory makes a lot of sense in so many ways. I haven’t read much phycology, hardly any to be honest, but there is something that feels familiar, and true in all of this. The mind has something to do with our physical health, so I think there must be something to this connection. Does it reach as far as Maté claims it does? Well, that’s the question, isn’t it?
And on the other hand, the way the author uses in some instances celebrity biographies to show how this works in practice makes me wonder a bit about this. He makes a medical diagnosis from biographies. This is at best anecdotal evidence, which may show scientists what might be interesting to explore, but doesn’t prove anything. This makes me a bit skeptical.
Of course, he doesn’t rely solely on that. Far from it. He bases his findings on interviews with his own patients, and results from research as well. On top of that the interest in this kind of research seems to be increasing, which suggests that scientists are starting to take this theory more seriously, but I suppose that there is a lot to explore here before it can be said for sure if it is accurate or not. For example, why can some people go through stress, and trauma without getting sick?
So when I feel like there is something to this theory, when I think it makes a lot of sense, is that because of my confirmation bias? I’m not sure. I’m really not. It is an interesting theory, that much is certain.
June 24, 2011
Repression-stress-lowered immunity as a trigger for disease, make sense and has been discussed before. A person only has to live through one major, stressful episode in his/her life to attest that the link between these is real. The author states repeatedly that it is only one of several contributing factors, however, like the majority of traditionally trained medical doctors, he ignores some very important ones: parasitic activity in our bodies, solvents and other toxins that have become omnipresent in our daily environment and food, nutritional deficiencies and stresses due to a modern diet extremely high in sugars/fat and low in fiber, lack of enough exercise, harmful effects of over-vaccination in recent decades, disappearance of life-sustaining minerals in our food supply due to industrial farming techniques, et al.
I agree with most points the author made and the book is easy to follow. But I found it a little too simplistic in its reasoning. Some of the research used for evidence is questionable. The subjective answers (or lack thereof) people give in study groups are not necessarily conclusive. At the same time, one should never make conclusions about the lives of famous people based solely on the opinion of a biographer (or sibling) who wrote about them after they were dead. The chapter about MS where the author parrots the ramblings of Jacqueleine duPre's jealous sister in her controversial biography, was disappointing. I had less respect for the author's words after that.
I agree with most points the author made and the book is easy to follow. But I found it a little too simplistic in its reasoning. Some of the research used for evidence is questionable. The subjective answers (or lack thereof) people give in study groups are not necessarily conclusive. At the same time, one should never make conclusions about the lives of famous people based solely on the opinion of a biographer (or sibling) who wrote about them after they were dead. The chapter about MS where the author parrots the ramblings of Jacqueleine duPre's jealous sister in her controversial biography, was disappointing. I had less respect for the author's words after that.
February 28, 2023
February Non-Fiction book of the month.
Over-rated!
Over-rated!
October 24, 2022
Nowadays I feel that a lot of people know that stress can be a source of disease, so in that sense, the premise of the book is not surprising: Stress predisposes people to various illnesses. The real value of the book consists of the explanations on how childhood experiences (even if not consciously recalled) can set up the development of an illness. Not only that, but traumas and coping modes which cause chronic stress can be transmitted to further generations without even being aware of them since they're deeply ingrained, creating a cycle.
The author, at one point, brings forth the idea that the familial environment is influenced by the social, economic and cultural context in which it exists. The family itself can be dysfunctional in such a way that it causes the child to adopt unhealthy coping mechanisms such at the repression of anger or taking the role of people pleaser / caregiver which causes chronic stress, even if isn't experienced consciously as such. The chronic stress in turn disarms our bodies' ability to fight off potential diseases. The author does a great job at explaining that the body should be understood as a whole (mind and body as whole, not as separate existences) and at explaining the interconectedness of the various systems and organs in our body. It makes sense then that any psychological event is bound to have, like a domino effect, repercussions in parts of the body which might seem unrelated at a glance. This perspective on disease also promotes a different approach on healing, one that isn't dependent on pills or miracle drugs, but on therapeutic recovery in order to undo the patterns which we have unconsciously learned in childhood in order to not lose attachments and to not affect our chances to integrate socially.
The book was originally released in 2003, which is quite some time ago and it's probably common sense by now that a person's life history can shed light on how and / or why certain diseases are triggered, or why certain people are more vulnerable or predisposed to develop cancer or multiple sclerosis than others. I believe the medical practice has evolved a bit since 20 years ago, especially in the most developed countries, but in my country I've never seen doctors focus on the aspects presented in the book, but strictly on the biological causes and effects of the disease, so in this sense there's still a long way to go and it's also a sign that people can still benefit from a book such as this. Also interesting to note is that the author recently released another book, The Myth of Normal: Trauma, Illness, and Healing in a Toxic Culture, which I didn't read yet, but from the title seems to be related to the point presented above, that culture can be an important factor in how families function and thus how individuals might be affected.
The author, at one point, brings forth the idea that the familial environment is influenced by the social, economic and cultural context in which it exists. The family itself can be dysfunctional in such a way that it causes the child to adopt unhealthy coping mechanisms such at the repression of anger or taking the role of people pleaser / caregiver which causes chronic stress, even if isn't experienced consciously as such. The chronic stress in turn disarms our bodies' ability to fight off potential diseases. The author does a great job at explaining that the body should be understood as a whole (mind and body as whole, not as separate existences) and at explaining the interconectedness of the various systems and organs in our body. It makes sense then that any psychological event is bound to have, like a domino effect, repercussions in parts of the body which might seem unrelated at a glance. This perspective on disease also promotes a different approach on healing, one that isn't dependent on pills or miracle drugs, but on therapeutic recovery in order to undo the patterns which we have unconsciously learned in childhood in order to not lose attachments and to not affect our chances to integrate socially.
The book was originally released in 2003, which is quite some time ago and it's probably common sense by now that a person's life history can shed light on how and / or why certain diseases are triggered, or why certain people are more vulnerable or predisposed to develop cancer or multiple sclerosis than others. I believe the medical practice has evolved a bit since 20 years ago, especially in the most developed countries, but in my country I've never seen doctors focus on the aspects presented in the book, but strictly on the biological causes and effects of the disease, so in this sense there's still a long way to go and it's also a sign that people can still benefit from a book such as this. Also interesting to note is that the author recently released another book, The Myth of Normal: Trauma, Illness, and Healing in a Toxic Culture, which I didn't read yet, but from the title seems to be related to the point presented above, that culture can be an important factor in how families function and thus how individuals might be affected.
March 3, 2024
Într-o lume a oamenilor stresați, chiar aveam nevoie de o astfel de carte. Gabor Mate ne povestește-fără să folosească niște termeni academici-despre toate bolile care pot fi provocate de stres. Despre cât de mult ne afectează mediul de la serviciu atunci când acesta se bazează pe stres, pe disconfort, ori inadecvare-sub toate formele ei.
Cartea mi-a amintit de replica unui domn doctor pe care l-am întâlnit la un control, acum ceva ani.
"-Doamnă, unde lucrați? Să știu de unde provine stresul. Atunci când acesta nu este conștientizat și pus la punct, el se transformă în boală. Depinde doar de noi să ne tratăm. Și de boală, dar și de stres."
Deci da, domnul Mate nu ne păcălește și nici nu ne sperie cu această carte, el doar ne atrage atenția. Poate ar trebui să ne echilibrăm un pic, să eliminăm factorii care se confundă cu stresul, dar ne și îmbolnăvesc în același timp. Pentru că atunci când stresul ajunge să te doară fizic, nu va simți asta nici șeful care poate te presează, nici prietenii care poate dezamăgesc, ori colegul pe care-l accepți în jur, cu tot cu energia negativă, ori cu glumele proaste. Doar tu simți suferința, doar tu. Și oare merită cineva asta?
Cartea mi-a amintit de replica unui domn doctor pe care l-am întâlnit la un control, acum ceva ani.
"-Doamnă, unde lucrați? Să știu de unde provine stresul. Atunci când acesta nu este conștientizat și pus la punct, el se transformă în boală. Depinde doar de noi să ne tratăm. Și de boală, dar și de stres."
Deci da, domnul Mate nu ne păcălește și nici nu ne sperie cu această carte, el doar ne atrage atenția. Poate ar trebui să ne echilibrăm un pic, să eliminăm factorii care se confundă cu stresul, dar ne și îmbolnăvesc în același timp. Pentru că atunci când stresul ajunge să te doară fizic, nu va simți asta nici șeful care poate te presează, nici prietenii care poate dezamăgesc, ori colegul pe care-l accepți în jur, cu tot cu energia negativă, ori cu glumele proaste. Doar tu simți suferința, doar tu. Și oare merită cineva asta?
April 30, 2019
I totally buy the mind/body connection explored here and grew up in a home where my doctor father and mystic mother always talked about it so this book and his theories felt right and familiar. The book was a sequence of cases that were illuminating and interesting.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,146 reviews