Individual differences make pain personal

Individual differences in pain: understanding the mosaic that makes pain personal: PAIN – Fillingim, Roger B. – Pain: April 2017

In Brief: The experience of pain is characterized by tremendous interindividual variability, which is driven by multiple biopsychosocial factors.

This review article discusses individual differences in pain, including the roles of demographic, genetic, and psychosocial factors and their interactions

The public can only access the first page of this report as a JPEG picture, but if you enlarge it you can read the text (even though it seems to have been intentionally blurred). 

If my tax dollars are paying for research conducted under the auspices of the NIH, I should have full access, not this blurred image of only the first page.


One thought on “Individual differences make pain personal

  1. Kathy C

    I am not that sure that these types of Articles are even helpful. Everything is “personal” and it has virtually nothing to do with pain. They have written pain out of the narrative. These Navel Gazing pseudo scientific takes on the issue are not furthering Science or Understanding, they are merely making excuses for the current missing research. Each time they introduce this stuff, is ask why. There is no comprehensive research because the industries that profited did not want it. Of course all of these factors have something to do with pain, but they are running the narrative backwards.
    There is a ridiculous amount of Bias in this field, and they are perpetuating it. Instead of seeking a Scientific explanation they theorize about “Psycho social Factors.” Well of Course. we have an Epidemic of Despair in this country, clearly associating with income and Social Class. Americans are dying, yet they are still looking for “Psycho social Factors.” They are pretty obvious, and these nebulous explanations are not helping. The Facts are glaringly obvious. They decided to Study these factors, because Industry money was available, not because they were meaningful. With Biased “Researchers” and preconceived “outcomes’ we can project any nebulous idea into the “Discussion.” Of course Income, Race and Gender all play a role, but not for the reason they are appearing to speculate about. I noticed that with any wacky idea, it becomes more credible, when they do repeated Studies. If they don’t confirm their Biases the first 20 times, they “Study” is again.
    They will do anything to avoid the Facts, they are inconvenient. Perhaps they should apply the same techniques to a “Study” of Researcher Bias. There won’t be a “Study” done of something like “Pain Catastrophic” focusing on the Researcher Gender, facial expressions, and Biases. That would be contrary to their current narrative. They did the exact same thing with Education, they blamed poor children for underachieving. When the results of the Studies did not show what they wanted they re did those “Studies enough times to make them appear credible. In Post Science America anything goes.



Other thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s