Talk:John E. Sarno

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I removed some copyright violations that were on this page. The text was directly copied from http://www.healingbackpain.com/treatment.html, which contains the same misspellings as this article had (such as "ondisorders", "onproviding", and "betweenemotions").

If the page is being edited by the good Doctor, please note that information that is clearly autobiographical or that reads like an ad is generally looked down on. --Interiot 20:05, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] POV problems

This article is a questionable and I may flag it. First, the citation about him "curing thousands" is a link to a commercial alternative-medicine site which is not a proper source. Second, there is no mention here of the fact that that his methods are controversial, which is mentioned in the Tension Myositis Syndrome article. If this article makes claims about him curing thousands then it needs to mention the controversy. The article needs work. --Howdybob 19:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to know on what basis you find Dr. Sarno's methods controversial. The central fact is that they work. He is a professor of Clinical Rehabilitation Medicine at the NYU School of Medicine, and attending physician at the Howard A. Rusk Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine at the NYU Medical Center, and has been for over 30 years (He's 83 now). His methods have been developed with real suffering patients in a clinical setting during that time, and he has refined them over the years so that they consistently work and relieve people of their chronic pain. They have been put into practice by numerous other doctors, with great success. In the cited article he estimates his success rate at 90%. When John Stossel of 20/20 (a true skeptic) did a segment on him in 1999, he was healed from 20 years of back pain, and they checked a sample of his records and found all twenty patients had positive results. [1]Ralphyde 01:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
You removed the POV template but you added a statement that he his still "curing patients" without a source on that statement. First of all, I quote the linked WP article tension myositis syndrome:
Sarno's theories and management plan for back pain and other TMS equivalents are not widely accepted by the conventional medical community, but have a high rate of success. [emphasis mine]
Second, there are simply no valid citations whatsoever in the TMS article for these "tens of thousands" of cured patients. Where the good Doctor teaches is irrelevant as to the validity of his methods or the unsupported assertions that he has cured tens of thousands. A link to a commerical alternative-medicine site isn't an acceptable source. I haven't looked at that .ram link yet but if it's good then you need to cite the report somehow, not with a .ram file and change "tens of thousands" to "ABC reporters verified that twenty patients say they had positive experiences with Dr. Sarno." It needs neutral, accepted sources, both on any evidence in support of his methods and on what the controversy may be and any arguments that others have against his methods. Both of these articles look absolutely rotten to me and I'm going to flag TMS for needing citations at least. I will continue this discussion at Talk:Tension myositis syndrome. --Howdybob 04:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Howdybob, I'd like to know if you know anything about TMS or Dr. Sarno, or whether you are simply acting on a whim to question his reputation. I've been studying TMS for the past two years since my wife was afflicted with severe chronic back pain, and have read his last three books, plus those of three others who have written about TMS, which is perhaps the most successful treatment for chronic back pain out there. His latest book contains chapters by six other doctors. I've also had two friends with chronic back pain for 17 years and more, heal themselves totally by simply reading his book, Healing Back Pain, and applying the attitude adjustments recommended. There are millions of people in severe pain out there, and Dr. Sarno seems to have discovered the key to healing it, and people need to know that his methods are available and successful instead of subjecting themselves to surgery which is 30 to 50% unsuccessful. And why do you call that citation invalid? It's an article on a medical information website, not commercial that I can tell. What is "rotten" about it? What is your interest in TMS?Ralphyde 06:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I made some small changes to try to move this to a more neutral persective. I removed references to how many patients he has "cured" and changed it to simply "treated." I think this article is pretty good now though it might be good to emphasize the controversy a bit more. The main issue is the TMS article, where all this needs to be thoroughly discussed and referenced. Work should concentrate there, and that work would help determine what might need to be said here about any controversy. Please discuss the latest version below here. --Howdybob 07:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)