"High pain threshold" WTH?

[rubato]

What does that actually mean?

1.
Of two people who experience the same objective level of agony one will be able to cope better. [in which case I would like to know how this is measured].

2.
Of two people who experience the same level of physical trauma*, but one has fewer pain receptors or a lower level of neuro-physiological response to pain.
* both have an identical laceration, for example.

3. Of two people one has a cranial response to pain which is very attenuated.

4.
There is really no difference this is just pure bullshit.

For the most part I think the whole "higher/lower pain threshold" is just pure crap.

We bear what we have to when we know we have to. And we come up with stories to tell about it.

yrs,
rubato

[dales]

Am I channeling rubbix?

OUCH..........THAT HURTS LIKE A SONOFABITCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





Physicians gauging pain have little to go on besides a patient’s self-report. And some sufferers simply can’t communicate how they’re feeling.

So scientists have searched for a reliable way to measure pain physiologically. And they may finally have one.

Researchers performed functional MRI scans on the brains of 24 subjects who were having an arm heated to the point of moderate pain. The subjects’ brain patterns were recorded both as they experienced pain and zero pain. The researchers then used an algorithm to develop a pain model, based on the patterns. The work was published in the journal PLoS One.

The researchers then analyzed the brain scan patterns of 16 new subjects, some experiencing pain, some not. They found that their model accurately predicted pain levels 81 percent of the time.

Most studies of physiology-based measurements of pain have focused on heart rate, skin conductance and EEG. These measures correlate with pain, but nothing has been accurate enough to substitute for self-reports.

The authors note we can’t depend solely on a study done with heat-based pain—but the method shows hope for new ways to accurately measure pain.

—Christie Nicholson

[Lord Jim]

There are just too many fat pitches in rube's OP...

It would be too easy....

Gonna take a pass...

[loCAtek]

Hmmm, if the injuries are the same, but the recipients respond differently, then 'pain threshold' is based on unique personal psychosomatic reaction to the stimuli.

If the psychosomatic reaction is mild, then we say the personal 'pain threshold' is high.

If the psychosomatic reaction is strong, then we say the personal 'pain threshold' is low.


Psychosomatic reaction is based on conditioning, training, and self-discipline, respectively. The actual physical sensation of 'pain' may be considered secondary as to how well an individual responds to thier psychosomatic reaction.

Meaning; some may have a life-threatening injury, but 'not feel it' and keep fighting.

While others will lose consciousness, or even die from simple discomfort.




As has been said;
'Pain is nature's way of telling you something's wrong.'


It's how one reacts to that message, which determines whether you have a high or low threshold.


As I once said in class; pain is an alarm system, but it's up to you to decide how severe the emergency is. If you hear a car alarm in the parking lot; you usualy don't care too much about it; but if it's a fire alarm on your office floor- you're ready to jump up and take action.

It's accurate awareness of your physical body and what its pain alarms are really saying, that determines if the sustained injury is severe enough for action, or not.

[Sean]

Hmmm, if the injuries are the same, but the recipients respond differently, then 'pain threshold' is based on unique personal psychosomatic reaction to the stimuli.

Different responses are just as (if not much more) likely to be caused by differences in the recipients' nervous systems.

[rubato]

Am I channeling rubbix?

Physicians gauging pain have little to go on besides a patient’s self-report. And some sufferers simply can’t communicate how they’re feeling.

So scientists have searched for a reliable way to measure pain physiologically. And they may finally have one.

Researchers performed functional MRI scans on the brains of 24 subjects who were having an arm heated to the point of moderate pain. The subjects’ brain patterns were recorded both as they experienced pain and zero pain. The researchers then used an algorithm to develop a pain model, based on the patterns. The work was published in the journal PLoS One.

The researchers then analyzed the brain scan patterns of 16 new subjects, some experiencing pain, some not. They found that their model accurately predicted pain levels 81 percent of the time.

Most studies of physiology-based measurements of pain have focused on heart rate, skin conductance and EEG. These measures correlate with pain, but nothing has been accurate enough to substitute for self-reports.

The authors note we can’t depend solely on a study done with heat-based pain—but the method shows hope for new ways to accurately measure pain.

—Christie Nicholson

But at the end of the day their method is only calibrated by people's self-reports of pain. And they're back at square one.

I have never seen any evidence to support the idea that different people have different tolerances to pain. The whole idea is just made-up nonsense.

yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Well, we could use instances of "breaking" under torture....

During Vietnam, it took a number of people extensive torture before they were willing to sign propaganda confessions, others not so much....

The military realizes different people are going to have different thresholds before they break which is why the guidelines say just to resist as long as you can....

[loCAtek]

I've not been any studies, but I deal with pain every day... Personally, I don't think folks nervous systems are any different; I do still feel pain, I just rationally judge how I am going to respond to it , that is tolerating it- much like different people can tolerate hot or cold weather.

[Big RR]

Some people see better than others, some hear better, some have a better sense of smell, and there are some who have an exceptional sense of taste (I knew one such person who was engaged in creating artificial flavors), why would it be at all surprising that some experience pain less than others? Sure, many times we just bear what we feel we have to, and many times we can become accustomed to even severe chronic pain, but I would not be at all surprised that some experience the pain far less than others.

[Miles]

One can learn to manage pain by deciding just how much you are willing to accept. Other factors could include how far did the knife penetrate or just where the bullit lodged. What bone was broken and how far did you have to go to get medical attention and what were the consequences if you don't make it. Again it comes down to "Mind over matter, you don't mind and it just plain doesn't fucking matter". Someone once said, "pain is just natures way of letting you know your alive".

[Big RR]

OK Miles, but is the inability to manage pain this way a consequence of failing to control one's perception of it sufficiently, or is it because those who can control it do experience it less than the others who can. My guess is that, like most things, it is a combinationation of the two factors.

[dgs49]

Shall we make this political?

Indeed.

One often hears it said, with respect to interrogation of suspected terrorists, that "torture doesn't work."

Well.

It is an obvious fact that physical pain (and the anticipation of physical pain) affects different people differently. SOme people can endure physical pain quite easily and for others, even a moderate change in room temperature is excruciating (witness the number of space heaters in a typical office). Thus, "torture," no matter how you define it, will "work" with some interrogees and will "fail" with others. To say that "torture does not work" is obvious bullshit.

But getting back to pain, the medicos have a way - a good way, as far as I'm concerned - of dealing with it in patients. You are asked to quantify your pain on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being mild, and 10 being completely intolerable.

In order to determine whether relative pain tolerance exists, you would have to subject more than one person to exactly the same level of physical pain. I don't think that's possible, because everyone's body is different.

[Miles]

OK Miles, but is the inability to manage pain this way a consequence of failing to control one's perception of it sufficiently, or is it because those who can control it do experience it less than the others who can. My guess is that, like most things, it is a combinationation of the two factors.

My own personal experience is that it is a learned response. Evaluating pain and determining how it can affect my ability to function is the key. I was once forced to walk 15 miles on a broken ankle. The pain was severe but manageable.

[Sue U]

One often hears it said, with respect to interrogation of suspected terrorists, that "torture doesn't work."

Well.

It is an obvious fact that physical pain (and the anticipation of physical pain) affects different people differently. SOme people can endure physical pain quite easily and for others, even a moderate change in room temperature is excruciating (witness the number of space heaters in a typical office). Thus, "torture," no matter how you define it, will "work" with some interrogees and will "fail" with others. To say that "torture does not work" is obvious bullshit.

The above is pure bullshit fantasy. The fundamental unreliability of torture to extract useful information has nothing to do with an individual subject's "tolerance" for pain. In addition to the fact that a torture victim will say anything, truthful or not, in order to make the torture stop, the very act of torture impairs the brain's ability to recall information or recall it accurately; it impairs the ability to distinguish between true and false memories; and it actually causes the brain to produce false memories.

As for "pain threshold," it has been my observation that hospital nursing staff are pretty adept at evaluating indvidual patients' experience of pain relative to other patients with similar injuries. But I do think there is wide variability among people between the states of "that's mildly annoying" and "that really hurts."

[Big RR]

Indeed Sue;

Ay, but I fear you speak upon the rack,
Where men enforced do speak anything.

Shakespeare, Mercahnt of Venice

[Gob]

My experience of pain is proportionally relative to the amount of time off work I can swing due to it..

[MajGenl.Meade]

The above is pure bullshit fantasy. The fundamental unreliability of torture to extract useful information has nothing to do with an individual subject's "tolerance" for pain. In addition to the fact that a torture victim will say anything, truthful or not, in order to make the torture stop, the very act of torture impairs the brain's ability to recall information or recall it accurately; it impairs the ability to distinguish between true and false memories; and it actually causes the brain to produce false memories.

Quite so Sue - but if the "false memories" are the ones that the torturer wants to take advantage of (i.e. is seeking to gain) then it can be said to have "worked". Truth may not be the objective of torture. One never reads of the Spanish inquisitors saying to the poor man or woman being seared by a hot metal rod, "Oh go on with you! We don't believe you are a heretic; you can go on screaming it as long as you like but I'm just going to let you go!" No, they got what they wanted. It could be that context dgs refers to.

It seems to me that absent disease (leprosy for one) or alcohol/drugs some people are better able to subordinate the natural pain/avoid reflex than others. Rather a mental feat than a physical one. I remember a grim day back in the early 70s when I demonstrated that beer (actually gin) is stronger than fire by applying a lighted cigarette to the back of my hand until someone made me stop - a nice burn and I felt the pain (for days) but you know, it didn't seem important.

Meade

[Sean]

Am I channeling rubbix?

Physicians gauging pain have little to go on besides a patient’s self-report. And some sufferers simply can’t communicate how they’re feeling.

So scientists have searched for a reliable way to measure pain physiologically. And they may finally have one.

Researchers performed functional MRI scans on the brains of 24 subjects who were having an arm heated to the point of moderate pain. The subjects’ brain patterns were recorded both as they experienced pain and zero pain. The researchers then used an algorithm to develop a pain model, based on the patterns. The work was published in the journal PLoS One.

The researchers then analyzed the brain scan patterns of 16 new subjects, some experiencing pain, some not. They found that their model accurately predicted pain levels 81 percent of the time.

Most studies of physiology-based measurements of pain have focused on heart rate, skin conductance and EEG. These measures correlate with pain, but nothing has been accurate enough to substitute for self-reports.

The authors note we can’t depend solely on a study done with heat-based pain—but the method shows hope for new ways to accurately measure pain.

—Christie Nicholson

But at the end of the day their method is only calibrated by people's self-reports of pain. And they're back at square one.

Not to mention that people are being asked to rate their pain on a scale of 1-10 without any real concept of what 10 is...

[MajGenl.Meade]

...and it's not listening to Leonard Cohen. (Just to pre-empt LJ)

or watching cricket

[Lord Jim]

..and it's not listening to Leonard Cohen. (Just to pre-empt LJ)

or watching cricket

Of course not, Gen'l.....

It's doing both at the same time....