Ah... cool... fair enough then. It is a hard one to answer IMHO.... because you must decide whether you use fact or belief I think.... I use both, but I still answered no on it based on the facts at that time. They have come a long way though in the past year IMHO with research surrounding regrowth and repair off human organs... which would even swing my opinion to include another addition to such a poll, something like:

• Yes
• No
• A cure will be found through science eventually

Okay, let me see if I can unravel at least for myself some of what is being espoused here.......

In regards to Doctors publishing their work, Anthony you replied to Waif:
I disagree with this Waif, in that many actually do write and publish their findings. You only need subscribe to the medical journals of mental health to see these very findings.

Statistically, I would have to say Waif is correct in this. All you need to do is to look at the numbers. Look at the medical journals published in the course of a month, count the number of articles they contain. That number is a hell of a lot smaller than the number of practicing health professionals. Or even the number of individuals published in the course of a year, or two, or 5. It's still a lot smaller. If you narrow the scope of comparison to articles about mental health, in specific articles about PTSD, and then compare the number to the number of mental health professionals working with trauma victims, the ratio gets even more skewed. Some of them have reached a point where they can publish, or are in a situation where they are required to publish, but so many of them tend to invest their time in working with their patients, and have little time to publish.

Then we move on to the magic cure for PTSD...the quick fix....when this was mentioned Anthony, you responded:
by definition a cure means: the successful treatment of a disease or illness to the preformed state. That means, like it never existed. Unfortunately that is not so with PTSD

Like it never existed? If that's the definition that you're working from, then by that definition, no disease or illness has ever been cured in the history of medicine. Every disease, every illness leaves it's mark on the body (or mind in some cases). A case of the flu can leave microscopic scars in the lungs. they may not cause pain, but they're there. Appendicitis, the cure alone for that one leaves a hell of a mark on the body. It's an interesting thought that in medical terms, the idea of a cure can quite often involve doing nearly as much damage to the body as the illness itself. You can cure a lot of things by surgery, but surgery is in and of itself a trauma inflicted on the human body under carefully controlled circumstances. An illness or disease will never disappear as though it never existed. Though by that definition....there already is a quick fix, a fairly simple procedure. I believe they call it a lobotomy. That would make it as though it never existed. If we open up our handy dictionary.com and have a look at the actual definition of the word:

CURE:

1. a means of healing or restoring to health; remedy.
2. a method or course of remedial treatment, as for disease.
3. successful remedial treatment; restoration to health.
4. a means of correcting or relieving anything that is troublesome or detrimental: to seek a cure for inflation.
5. the act or a method of preserving meat, fish, etc., by smoking, salting, or the like.
6. spiritual or religious charge of the people in a certain district.
7. the office or district of a curate or parish priest.
–verb (used with object)
8. to restore to health.
9. to relieve or rid of something detrimental, as an illness or a bad habit.
10. to prepare (meat, fish, etc.) for preservation by salting, drying, etc.
11. to promote hardening of (fresh concrete or mortar), as by keeping it damp.
12. to process (rubber, tobacco, etc.) as by fermentation or aging.
–verb (used without object)
13. to effect a cure.
14. to become cured.

Okay we'll ignore the whole preserving meat since that's not a part of this conversation, but I don't see anything about causing symptoms to be "as though they never were". I see restoration to health. But there we are back to that little problem of semantics. Health is not a constant. Health is not your weight, you can weight yourself and say, great, I'm 250 now, I want to be 210....and work towards it. You can't do that with health. Health is an individual determination based on a general feeling of well being measured on an individual basis.....To relieve or rid of something detrimental.....taking away that which is detrimental, I don't read into that making it as though it was never there. Removing the detriment is not the same thing as erasing all evidence of it's existence. The things which cause the health problems are gone, but the scars remain. As it is with PTSD, the trauma can be healed, and the health detriments can be removed. But the scars; the memories, remain, they no longer cause the same pain, or the same health detriments, but they will always be there. Memories are integral, irremovable, but I would say that in the end they are similar to the scars of an illness.

On the whole I agree with Waif that western society has gotten lazy. We are looking for a quick fix to everything, and mental health is no exception (everyone on the Atkins diet raise your hands!) Everybody wants one treatment, or one quick little therapy that will solve all their problems, and they could have it (see lobotomy comment above) but the cure might be worse than the problem. It's a combination of factors. It's the human mind, and no two think alike. A cure for 100 people with PTSD will be 100 different cocktails of therapy, medication, mindfulness and hard work.

This goes right back to my problem with all of the studies you can quote. They're all crap. Especially when it comes to PTSD. A medical study look at a treatment under very carefully controlled circumstances. There is a regiment that must be followed in order to ensure the validity of the data. It's a process with inviolable rules if you want to get it published. Studies are rigid and unbending. How can anyone who has ever lived with PTSD place any faith whatsoever, or believe for a second that any study done under such controlled circumstances can ever produce a valid finding for something as varied, and as individual as this illness? You have already agreed with Waif that treatment must be varied, must contain a number of different approaches, and must be modified as that treatment progresses......and it's going to be different for each and every person. Medical studies are incredibly biased against illnesses of the mind. In reading through what Waif has said, I don't see how this is getting misinterpreted.

Regarding Waif saying that every doctor she has dealt with has told her this was how to cure PTSD, a reply was made:
"Every doctor you encountered was wrong then, if that is what they have stated to you, because the facts are; no cure currently exists for PTSD. The only thing that exists is known methods to reduce the symptoms, control them, medicate them, but nothing to actually reverse the brain damage that PTSD causes which makes it the incurable mental illness it is. I would rather people know the truth, to learn to be honest with themselves, than to live in the clouds of disbelief that a cure for this exists, which factually does not."

First off.....wow. For a forum based on support and open exchange in a comfortable and non judgmental environment.....that was.....that was just so....not.
In an earlier post Waif has already noted that the brain, in particular the hipocampus can regrow, it doesn't even need medication to do it, just a proper lifestyle. The brain can reverse it's damage. You're asking for medical strictures to be applied to an illness that treads into the philosophical and the spiritual. They are diametric opposites.

Speaking of the more philosophical....Waif noted that if you were to espouse such an opinion in a sexual abuse survivors forum, there would be an outroar, and Anthony replied: "That may be what other forums do... they may feed one another bullshit, fictional statements, but this forum does not. This forum deals in facts only, and it will remain that way."

I read this, and I have to wonder, "How healthy is that?" Of course as the board administrator you're the boss here, and as such, you're perfectly correct to hold to your own ideals about how information on this board is presented. Although I find it to be a bit of a mystery. Let's step back from mental illness for a moment and look at medicine in general. One of the things that any doctor will agree to is that beating any illness is the work of the patient. Medicine and drugs, treatment regimens and surgery can only go so far. The patient has to want to get better. They tell cancer patients that the most important thing they can do is to fight to heal, to believe it. Your mind can aid the healing process, or it can impair it. My thing is....essentially this board is telling someone not to bother believing they will ever get better. While I may understand the semantical differences, and accept the premise that you believe, a confused and scared person entering the world of PTSD is going to read all of this and think, "well damn, I'm stuck in this forever". Right off the bat, the first thing that happens is that they lose their hope. It's crushed beneath the boots of facts derived from a medical environment that has been applying the rules for cutting up apples to oranges. This is simply a philosophical thought, a hypothetical question if you will, but if you have two people, lets call them Jack and Jill......both have PTSD, both are looking for how to proceed. Jack wanders in and reads there is no cure, you'll never get any better, deal with it, you're stuck here the rest of your life. And poor old Jack believes that, and now, right off the bat, Jack is working at a disadvantage. Considering that with PTSD he is already in pain mentally, and prone to negative thinking, that thought has now taken hold and sabotaged him. Then we have Jill, who hears for the first thing, "You can get through it, you can come out the other side, this can be beaten, this can be overcome". Who is going to be in a better position to actually benefit from help? From a philosophical point of view, what you call truthfulness, I see as fostering a hopeless outlook. Anthony, you mentioned several times that fiction is not welcome. I would contend that letting people live without hope is the worst kind of fiction.

I am wondering Anthony do you believe people can not be cured but can recover?

I wanted to add what my doctor spoke to me about today - I know there is not much weighting in one persons perception - but I believe him to be a very good doctor!

I told him about this forum and about the types of information that there was on PTSD. He agreed that there is an ongoing debate about PTSD being curable and that was highly dependant on the school of thought that a proffesional belongs to as much as anything.

He was a doctor in the Royal Air Force and treated/worked with POW's - ultimatley he said that some did recover and some did not - those who did not where individuals who had experienced the worst types of trauma whilst imprisoned.

So I guess alot of this comes down to a persons experience and the support they receive alongside their determination. I do realsie that life is much more complex than that!

I guess if you have the odds staked against you like not having any emotional attachmetns with people who can love and support you, that your fight would be much harder than those who do have this.

Anyway, I just wanted to add that! I DO BELIEVE THAT IT IS TREATABLE AND CURABLE -it is about my strength of mind! That does nto neagate that I am struggling and realy struggling right now but that frame of mind has got to be a good start to healing?

Hi Bradinn, I think some of your points are quite relevant, others are your opinion. At the end of the day I will say the same thing to you and I do Waif, show the proof that a cure exists and then I am more than willing to rollover and say, well... I was wrong. Scientifically proven at this point in time, no cure for PTSD exists, and that has nothing to do with biased studies, it has to do with the overwhelming joint opinion within the psychiatric field. I agree with you that studies are biased, and have always stated that myself for the same reasons. Studies are looking for an outcome before they begin, under conditions and controls which do not allow a wider base for interpretation or outcome, a more true result that is.

Mental health studies are not the same IMHO as say.... studies for the testing of a new medication. That needs controls, it needs knowns in order to study an accurate outcome. Mental health studies not quite the same IMHO.
Waif, you pretty much hit it on the head. It is not because I believe people cannot be cured though, it is simply at this time factually proven that PTSD as a mental health illness has no cure, however; it does have known variables in which you can apply so that a person may recover the symptoms, though cannot recover the illness itself. A small stressor or trauma simply sets them off once again. This is why it is incurable at this point.

Bradinn suggests that I would be crushing people by stating the truth, well I do not see it that way. What other forums do that may be the consensus, however; again this is not other forums, this is my forum. My forum works on facts, and no factual evidence exists at this time that a known cure is available for PTSD. The facts are though, that medication is available to help with the symptoms, not cure, but eases the symptoms. Facts are, known technique, exposure therapy, therapies and relaxation of types when combined are producing results to help some, but not others. Whilst it helps some, but not others, its not a cure, its simply what it factually states.... known techniques to assist the recovery of PTSD symptoms, not PTSD illness, PTSD symptoms. That is what CBT is about, exposure therapy, EMDR and so forth. None of those methods ever state nor claim they cure PTSD, but instead they look at the aspects of healing trauma and teaching people how to manage themselves, their lifestyles... nothing about a cure though.

Some idiot physicians run off and adapt a known method, call it a different name, try and get themselves known or branded because that is what they see as important, they try and blindfold the world with hope and bullshit, instead of providing fact. If I told someone they could be cured, and after 20 years they still suffered the same shit, that would only make me look stupid. Why do you think the majority of therapists who even state its curable are all looking stupid? Because if they are dealing with someone who has PTSD, not PTS, but PTSD... then they cannot cure it, they can only help the person to heal their trauma, then help that person expose themselves to life once again. Even a person who endures EMDR, that only focuses on the trauma, not the exposure back into life. A combination of both brings results, however; people jump back into life and then fall over, all their trauma memories resurface and they go back 50 steps because they where told it was cured, when in fact the chemical imbalance hasn't gone anywhere, which is what PTSD is. PTSD is not the symptoms, it is the actual physiological change within the brain, hence why PTS exists.

If you present here a factual cure for PTSD, I will certainly change what I am saying, which is based currently on facts, not on fiction. Prove me wrong, more than happy to be proved wrong about such an important aspect of my own life.... please do I say, but bring facts to the table, not fiction, not your opinion, facts.

Your attempting to debate with me a cure exists, which doesn't.

Your attempting to say that you must bring "hope" to believe a cure exists, which has nothing to do with it.

Facts only please.... Fact: No cure for PTSD exists. Fact: PTS can be cured, and is often misdiagnosed for PTSD. Fact: I believe a cure will one day exist. Fact: Presently, the application of known techniques and methods produce a result that allow "some" to get back into life, allow "some" the ability to live daily under a controlled lifestyle to keep symptoms at bay, all "some" to simply have a little peace compared to uncontrolled state of constant anxiety.

Please bring facts to table if you want to debate whether a cure exists or not.

I have to draw a parallel here.

I have an endocrine disorder called polycystic ovarian syndrome. It is incurable. It affects hormones, including insulin. It affects fertility, cholesterol, blood pressure etc. As a result I have suffered from high blood pressure, high cholesterol & diagnosed with insulin resistance.

You are diagnosed with blood tests, and an ultrasound that typically (but not always) presents with cysts of the ovaries.

However, the symptoms can be reduced to non-existant in some cases with diet & exercise & some with medication but not all.

My endocrinologist said whilst there is no cure, naturopaths tend to have a lot success with this disorder.

I have seen a naturopath on and off for two years. With diet recommendations, weight training, exercise & vitamin therapy - my last ultrasound showed no cysts (when previously on one they were extensive and the other medium). I have reduced my blood pressure & cholesterol. I have not checked my insulin levels recently, but I am tipping that too would be back in the normal ranges because of how I feel.

At the moment to quote the specialist, looking at me with my ultrasound & blood test results I appear not to have the endocrine disorder. If I walked in off the street afresh today I would not be diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome. In other words I appear not to have it at all, and there are no signs of it (i.e. cysts are produced as 'scars' as result of ovulation failing).

However during this two year period when I have been 'bad', and binge drinking & eating junk & not exercising my blood tests results again show I have the endocrine disorder. I am not on any medication for it, I have 'cured' myself with changes to my lifestyle. Yet it is incurable!

I have not researched this extensively but it is widely accepted in the medical community that treatments such as naturopathy, diet, exercise, meditation (i.e. a combination of treatments) that symptoms of polycystic ovarian syndrome can be reduced to 'zero' yet they still have not declared a 'cure'. I'm assuming because it only works for a percentage of people and because like I say as soon as I stop the lifestyle changes I've made I again suffer the symptoms.

I believe PTSD is the same, and in effect agreeing about incurable/curable. What your debate about is more philosophical in how you present the 'not curable, but treatable' aspect of PTSD. And really that's just a matter of opinion. Some are super positive, optimistic, others not. Somewhere in the middle i.e. realistic, is what I think is ideal. A bit of balance.

For Jack may feel badly initially about being told that his PTSD is incurable. Then again, he may feel better about himself about why he has been unable to get out of the grips of his PTSD hell. And Jill may feel great initially, but then plunge into despair after a few months when she is no longer getting better.

But to each their own. Some people like different forums depending on their personality & philosophical outlook. Personally I couldn't stand an airy fairy feel good positive the world is wonderful forum but equally I couldn't stand a negative poor me victim one either. I think this one is mostly, most of the time, a good balance.

It's the same with treatments. I quite happily see a naturopath but other people think that is hocus pocus. I also like meditation. Others see it as new age.

A cure does not exist. It is treatable/manageable I believe with a lot of hard work using a combination of treatments mentioned throughout these posts. It is possible that one day there might be a cure.

Well said Awakening.... "realistic" is a good word. I like that word, along with "fact" and "commonsense" and "balanced approach" and such terms. I do not endorse at this time, "PTSD can be cured" when there are no "facts" to this statement. If one does come around, where the one treatment provides a majority cure of all issues, as defined what a cure takes from a medial viewpoint, I would endorse it immediately. PTSD however can be recovered if you apply a "balanced approach" to known techniques.

Bradinn and Waif, these are my points.... and facts.

But what constitutes a scientific fact?
A scientific fact is something that can be historically identified and followed throughout time in order to determine whether it is a fact - what has not been refuted can be considered a scientific fact and nothing else!
Ever read the book ....entitled the 'Black Swan', by Nassim Nicholas Taleb? The long and short of this book is that; Until the 19th century it was believed a fact that all swans were white, that is until the discovery of mutant black swans in Australia. A fact is something that is misused as the criterion for a fact has many variables and misconceptions.

Lets take for example Karl Poppers theory - Karl Popper's 'Hypothetico Deductive' method sets out guidelines of this principle in determining whether something has sufficiently reached a scientific stage and can call itself scientific. So unless PTSD research has adhered to this process than stating whether something is a fact or more importantly as we are talking about science a ' scientific fact' would be misleading and a falsehood.

Lets not also forget FiLCHeRS -The six rules for evidential reasoning; FiLCHers is an acronym, ignoring the vowels helps in remembering the six rules of evidential reasoning as set out by James Lett:
Falsifiability - A claim must be able to be disproven.
Logic - Any argument in support of a claim must be both valid and sound. To be valid the arguments premise must be true. To be sound, the rules of logic must be correctly used to reach any conclusions based on such premis.
Comprehensiveness - all evidence that is available must of been exhaustivley referred to.
Honesty -The evidence must be evaluated without self-deception.
Replicability - The evidence for a claim ( scientific measure etc) must be able to be replicated. Literature does not serve as evidence alone.
Suffiency - Extraordinary claims must be supported by extraordinary evidence. The eveidence of the truth of a claim must be substantial in order to support this.

All of these should be considered before ever claiming that something is a scientific fact!

At the end of the day fact or not fact PTSD is debilitating, but should the emphasis of such forums be based on giving people hope instead of bantering over the semantics?

In conclusion where are the scientific facts that PTSD is not curable and where are the scientific facts that it is? Without these all facts are merely based on conjecture.

Spiritofnow