But isn’t this just saying: “we have no existing evidence or test today showing a physiological illness so therefore we are going to call it this other imagined

But isn’t this just saying: “we have no existing evidence or test today showing a physiological illness so therefore we are going to call it this other imagined thing for which we also can’t prove, yet which has been repeatedly disproven over history.” All illness have at some time been “inconsistent with any known diseases or injuries”, MS, epilepsy, CFS, etc. What’s more likely at this point. I think lack of evidence in medicine shouldn’t be used as evidence for “psychogenic illness.” Just as lack of evidence for something in physics shouldn’t be used as evidence for “god put it there.” Doctors should get used to saying “we don’t know what’s wrong with these people yet” instead of trying to force an answer where there currently isn’t one. It’s far more correct and much kinder.