4 ms·
This is a reductive video from a content farm about a complex topic. Trauma has been well-studied in reasonably scientific ways for 100 years. We’re still not g
by sonofhans 3y ago
This is a reductive video from a content farm about a complex topic. Trauma has been well-studied in reasonably scientific ways for 100 years. We’re still not good at treating it, but the causes and mechanisms are pretty well understood — keep almost any human in a state of fear and helplessness long enough and they will develop trauma.
Exactly how long, and how, and why — we know more than we did, and you can look it up. Judith Herman’s 1992 “Trauma and Recovery” is groundwork in the field, and responsible for much of our modern thought about it.
Do we know exactly which brain regions and neurotransmitters give rise to specific effects? No. TBKTS does make forays into that, some with confidence and some with speculation. Criticisms of this aspect of the book don’t seem meaningful to me.
We do know clearly that trauma appears to be kept in and released from the body, usually against the conscious intent of the victim. That alone is a giant idea, and it would have been world-altering for WW1 veterans accused of cowardice for their “shell shock.”
Kids These Days (tm) are using the word “trauma” a lot to discuss things outside the medical definition of it. This happens with words. I’ve heard them talk, and most of it seems lightweight and ironic — “Oh god that English assignment gave me PTSD.” None of this should reflect back on the book, or the ideas within it.
- Modified3019 3y agoIt should be noted that what is often called “shell shock” is at least two distinct things that get lumped together (though they can absolutely co-occur). The first is what we typically mean by “psychological” trauma, which can have physical secondary effects, but not reliably. Spending months being hunted is going to rewire some things. From what I’ve read, those who consistently imagine themselves “the hunter” rather than “the hunted” seem to fare better. The second is blast-induced neurotrauma, direct brain damage that blast waves physically cause. If a shell lands nearby, even if the head is fully protected, the wave can propagate up the spine into the skull. These force waves can then cause microshearing in the extremely fragile tissue there, resulting in inflammation and oxidation of the highly reactive polyunsaturated fats that make up our brains. The cascade of complex negative effects that follow only finally started getting proper attention due to the large number of IED injuries when the US invaded Iraq/Afganistan. Autopsies of those subjected to blast effects can often show a brain filled with nodules, either tiny like sand or much larger. This is the one that is really the cause of involuntary tremors and seizures that resulted in the brain damaged victim blamed for “cowardice”. The former can kinda-sorta be addressed. The later gets “hopes and prayers”.
- creer 3y ago> Kids These Days (tm) That doesn't mean there aren't three different things all worth considering and addressing. And there is such a thing as a discipline poo-pooing an entire aspect. In this case you describe: - trauma as ironic, gossipy turn of phrase - medical trauma (Is there even just one category? doesn't matter here.) - trauma as short or long experience which leaves a mark which affects day to day life for years. Just because you might work or consider one version doesn't mean the others are somehow "not legit". When people use a word for some purpose - they still mean something by it. Even when it's easy to dismiss that with a (tm).
- sonofhans 3y agoOh, I don’t intend anything dismissive. I think if you read that paragraph again you may hear the patience and compassion I have for my kid and their friends. I don’t mind them defining their own language and experience.