Advertisement

Response to van Rysewyk S and Moseley GL et al.’s Comments on Cohen et al. J Pain 2022; 23(8):1283-1293

  • Milton Cohen
    Correspondence
    Address reprint requests to Milton Cohen, MD, FFPMANZCA, Suite 506, St Vincent's Clinic, 438 Victoria Street, NSW 2010, Australia.
    Affiliations
    School of Clinical Medicine, St Vincent's Clinical Campus, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Asaf Weisman
    Affiliations
    Spinal Research Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Stanley Steyer School of Health Professions, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Israel
    Search for articles by this author
  • John Quintner
    Affiliations
    Arthritis and Osteoporosis Foundation of Western Australia, Shenton Park, Western Australia, Australia
    Search for articles by this author
Published:November 15, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2022.11.003
      We thank Simon van Rysewyk

      van Rysewyk S: Comment on Cohen M, Weisman A, Quintner J, 2022, J Pain.

      (with whom we have collaborated in this arena) and Lorimer Moseley and colleagues
      • Moseley GL
      • Pearson N
      • Reezigt R
      • Madden T
      • Hutchison MR
      • Dunbar M
      • Beetsma A
      • Leake HB
      • Moore P
      • Simons L
      • Heathcote L
      • Ryan C
      • Berryman C
      • Mardon AK
      • Wand BM
      Considering precision and utility when we talk about pain. Comment on Cohen M, Weisman A, Quintner J.
      for their thoughtful responses to our paper. Interestingly, neither of these authors actually engages with our core thesis, that reification of pain is the fundamental error underlying the misnomers, fallacies and speculative concepts that we identified in current Pain Medicine. Rather, they each appear to be concerned with two of our derivative themes, the distinction between the points of view of the observer and the experiencer of pain and the tension between speculation and fact. While we have argued for “epistemic discipline in the use of language and logic,” they are concerned that such a technical (or observer-dependent) stance may detract from what they see as more colloquial (or experiencer-dependent) utility.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to The Journal of Pain
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Moseley GL
        • Pearson N
        • Reezigt R
        • Madden T
        • Hutchison MR
        • Dunbar M
        • Beetsma A
        • Leake HB
        • Moore P
        • Simons L
        • Heathcote L
        • Ryan C
        • Berryman C
        • Mardon AK
        • Wand BM
        Considering precision and utility when we talk about pain. Comment on Cohen M, Weisman A, Quintner J.
        J Pain. 2022;
        • Quintner JL
        • Cohen ML
        • Buchanan D
        • Katz J
        • Williamson OW
        Pain medicine and its models: Helping or hindering?.
        Pain Med. 2008; 9: 824-834
      1. van Rysewyk S: Comment on Cohen M, Weisman A, Quintner J, 2022, J Pain.