I have a question regarding TMS and its relationship to central sensitization.
First, let me say that I find Sarno’s refutation of structural “flaws” to be entirely convincing. The studies demonstrating no correlation between MRI findings and the experience of pain is very strong evidence against structural explanations for pain.
I also find the whiplash study in Denmark to be very strong evidence demonstrating that the origin of persistent pain can be entirely emotional.
I find the idea of central sensitization to be of a hindrance in completely accepting that I am experiencing TMS (it nags in the back of my mind). The concept of central sensitization was beaten into me years ago. I doubt that I am the only one that has had neurological reasons (rather than structural ones) explained to them for the continuation of pain. I am only in week two of this program but I’m not sure if this has been addressed, especially considering the popularity that central sensitization has gained in recent years.
It seems to me that the argument against its importance is the high recovery rate reported my Sarno and others treating TMS. This would imply that central sensitization, which I have been “educated” is present in many experiencers of persistent pain, must be reversible or not the actual cause of the pain itself (I know Sarno talks about oxygen deprivation). And obviously this a very strong argument. But it’s kind of a roundabout way to think about it.
My question is: Did Sarno or any further TMS theory ever directly talk about the problem of central sensitization?