We may have cancer and feel good, or be submitted to substantial disability and suffering without doctors finding any evidence of disease. Medicine gives no acceptable answers to the last situation and arbitrarily appeals to denying the reality of suffering, making the calvary of patients even more unbearable. This blog tries to contribute with the knowledge of the neuronal network, giving a little light to this confusing section of pathology.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Pain and necrosis






- My chest hurts ...
- You’re having a heart attack.

The heart is a muscle that works tirelessly to give blood (chemical energy) to every cell of the organism. If it doesn’t get any blood (chemical energy) the heart muscle breaks down in a violent way. Necrosis happens. Neurons that keep an eye on necrosis detect their signals and send messages to the brain. The brain receives the necrotic message and, maybe, maybe not, it activates the chest pain program.
....................

- You’re having a heart attack.
- But it doesn’t hurt.

There is no equivalence between pain and necrosis. There is pain without necrosis and necrosis without pain. No signs of necrosis are enough or necessary to initiate the perception of pain.

In physical threat conditions with a fight-fly defensive response, pain may be absent. When running away from a lion who wants to eat us we can be harmed by scratches without feeling (or at least suffering) any pain. Stress is analgesic. Exercise is analgesic.

It was thought that painless heart attacks occurred mostly in diabetic patients who had damaged vigilant neurons. When no necrosis was found, the brain was not aware of the incident and the alarm of pain would not turn on.

That is what was once thought and defended ... until they found it was not true. One can have a heart attack, produce necrotic cellular signals, be collected by the corresponding vigilant neurons, those signals then be brought to the brain and, inexplicably, no alarms go off. Apparently nothing relevant happens in the chest ...

- Can’t you give me something to make it hurt when I have a heart attack?
- We have drugs to take away the pain but not to create it.

If relievers exist, then there should be "agitators" too. In the end, everything is chemistry. The organism has relievers and agitators and uses them according to its evaluations to calm and agitate the individual.

- Necrosis? So what? Keep running. Endorphins. No pain.
....................

- I know that there’s no necrosis but I'm afraid to move and mess it up... No endorphins. Cholecystokinin. Pain.

The brain has its reasons and applies them by removing or creating pain, by calming or agitating.

Homo sapiens (ma non troppo) tries to impose his or her own and offers all kinds of solutions.

- It hurts.
- Don’t worry. Here you go some sedatives.
.....................

- It still hurts.
- It can’t be. We gave you morphine. You will have to go to the Psychologist’s office.

...................

- My chest hurts so badly. I'm dying...!
- Relax, we’ll take away the pain now.

.................

- Give him some saline. This guy has nothing. He’s a hypochondriac.

................

- How are you feeling?
- It doesn’t hurt anymore. The calming effect worked.

..............

- I already told you he had nothing. He can go home.

A placebo can remove the pain of a heart attack. The placebo does not work as a test that distinguishes necrotic pain from the "psychological" one. Any therapeutic action (real or apparent) can cause the brain to turn off the pain (neurons ON) and activate the analgesia (neurons OFF).

The executive brain (prefrontal) evaluates and decides. Turns on and off. Calms and agitates.

- Necrosis? Now we’ll think it over and then decide.
...................

- I know that there is no necrosis... at the moment. But things can change. So I’ll activate some pain.

As said above: the brain has reasons unknown to the individual.

The individual has reasons that the brain often disregards.

4 comments:

legemcruz said...

¿Y cómo actuar en el caso de dolor por amenaza inminente? Por ejemplo, dolor producido por un ataque de sinusitis. Si el objetivo del dolor es comunicar la presencia de dicha amenaza, una vez que se da uno por enterado, que hacemos? Me dió una migraña este verano por dicho motivo y estuve a punto de tomar la triptanita, aunque como ya no llevo encima (gracias a usted!) de camino a la farmacia se me pasó el dolor brutal y quedó "el rumor". Tomé ibuprofeno y se resolvió. Hice bien? En caso de no haber mejorado podría haber tomado el zomig? Gracias por la entrada. Cruz

Arturo Goicoechea said...

Legemcruz: por daño inminente entiendo una situación en la que uno está afectado por un agente o estado que, si se prolonga, acaba produciendo en poco tiempo necrosis. El dolor por sinusitis corresponde a un daño consumado, con necrosis. En esos casos podemos tomar un analgésico-antinflamatorio si queremos aliviar la molestia del dolor porque este ya no cumple ninguna función, una vez detectada la sinusitis. La utilización de calmantes cuando hay un proceso necrótico-inflamatorio es opcional pero es aceptable. No veo ninguna justificación para la triptanita. Lo presentan como un producto específico para la migraña pero no es verdad.

Mañana pensaba hacer la entrada para aclarar el concepto de daño inminente.

Saludos

Sol del Val said...

Una de las pocas cosas que tiene de bueno septiembre y la vuelta a la rutina es poder volver a leer tu blog.
Espero que hayas descansado y vuelvas con ganas (aunque ya veo por el nuevo diseño y las entradas que así es ).
Mis migrañas siguen a raya. Alguna que otra vez han intentado aguarme la fiesta pero no lo han conseguido.
Con respecto a algún comentario que he leido, yo, ex padeciente de migraña, no cambié de vida para acabar con las migrañas sino que adquirí información nueva, mis creencias acerca del dolor cambiaron y con el cambio también desapareció mi miedo a que algo malo estuviera ocurriendo en mi cabeza. Deje de evitar todas aquellas cosas que creía peligrosas o desencadenantes del dolor y poco a poco la situación fue cambiando.
No es un camino fácil y requiere esfuerzo, constancia y aprendizaje pero para mí ha sido un auténtico descubrimiento.
Me uno con mi testimonio nuevamente al "comienzo de curso" y , de nuevo, como siempre gracias mil.
Un abrazo.

Arturo Goicoechea said...

Sol del val: como siempre, gracias por tu inestimable testimonio. Como ves hay resistencia a admitir que somos carne dolorosa de lo que creemos y se sigue defendiendo la tesis de las vias psicosomáticas, somatizaciones y demás.

Me alegra saberte exmigrañosa

Saludos