Asklemmy

43336 readers

793 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Hypnotherapy as a proactive treatment (lemmy.world)

submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by Quicky@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Since hypnotherapy can be effective for a percentage of the population for various treatments, why is it not offered as a standard therapy for everyone in terms of setting them up for health benefits at a younger age? For example, some people claim to have had successful results with hypnotherapy as a smoking cessation tool. If it’s effective, why is it not offered more widely as a smoking prevention tool, or healthy eating tool, or any other pro-healthy lifestyle aid before those bad habits are formed? Preventing smoking, or suggesting healthy food habits at a young age would save the NHS (or other public healthcare provider) billions long-term if it was effective. It seems like, if hypnotherapy is generally accepted as a mechanism to treat certain conditions (which it appears to be in various quarters of traditional medicine), why is it used more as a reactive treatment rather than a proactive one?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

Because being hypnotised prophylactically can easily come across as creepy and controlling, even if it's well-meaning.

Let's give an example that is both well-meaning and at least a little overbearing: "Hey, let's hypnotise our kids to really want to try hard at school."

Freedom means the freedom to be unhappy, make mistakes, and differ from others, as well as the freedom to be happy, succeed, and conform.

If you want prophylactic hypnosis, maybe try self-hypnosis? However, from everything I have read and tried myself in that field, it's still used reactively. You realise your thoughts and behaviour cause a problem (e.g. over indulging in some vice), and you try to hypnotise yourself to not. Imagining potential problems and trying to fix them ahead of time could be based on poor assumptions, and lead to you trying to change your thoughts and behaviours in maladaptive ways. Fixing a problem before diagnosing it doesn't make much sense to me.

[–] Quicky@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, I can absolutely see the controlling aspect. That said, schools, parents and health institutions already provide education geared towards positive health habits, which you can argue is similarly controlling.

I’m not suggesting hypnosis should be forced on everyone at birth - it’s not something I’ve ever considered for myself. It’s more of a shower thought. I was wondering why it’s not more widespread as a preventative mechanism if, as seems to be the case through various studies, it can have a positive effect on the reduction of pain, addiction and various psychological issues.

I really don’t agree with your last sentence though. “Fixing” problems before they arise is exactly why we, particularly governments, already spend millions on the promotion of wellbeing and heathy lifestyles in order to prevent health issues in later life.

[–] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I really don’t agree with your last sentence though. “Fixing” problems before they arise is exactly why we, particularly governments, already spend millions on the promotion of wellbeing and heathy lifestyles in order to prevent health issues in later life.

I'm pretty familiar with the differences in life expectancy statistics caused by health inequality. I'm not sure that you can truly promote wellbeing in a world where people are treated like they're vastly less valuable.

[–] Quicky@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Well “the world” is a big place, but health is already a factor within education in countries that don’t want their population to become a burden on the state, while also maximising their workforce.

load more comments (1 replies)