Live data from Hacker News

Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

cam.ac.uk

121–130 of 169 posts

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#121

For ethical reasons, no participant was given a negative event to imagine, but only positive or neutral ones. 120 people and three months and during COVID. Just because it's from Cambridge don't assume credibility.

I think most people in psychiatry don't want to admit the patients are typically victims and society has to be the one to change. In my opinion most psychological techniques induce the behaviors they are attempting to suppress effectively bullying the people who are seeking help.

I agree, and I'd like to add, it is very difficult to sort the wheat from the chaff as a client.

The psych is expected to know an awful lot more than you about the whole process and subject.. so if you need to think critically about the psych, you don't really have the knowledge base to do well.

Taking what a psychiatrist has said as a golden rule, has wasted time and led me down the wrong road.

There is no subsitute for making up your own mind, or hearing the truth from the highest quality/rawest sources. And those sources are basically in universities and high quality education materials.

Most of the information just generally available in society and delivered by 'professionals'.... is a long, long way from what an adult needs to make rational decisions.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#122

I suppose it wouldn't be that surprising. Mindfulness for instance teaches you to "let go" of thoughts - which is really just a gentle form of suppression. CBT encourages you to redirect existing negative thoughts in a positive/constructive direction - ultimately steering you away from or undermining the original negative thought - but does not encourage you to do a deep dive on it. Not to mention that Freud was a qu…

> Not to mention that Freud was a quack who was more prone to speculation than to science, so if traditional psychotherapy is based on his work then it is likely built on sand. Wow, that’s rich. Dismissing Freud like this is the most egregious way of conducting a discussion about these topics. Have you also ever thought that Mindfulness and CBT, while effective, are successful in a capitalistic society because ultima…

I think I said it enough on this website, but my personal experience with 4 psychanalyst led me to believe this is a quackery, a pseudoscience, and actually harmful for people who have real mental issues.

And I'm not talking about those weird ideas about autism, that anybody with a brain who worked with autistic children or adults would know to dismiss, or that dumb dream analysis, I'm talking about clinical psychoanalysis and it's 'practical' application. The fact is, solving bipolarity or schizophrenia with psychoanalysis is like solving cancer with homeopathy, except in the second case the practionners have a smudge of ethics and led their patient towards real medical praticiens once the issue is to big for them.

Whereas psychanalyst try to extract the most money they can for 15 years, pass the patients between themselves to make the con last longer, and if they're lucky the patient miss their TS, go see a real doctor that in 5 (5!) minutes diagnose bipolarity, then in a day make a bloodtest to be certain, and prescribe lithium. Without mood crisis, the patient can live without pissing of friends and family, and has only lost 15 years and a dozen relationships. In other case, the patient kill themselves.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#123
I really disagree with this concept of "thoughts" being a free-floating occurence that springs on you like a burgular in the night.

Obviously thoughts exist and understanding why and how thoughts exist is yet to be known.

But don't we have centuries of philosophers writing about what happens if you follow those thoughts...

IF I had a thought about the boringness of "seeing the same damn thing again and again", that's not an Event in my mind that needs a special verb attached to it.

I just know those thoughts occur and Schopenhauer knows better than I do, what life is like if you follow and grow that particular thought.

I really wonder how we're supposed to survive the experiences of pleasure and pain, positive/negative, happy/sad, whatever... without a philosophy to validate our experiences.

People can think negatively (or positively) all they want, in my view, as long as it's connected to their philosophy managing their experiences.

The problems occur when you let the experiences of feeings/emotions reinforce arbitrary thoughts, and cloud/submerge/drown the ability to rationalize your way out of trouble.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#124
post #65

Why are we still talking about Freud? Some researchers studied how to be happy. Unsurprisingly they also found no support for Freudian ideas that were popular 30 years ago. The Cambridge University PR office still leads by stating Freudian ideas as the "accepted narrative". Maybe they are? But this is the least novel result of the study, and yet it's in the headline. Obviously we shouldn't shoot the messenger: scienc…

Because Freud fills his niche perfectly. People who want to refer to his ideas, his character, his writing, can do so..

What bothers me deeply is that all the first-order/top-level work was done in the past and we're not really exploring that space anymore.

The science may disprove Freud, and unfortunately we have still not progressed past his niche and character as an intro to psychology.

Freud didn't dig a hole, he left a high quality signpost to the future. We need a better signpost but people are using Freud 'cause recent second-order psych and statistics is sexier.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#125

I wonder if using the technique people succeeded in suppressing "negative" emotions but also in suppressing "positive" emotions. In other words, did they just feel less overall? More numb? Or did they somehow feel less "negative" emotions and the same or more "positive" emotions? I would hypothesize that it made people feel less overall, more numb, or more indifferent, and for someone feeling a lot of anxiety or fear…

I generally think about emotions and thoughts as a function of neurochemical pathways. We know those are subject to reinforcement. That clearly implies that if you want to feel and think better, you should encourage and intentionally practice good thoughts and emotions and inhibit / lay off the bad ones.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#126
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not to mention that Freud was a quack who was more prone to speculation than to science, so if traditional psychotherapy is based on his work then it is likely built on sand. Wow, that’s rich. Dismissing Freud like this is the most egregious way of conducting a discussion about these topics. Have you also ever thought that Mindfulness and CBT, while effective, are successful in a capitalistic society because ultima…

I think I said it enough on this website, but my personal experience with 4 psychanalyst led me to believe this is a quackery, a pseudoscience, and actually harmful for people who have real mental issues. And I'm not talking about those weird ideas about autism, that anybody with a brain who worked with autistic children or adults would know to dismiss, or that dumb dream analysis, I'm talking about clinical psychoan…

I believe your experience might be related to how psychoanalists work in the US (or the country you're from)? Here in Germany it's a highly regulated practice, and believe me, psychoanalysts refuse constantly patients with the pathological problems you describe because they are aware that psychoanalysis' is not fit for those. In fact they are also perfectly aware they are not psychiatrists, and they would never be able to prescribe nor help you get out of any medication.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#127
post #65

Why are we still talking about Freud? Some researchers studied how to be happy. Unsurprisingly they also found no support for Freudian ideas that were popular 30 years ago. The Cambridge University PR office still leads by stating Freudian ideas as the "accepted narrative". Maybe they are? But this is the least novel result of the study, and yet it's in the headline. Obviously we shouldn't shoot the messenger: scienc…

Maybe there's a generic term for this (objects or figures held up for attack as a way of signaling group membership), but in the behavioral sciences and psychiatry there's a lot of strawman figures or ideas that get held up by authors as an object of derision, as a way for the authors to assert being part of "real science". This takes a lot of forms, but Freud is one of these figures. Others involve references to mind-body dualism ("this is a brain-based phenomenon, not a psychological one", which is ironic in a lot of ways), there a lot of others. The behavioral sciences often are ridiculed by other sciences, sometimes rightly so, but sometimes by people who are unaware of the complexities involved in certain topics, or who are otherwise just being narcissistic bullies; so people trying in good faith to do research sometimes use targeting figures like Freud to signal their "science credentials."

This case leaves me scratching my head a bit because the idea of suppressing negative thoughts sometimes being a bad thing isn't just a Freudian idea (what Freud was actually saying, and how different modern theories are from those of Freud, is a whole topic onto itself). CBT, which is often held up as some kind of gold standard of empirically supported therapy, has this idea of a hierarchy of beliefs, some a person might be aware of, and others of which the person only holds implicitly. These "core beliefs" go unaddressed, sometimes through active avoidance, which leads to problems (or so the theory goes). Or from a purely behavioral perspective, someone has some fear that leads to elaborate avoidance behaviors, which cause impairments — the treatment being exposure to the feared stimulus.

The framing of this is odd because I don't think any good therapist would say that avoiding negative thoughts is always good or always bad. It depends on the situation. Sometimes someone needs to just shift attention from unproductive rumination. But sometimes people do have a lot of issues that go unaddressed, and that avoidance becomes unhealthy because it leaves a whole belief system or set of interpersonal problems unresolved, or snowballs out of control.

None of this is necessarily Freudian or not Freudian, and framing it as such says more about the concerns of the authors than anything about the theories used in modern therapy or the implications of the study results.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#128

For ethical reasons, no participant was given a negative event to imagine, but only positive or neutral ones. 120 people and three months and during COVID. Just because it's from Cambridge don't assume credibility.

That’s the literal definition of credibility firstly, and secondly if 120 people and covid were properly controlled for, neither of these facts invalidates the study. You can find statistically valid conclusions from 120 people, for sure. Just read the damn paper, rather than presume it’s credible or dismiss it because they couldn’t run it on 100,000 people over the course of 30 years.

You're telling me to read a paper you haven't read yourself? COVID was not controlled for. A three month study says nothing about mental health which is intrinsically long-term: this decides to observe short-term effects. I am not even satisfied with the very definition of 'negative thoughts' which at least should fall under multiple categories and studied differently.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#129
> “What we found runs counter to the accepted narrative,” said Professor Anderson. “Although more work will be needed to confirm the findings, it seems like it is possible and could even be potentially beneficial to actively suppress our fearful thoughts.”

I don't know if this study convinces me, but my own experience sure does. I've lived both ways, there's no question in my mind what works better for me. The jokey, modern trope is the guy who ignores his feelings and then blows up later. I found instead that negative feelings tend to go away if you focus on other things, but if you focus on bad thoughts, they just last longer and sometimes grow into fixations.

Re: Suppressing negative thoughts may be good for mental health after all

#130
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A negative thought is just a thought, it's not like you need to actively not take care of real life things or errands. But if you find yourself thinking about death, or about how much your childhood sucked, or that you're good for nothing, you don't need to address anything about those thoughts. The least time you spend on them the better, nothing good comes from dwelling. I can't understand people that want to re-li…

> But if you find yourself thinking about death, or about how much your childhood sucked, or that you're good for nothing, you don't need to address anything about those thoughts. > The least time you spend on them the better, nothing good comes from dwelling. Negative visualization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_visualization is absolutely a thing. If you do it properly (aiming towards psychological resilien…

Of course it exists, I described it in my comment. Look at this quote from wikipedia and compare it to my example of preparing for your parents to die:

> Unlike the general focus of creative visualization of inducing an imaginary positive psychological and physiologic response, negative visualization focuses on training the practitioner on the negative outcomes of realistic life scenarios to desensitize or create psychological fitness in preparation for real-life losses

Something existing and some people thinking it is a good idea doesn't mean it is. I'm not saying I'm right either, I'm sharing what I do and what I think. And what I think is that negative visualization is ridiculous. Live your life, bad things will happen anyway, why do you want to be sad in advance just to maybe be a little bit less sad later? I can't take this idea seriously, it's like someone who doesn't want to love for fear of getting a broken heart.

Post reply on HN