I wanted to apply for the prize criticizing EA but unfortunately I’m too late. Here it is anyway.


 

EA is interested in big ideas but there are 8 billion people on this planet and you’ve got to bring them along with you - you can’t change the world for them, you have to encourage them to change the world with you.


 

So, encourage your followers: if someone self identifies as an EA supporter, acknowledge them. If you put your email address on the internet, you’ve got to expect people to write to you and you need to reply, partly because it’s polite and partly because you’re trying to build a community here.


 

You can have a standard reply that is both encouraging and yet non-committal.


 

Some of the ideas may sound strange- if you’re going to set yourselves up as idea specialists, you need to investigate new ideas.That takes time and has many blind alleys but occasionally you’re going to find gold. You can’t decide without doing some investigation or you could miss a big idea.


 

So here’s a new idea that I can’t get anyone in the EA community to investigate -a way to get rid of chronic pain.


 

It’s quick and free. According to EA guidelines, I need to give 3 reasons why this is a good idea- can you not kind of work it out for yourselves?


 

If not, let me fill in the blanks. First, it stops pain. By freeing people from pain, you allow them to live more productive lives. Second, you massively relieve health care burdens worldwide. Third, people can save a ton of money on painkillers and anti-inflammatories (not such good news for pharmaceutical companies but they will still be needed for acute pain.) Fourth, it should reduce the number of people getting addicted to opioids. Fifth, it could bring in a  new era where doctors try to treat the whole body, lifestyle, diet, exercise etc rather than just hand over a prescription. Fifth, you can retrain a whole bunch of back care surgeons to work on another area of the body.Sixth, you encourage people to believe that some problems do have a solution and that solution lies in their own hands.


 

How does it work? You write down your emotions on a piece of paper, rip it up and throw it away.

Full details here:https://stuartwiffin.substack.com/p/pain-and-what-to-do-about-it 

 

I’m sorry if this sets the wrong tone but when I saw what Dr David Hanscom had discovered, I couldn’t imagine why it’s not better known. I’m trying to spread his work and I’m tired of banging my head on closed doors.


 

-8

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Comments11


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

As someone with chronic pain, this post infuriates me. I read the linked page. It basically says "chronic pain is caused by your neural pathways learning unwanted behaviour. Solution: this piece of paper trick!". It doesn't make any sense and doesn't link to any actual research.

In reality, I don't expect to have better treatment options in the coming decade or two. We're leagues away from understanding chronic pain mechanisms.

Hi Guy,  

Have you tried it? It only takes a few minutes- what I'm looking for here is anecdotal evidence- please post on my linked page WHETHER OR NOT IT WORKS- I need data/anecdata

You also say I don't link to any research, but there are a few links on my post(which I'll repeat here)  which I think are interesting:

Why things hurt Lorimer Moseley

Dr Hanscom at google https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5cwZ2iu8jU&t=2327s

Dr Howard Schubiner at google https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VyH1laOd2M&t=1052s

2 articles in slate

https://slate.com/technology/2021/02/chronic-pain-neuroscience-education-running-joy.html?

https://slate.com/technology/2022/06/chronic-pain-identity-spoonies-support-recovery.html

Lorimer Moseley on pain https://trustmephysiotherapy.com/50-shades-of-pain-with-lorimer-moseley/

Another blistering talk on back pain here- how to understand and control your pain Dr Stuart McGill

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLme5ybP9wY

and the history of expressive writing. James W Pennebaker talking to Jordan Peterson

https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/podcast/episode-11/

 

I would say the evidence here is enough to justify spending money on a trial to get the research!

Anecdata in this case is worse than no data.

Hi Guy, 

Have you tried it? It would take a few minutes of your time and it's really a win-win- either it works (as it did for me) and your pain goes away or it fails and you get to call me out as a charlatan and a hoaxer with actual data rather than just a prejudice- hope to hear from you soon! Both here and on the substack.

ok but without anecdotes we can' t even try new things, which is the basic criticism of EA I was making in my post. There are many people (how many? who knows?) who have been helped by these methods, we're fairly sure our current ideas about pain are wrong.

https://trustmephysiotherapy.com/50-shades-of-pain-with-lorimer-moseley/ 

and yet we're unable to move forward and try something new.

Have a look at this man talking about his journey away from pain and then tell me it's not worth our time investigating. It's 6 minutes of your life, from 2.54 to 9.00

 

And, as I said before, please feel free to try the "method" and , if it really doesn't work for you, call me out and say it didn't work- but don't tell me it won't work before trying it because that's even worse than anecdata.

here's Richard Feynman explaining that you can't make assumptions about the world- you have to test them.  http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/607/2/Feynman.pdf 

I don't know if you've seen Peter Singer's thought experiment of the girl in China?

https://www.ted.com/talks/peter_singer_the_why_and_how_of_effective_altruism 

Here's another thought experiment- imagine there's a way to cure millions of people of their pain for free but because it sounds a bit wacky you just refuse to try it- step over their bodies and carry on walking down the road. You wouldn't, would you?

It's optimistic to hope that chronic pain can be cured as easily as by writing problems on a piece of paper and ripping it up. This probably only works for some people, though, and for many others the suggestion to do this would come across as condescending and probably make matters worse.

This might be a useful tool in the chronic pain management arsenal, along with CBT (which is already a staple chronic pain treatment) and other mindset-based approaches like that of Dr John Sarno.

Yes, it might only work for some people- what I would like to know is whether those "some people" are 5%, 10%, 50% or 90%- that would tell us how many of the 65 million disability years could be saved.  And when I went to the doctor and physiotherapist, CBT  and mind-body wern't mentioned- just painkillers and anti- inflammatories- and lots of exercises, which I've detailed here: https://stuartwiffin.substack.com/p/fascia-and-lower-back?s=w 

So, data!  I posted this as a reply to another post:

Has anyone ever done a proper trial (with independent funding!)  of the methods proposed by James Pennebaker,  John Sarno, Howard Schubiner, Alan Gordon or (my personal favourite- it worked for me) David Hanscom?

I saw that Scott asked for volunteers for a trial here : https://slatestarcodex.com/2016/06/26/book-review-unlearn-your-pain/ 

"Part of me is tempted to recommend Unlearn Your Pain to my patients on the same principle. And if any readers of this blog have chronic pain and want to try  the month-long self-help therapy course in this book, I would be very interested in hearing back from you (please tell me before you start, so that there aren’t response biases).  "

But I don't know if anyone ever took him up on the offer. The actual treatment costs are virtually zero, so if these methods work (partially?) they could potentially save a large number of those 65 million disability years. It's the ultimate effective altruism project. Surely someone who reads this has the authority and cash to get a proper trial done?

 

As Guy points out, I don't link to any research because I can't find any- let's do some!

It's not a useful tool if noone has heard of it...

And it's not optimistic, it's factual, evidence based- I've done it now on 7 people and I've basically run out of people I know with pain- does anyone out there know anyone with chronic pain who would be willing to give this a try? If so, please get in touch so I can keep a tally of the results.

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 25m read
 · 
Epistemic status: This post — the result of a loosely timeboxed ~2-day sprint[1] — is more like “research notes with rough takes” than “report with solid answers.” You should interpret the things we say as best guesses, and not give them much more weight than that. Summary There’s been some discussion of what “transformative AI may arrive soon” might mean for animal advocates. After a very shallow review, we’ve tentatively concluded that radical changes to the animal welfare (AW) field are not yet warranted. In particular: * Some ideas in this space seem fairly promising, but in the “maybe a researcher should look into this” stage, rather than “shovel-ready” * We’re skeptical of the case for most speculative “TAI<>AW” projects * We think the most common version of this argument underrates how radically weird post-“transformative”-AI worlds would be, and how much this harms our ability to predict the longer-run effects of interventions available to us today. Without specific reasons to believe that an intervention is especially robust,[2] we think it’s best to discount its expected value to ~zero. Here’s a brief overview of our (tentative!) actionable takes on this question[3]: ✅ Some things we recommend❌ Some things we don’t recommend * Dedicating some amount of (ongoing) attention to the possibility of “AW lock ins”[4]  * Pursuing other exploratory research on what transformative AI might mean for animals & how to help (we’re unconvinced by most existing proposals, but many of these ideas have received <1 month of research effort from everyone in the space combined — it would be unsurprising if even just a few months of effort turned up better ideas) * Investing in highly “flexible” capacity for advancing animal interests in AI-transformed worlds * Trying to use AI for near-term animal welfare work, and fundraising from donors who have invested in AI * Heavily discounting “normal” interventions that take 10+ years to help animals * “Rowing” on na
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
About the program Hi! We’re Chana and Aric, from the new 80,000 Hours video program. For over a decade, 80,000 Hours has been talking about the world’s most pressing problems in newsletters, articles and many extremely lengthy podcasts. But today’s world calls for video, so we’ve started a video program[1], and we’re so excited to tell you about it! 80,000 Hours is launching AI in Context, a new YouTube channel hosted by Aric Floyd. Together with associated Instagram and TikTok accounts, the channel will aim to inform, entertain, and energize with a mix of long and shortform videos about the risks of transformative AI, and what people can do about them. [Chana has also been experimenting with making shortform videos, which you can check out here; we’re still deciding on what form her content creation will take] We hope to bring our own personalities and perspectives on these issues, alongside humor, earnestness, and nuance. We want to help people make sense of the world we're in and think about what role they might play in the upcoming years of potentially rapid change. Our first long-form video For our first long-form video, we decided to explore AI Futures Project’s AI 2027 scenario (which has been widely discussed on the Forum). It combines quantitative forecasting and storytelling to depict a possible future that might include human extinction, or in a better outcome, “merely” an unprecedented concentration of power. Why? We wanted to start our new channel with a compelling story that viewers can sink their teeth into, and that a wide audience would have reason to watch, even if they don’t yet know who we are or trust our viewpoints yet. (We think a video about “Why AI might pose an existential risk”, for example, might depend more on pre-existing trust to succeed.) We also saw this as an opportunity to tell the world about the ideas and people that have for years been anticipating the progress and dangers of AI (that’s many of you!), and invite the br
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
Hi all, This is a one time cross-post from my substack. If you like it, you can subscribe to the substack at tobiasleenaert.substack.com. Thanks Gaslit by humanity After twenty-five years in the animal liberation movement, I’m still looking for ways to make people see. I’ve given countless talks, co-founded organizations, written numerous articles and cited hundreds of statistics to thousands of people. And yet, most days, I know none of this will do what I hope: open their eyes to the immensity of animal suffering. Sometimes I feel obsessed with finding the ultimate way to make people understand and care. This obsession is about stopping the horror, but it’s also about something else, something harder to put into words: sometimes the suffering feels so enormous that I start doubting my own perception - especially because others don’t seem to see it. It’s as if I am being gaslit by humanity, with its quiet, constant suggestion that I must be overreacting, because no one else seems alarmed. “I must be mad” Some quotes from the book The Lives of Animals, by South African writer and Nobel laureate J.M. Coetzee, may help illustrate this feeling. In his novella, Coetzee speaks through a female vegetarian protagonist named Elisabeth Costello. We see her wrestle with questions of suffering, guilt and responsibility. At one point, Elisabeth makes the following internal observation about her family’s consumption of animal products: “I seem to move around perfectly easily among people, to have perfectly normal relations with them. Is it possible, I ask myself, that all of them are participants in a crime of stupefying proportions? Am I fantasizing it all? I must be mad!” Elisabeth wonders: can something be a crime if billions are participating in it? She goes back and forth on this. On the one hand she can’t not see what she is seeing: “Yet every day I see the evidences. The very people I suspect produce the evidence, exhibit it, offer it to me. Corpses. Fragments of