Criticisms of “The Body Keeps the Score”

This article (and author) seems to be something of a trauma-skeptic, which doesn't seem to agree with mainstream science (setting aside Body Keeps the Score)

> That is, trauma doesn’t lead to dysfunction or abnormal brain function, physiology or hormonal regulation. Rather, an unhealthy person may be more susceptible to trauma.

What has been documented about Adverse Childhood Experiences doesn’t agree with this. There is copious evidence that the presence of ACEs, independent of other factors, leads to poor health outcomes [1]

It's also well known that past trauma predisposes you to future trauma [2]

There's also data indicating CPTSD, PTSD, and Borderline are distinct disorders [3]

1 - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8882933/ https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s...

2 - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5858954/

3 - https://www.psychiatrypodcast.com/psychiatry-psychotherapy-p...

It seems like all of those things can be true independently of whether or not a traumatic experience, in and of itself, effects permanent neurological/endocrine changes, though, right?

It sounded to me like his issue was with the claim that there are direct, systematic physical effects directly consequent to the psychological experience. It didn’t sound like an argument against claims like “a rough childhood reverberates into adulthood,” or “traumatic experiences have profound consequences for people.”

If anything, it would seem to me that, to effectively treat people struggling with post-traumatic consequences, it would be useful to understand whether or not your efforts would be usefully invested in physical interventions to address these supposed physical changes. Or if the best treatments are not medical but psychological, or social, or spiritual, or whatever.

It also has that tone scientists use when they speak of Malcolm Gladwell: annoyed that he misrepresents careful experimental findings in service of a good accessible narrative. Even if what he’s saying could turn out to be true—taking issue with the claim that it’s been scientifically demonstrated to be so. Which I’m sympathetic to.