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?
Those areas are defined by the NHS specifically as complementary or alternative therapies. In other words, not part of general practition and similar to other, general health advice.
From your link -
Very much like advice to rest after ill health, or perhaps as part of a programme to increase fitness we may receive advice to take regular brisk walks.
Hypnotherapy is not medicine. It will never be the primary course of any treatment. But I have also said that it can help, which is as much as any medical professional will agree with.
Trying to give it any further weight, as you are, isn’t helpful and could be harmful. Please don’t do that.
Mate, I literally provided a link to an established medical organisation and their details from it. I’m not giving it weight, the Royal College of Psychiatrists is.
Complementary therapy, whether you agree with it or not, is very often recommended by UK practitioners.
Even the NHS offer hypnotherapy under certain circumstances! They literally tell you to speak to your GP to see if you can see a hypnotherapist on the NHS
It’s really not difficult to find examples of hypnotherapy being offered by NHS doctors in the UK. Whatever your definition of ‘not medicine’ is, there appear to be plenty of medically licensed practitioners in the UK who would argue otherwise.
Please, I’ve provided enough context at every stage to be clearly understood. What is regarded and by whom as medicine is not the same as recommending something as complementary to other medicine.
The problem with your post is here -
It does not treat anything directly. It can help in as much as painkillers can help. That’s it. The way you have framed it makes it appear to be more than that.
From your link -
Being very good at helping people relax, overcome fears and reduce anxiety is absolutely beneficial when used alongside medical procedure.
That does not mean it is medical procedure and nothing you have linked to suggests otherwise.
From your other link -
I used a form of hypnotherapy to stop smoking, so I’m not against the use of it. But it didn’t “make” me stop, it helped me to stop because I wanted to stop and because I believed it could help. Which is a very powerful tool in that scenario, as shown by my never having smoked since and not having any side effects or cravings at all after the session. Over seventeen years ago.
I have over egged my objections to your post somewhat because I feel very strongly about the way in which we present information over social media. I don’t think I need tell you why that’s important.
Just don’t tell people hypnotherapy can fix them. And make it clear that isn’t what you are saying. Please.
Yes, you’re understood, but you’re also wrong. However many times you say please, I’m not actually making any bold claims about the magic of hypnotherapy. I haven’t “framed” it in any way. Nobody is spreading misinformation or claiming it will be guaranteed to fix them - all I’ve said is hypnotherapy is a technique used by medical practitioners, and provided evidence for that to counter your assertion that it isn’t medicine, because by your same logic, no psychiatry is.
There’s no problem with my post other than you not deeming it as something that can be an effective treatment, which is demonstrably false - proven by the fact that it’s offered by people in the medical profession and studies have shown it can be effective. As well as your own claimed experience! Nobody has said it’s a procedure either.
You can have an opinion on it obviously, but that doesn’t stop it from being used as a literal treatment by literal professionals, and that’s absolutely not me spreading “harmful” misinformation, it’s documented fact.
You also said it’s the same as going for a brisk walk, then afterwards said it was a very powerful tool for you when giving up smoking. Make your mind up.
“Brisk walk”, “Very powerful tool”. Sounds like you’re doing the framing mate, but you can’t decide which way. I don’t think I need to tell you why the way in which we present information on social media is important.