Erik Peper, PhD, and Dana Yirmiyahu
Abstract
After suffering a corneal abrasion injury fifteen years ago, a 37-year-old woman has continued to experience eye irritation, itchiness, and pain whenever she felt tired, anxiety or experienced emotional discomfort. Overtime her eye ‘shrank’ and became visually smaller and felt tense all the time and she described her eye as the ‘bad eye’. During a short, guided session in which she changed her self-description and perception of her eye by appreciating what the eye had done for her all these years and embracing the eye with tenderness as well as guided eye movement exercise, she experienced the muscle of the eye relaxing and the eye opening up. She has continued to practice these skills at home whenever she noticed sensations in her eye. At the three-month follow-up, her eye has opened and is completely normal. Discussed is how negative self-labeling affects health outcomes, description of the intervention and healing strategies. The links to the recorded intervention session are included.
“I completely changed my perception of having a bad eye, to having an amazing eye. After two months, my eye is totally normal and healthy”
When experiencing chronic discomfort or reduced function, we commonly describe that part of our body that causes problems as broken or bad or label ourselves as disabled. Sometimes we even wish that it did not exist. In other cases, especially if there is pain or disfigurement, the person may attempt to dissociate from that body part. The language the person uses describes a graphic imagery that may impact the healing process; since, language can also be seen as a post self-hypnotic suggestion.1
The negative labeling, being disgusted or frustrated with that part of the body that is the cause of discomfort, often increases stress, tension, and sympathetic activity, which reduces the self-healing potential and hope. The language often reflects the person’s relationship and understanding of the problem. In many cases, the language is both the description and the prognosis—a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the description is negative and judgmental, it may interfere with the healing/treatment process. The negative language implicitly may activate the nocebo process that inhibits regeneration. On the other hand, positive affirming language may implicitly activate the placebo process that enhances healing.
By reframing the experience as positive and appreciating what the problem area of the body had done for you in the past as well as incorporating a healing compassionate process, the healing is supported. The limits of our beliefs as expressed by our language is also the limits of our possibilities. See the TED talk, A broken body isn’t a broken person,2 by Janine Shepherd (2014) who after a horrendous accident and being paralyzed became an acrobatic pilot instructor. Another example of a remarkable recovery is by Madhu Anziani who initially was a quadriplegic after falling from a second-floor window and used Reiki, toning, and self-compassion and hope to improve health. He reframed the problem as an opportunity for growth. He can now walk, talk and play the most remarkable music.3
When a person can focus on what they can do instead of focusing on what they cannot do or on their suffering, pain may be reduced. For example, Jill Cosby describes how she used imagery to eliminate the pains in her back and stopped her pain medications a year later after undergoing two surgeries to replace her shattered L3 with a metal “cage” (looks like a spring) and fused this cage to the L4 and L2 vertebrae with bars.4 The healing process is similar to how children develop, growth, and learn—a process that is promoted through playfulness and support with an openness to possibilities.
Healing Goes Forward and Not Backwards in Time
After an injury, most people want to be the same as they were before the injury, and they keep comparing themselves to how they were. The person can never be what they were in the past—they can be different and even better; however, they cannot become the same. Time flows only in a forward direction, and the person already has been changed by the experience. Instead, the person accepts where they are, appreciates how much the problem area has done for them in the past, and continues to work to improve. This is a dynamic process in which the person appreciates the very small positive changes that are occurring without limiting how much change can occur.
A useful tool while working with clients is to explore ways by which clients can genuinely transform their belief and internal language about the problem area from negative framing to appreciation and growth. This process is illustrated in the participant’s report that describes a rapid healing of a 15-year problem of an eye that got smaller following server corneal abrasion.
On January 18th, 2023, I attended a workshop/ lecture by Professor Erik Peper.
During the break I spoke to him and expressed my concern regarding my right eye. 15 years ago, the cornea of my eye was accidently scratched by my 3-year-old daughter. The eye suffered a trauma and was treated daily at the hospital. In addition, I had a patch over my eye for 3 weeks and suffered extrusion pain during the first 2 weeks. A scar remained on my eye, and doctors were not able to say if it is permanent or that the eye may heal itself eventuality. An invasive operation was also suggested which I refused to take. The trauma affected my eyesight for a few months but eventually after a year, the scar was gone and physically no permanent damaged has remind.
Although it was certainly determined that my eye has healed completely, the sensation didn’t feel like it at all. I always considered it ‘my bad eye’ and suffered irritation and pain every time I experienced tiredness, anxiety, or any other emotional discomfort. My eye was the first and only organ to reflect pain/itchiness/irritation. Over time, my eye ‘shrank’ as well. It became visually smaller and I felt it tense at all times.
For 15 years that was my reality! I coped with it and haven’t thought of it much, until January 18, when I attended the workshop.
Professor Peper asked me to the front of the stage when we returned from break and conducted an exercise with me, where I used my imagination and verbal words to comfort my eye and embrace it rather than feel it was ‘the defected/bad eye’. He pointed out that if you only describe your children as bad or evil, how can you expect them to grow. Thus, he explored with me a few exercises such as evoking self-healing imagery. The self-healing imagery did not totally resonate; however, I felt I just needed to hug my eye. I thanked my eye for its being and stroked it gently in my mind. On stage and during the rest of the lecture I felt a sense of comfort. As if the muscles around my eye have finally loosened. A feeling I haven’t experienced for years. I continued to follow the instructions I got at the workshop for a couple of days, but unfortunately, I did not persist, and the negative sensation returned.
On a follow-up Zoom meeting 10 days after the lecture with Prof. Peper, I received additional tools to practice ‘eye physiotherapy’ as well as mindfulness regarding the eye. This practice consisted of closing my eyes and cover the non-problem eye and then as I exhaled gently and softly open my eyes and open more and more while looking all around. I completely changed my perception of having a bad eye, to having ‘an amazing eye’. At first talking to it didn’t come naturally to me but as I persisted it became more and more easier. I did it in the car, before going to sleep and when waking up in the morning. In addition, I practiced the exercises I got over Zoom, where I covered my left eye (the undamaged one) and had my right eye look up and down to the sides.
It has been about three months since this Zoom meeting, and I am awed by the results. My eye has opened more, and no longer feels shrank and small, I rarely feel negative sensation in it and when I do, I immediately know how to handle it.
I can say that attending this workshop has defiantly been a life changing point to my amazing right eye and for me.
Why Did the Healing Occur?
The “bad eye” symptoms was most likely caused by “learned disuse”; namely, the chronic eye tension was the result of the protective response to reduce the discomfort after the injury to the cornea.5 After the injury and medical treatment, she would have unknowingly tensed her muscles around the eye to protect it. A process that occurred automatically without conscious awareness. This protective response became her new normal; and once her eye had healed, the bracing continued. The bracing pattern was amplified by the ongoing self-labeling of having a “bad eye.” By accepting the eye as it was, giving it compassionate caring and support, and following up with simple eye movement exercises to allow the eye to rediscover and experience the complete range of motion, the symptoms disappeared.
What Can We Take Home From This Case Example?
Listen to the language, how a client describes their problem: Does the language implicitly limit recovery, growth, and hope (e.g., I always have the problem, it is broken)? Does the language inhibit caring and compassion for the problem area (e.g., being frustrated, angry, disgusted)? If that is the case, explore ways by which the client can reframe the language and emotional tone. A useful strategy is to incorporate self-healing imagery in which the person first inspects the problem area, second imagines how it would look well/healthy, and third creates a self-healing imagery that transforms what was observed in the inspection to becoming well and whole. Then each moment the client’s attention is drawn to the problem, the client evokes the self-healing imagery.6 In many cases, by combining this imagery with slower breathing to reduce the stress, healing is promoted.
Correspondence should be addressed to Erik Peper, Ph.D., Institute for Holistic Health Studies/Department of Recreation, Parks, Tourism and Holistic Health, San Francisco State University, 1600 Holloway Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94132. Email: epeper@sfsu.edu web: www.biofeedbackhealth.org blog: www.peperperspective.com
References
- Mullins, A. (2009). The opportunity of adversity. TEDMED. Accessed March 22, 2023. https://www.ted.com/talks/aimee_mullins_the_opportunity_of_adversity?language=en
- Shepherd, J. (2014). A broken body isn’t a broken person. TEDxKC. Accessed March 20, 2023 https://www.ted.com/talks/janine_shepherd_a_broken_body_isn_t_a_broken_person?language=en
- Anziani, M. & Peper, E. (2021). Healing from paralysis-Music (toning) to activate health. the peper perspective-ideas on illness, health and well-being from Erik Peper. Accessed March 22, 2023. https://peperperspective.com/2021/11/22/healing-from-paralysis-music-toning-to-activate-health/
- Peper, E. Cosby, J. & Amendras, M. (2022). Healing chronic back pain. NeuroRegulation, 9(3), 165-172. https://doi.org/10.15540/nr.9.3.164
- Uswatte, G. & Taub, E. (2005). Implications of the Learned Nonuse Formulation for Measuring Rehabilitation Outcomes: Lessons From Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy. Rehabilitation Psychology, 50(1), 34-42. https://doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550.50.1.34
- Peper, E., Gibney, H. K. & Holt, C. (2002). Make Health Happen. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall-Hunt. pp. 193-236. https://he.kendallhunt.com/make-health-happen
Published July 29, 2023
About the Author
Erik Peper, PhD, is an international authority on biofeedback and self-regulation. Since 1970 he has been researching factors that promote healing. Peper is Professor of Holistic Health Studies/Department of Health Education at San Francisco State University. He is President of the Biofeedback Foundation of Europe and past President of the Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback. He holds Senior Fellow (Biofeedback) certification from the Biofeedback Certification Institute of America. He has a biofeedback practice at Biofeedback Health (www.biofeedbackhealth.org) and posts articles at https://peperperspective.com.