On the contrary it gives me a great deal of confidence that there is no scientific consensus on this subject based on how intuitive or how obvious it seems, and that instead scientists are hesitant to come to a consensus without experimental evidence.
I think plenty of physicians have personal opinions and hypotheses about the impact of the brain on the body, but it's something incredibly difficult to validate or refute, experiments are very hard to carry out on this subject, and consequently the responsible thing for a scientist to do is to avoid making conclusions or coming to a consensus on the basis of how nice or appealing something sounds.
If you want to hold a personal opinion on the subject, go for it... if that opinion inspires you to pursue an interest and develop a testable theory... wonderful do it. Until then, from a professional point of view it's best to avoid perpetuating an idea, no matter how strongly you believe it to be, as a well established scientific fact.
Just because science has not or cannot proven a concept, does not mean that concept is not real. That’s not the same as disproving a concept though science.
Don’t let double-blind, placebo controlled, peer reviewed studies with sufficient n limit your understanding of reality. There are aspects of reality which have not been and never will be tested with the scientific method.
I never said anything about proving or disproving. People are welcome to believe anything they'd like to on whatever basis they choose to... if you like Chinese medicine, go for it. Think drinking that awful cough medicine will make you feel better? Fine... Want to see a naturopath or chiropractor to perform vertebral subluxation to cure your back pain? Have at it... All of these practices sound very convincing, intuitive, and are almost common sense to billions of people, and I'm glad that professional doctors and scientists reject them regardless of how appealing they sound because none of them can be experimentally verified.
The fact that they are rejected does not mean that they don't work or have been proven to be ineffective, it means that they are not established scientific facts and as such it's absolutely dangerous to have physicians or other scientists promoting ideas as scientific fact or using said ideas as the basis for their professional practice.
I think plenty of physicians have personal opinions and hypotheses about the impact of the brain on the body, but it's something incredibly difficult to validate or refute, experiments are very hard to carry out on this subject, and consequently the responsible thing for a scientist to do is to avoid making conclusions or coming to a consensus on the basis of how nice or appealing something sounds.
If you want to hold a personal opinion on the subject, go for it... if that opinion inspires you to pursue an interest and develop a testable theory... wonderful do it. Until then, from a professional point of view it's best to avoid perpetuating an idea, no matter how strongly you believe it to be, as a well established scientific fact.