Is MAV damaging me?

Basically I imagine this forum to be similar to a safe circle where anything can come out based on experience and current state.
I will personally not feel discouraged by any one post because there are others that balance it all out.

I like it when a person speaks their truth. Guide lines are in place regarding profanity. Religion and politics are not here so I think we’re all safe.


I second Andy. Hope with a healthy dose of reality goes a long way. If someone believes they have a brain/migraine/systemic issue then it helps them to keep pursuing the right course of action. It takes grit to follow the medication trial and error route and for this the patient and the physician need to be on the same mental model.

Thankfully for those who are too new to have any vantage point to see things, we have doctors who are getting better at treating vestibular migraine.

For those who have had this for a decade i would say they have a brain prone to migraine. Though damage might be a strong term, damage need not have to mean permanent. Understanding the focus area of the problem(brain) is more important than terms such as “damage” which add color to the problem.


I don’t want to go on about this but in short I say what I find. I have little interest if something is perceived as positive or negative as long as it’s true or has an honest intention.

My research lead me away from myopic reading about migraine as i realised it was more and thus went on to look at additional conditions like PTSD, TBI, CFS etc. An abundance of oxidative stress and inflammation causes damage to the brain whether someone likes it or not. I think frank and open discussion is needed.

Truth can be seen as a burden but as Emily was alluding to earlier, being armed with that is more empowering. My understanding of how my body works is greater than ever and now I can manipulate it in the right direction. I understand that as a moderator it’s important to keep the positivity up as online health forums can easily spiral downwards but I won’t censor my opinions if I think it will add to the discussion regardless of how it is perceived.

I speak frankly in person so maybe it comes across as aggressive in type. It’s not meant that way.


I’ve never found your tone aggressive. You’re honest, inquisitive and scientific. But then again I’m forthright to a fault so what do I know? :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

Sorry guys, I remain unconvinced.

We should not be throwing around terms like ‘damage’ imho. It’s not helpful.

I remember when I was at my worst and whenever I read something like that my heart sank and I felt extremely depressed. We have to respect others will feel that way too, especially new sufferers.

Emily you seem to have misinterpreted my posts and taken them to be some kind of criticism of ‘acceptance’. It is not. I’ve not even referred to the term in this Topic so don’t know where you’ve got that from. You seem to have made some unreasonable assumptions about what I was thinking. I have never criticised ‘acceptance’ and believe it to be a completely reasonable way of improving ones comfort and state of mind.

The discussion has started venturing into conflict over belief systems again which is unnecessary and argumentative in this context. I was just discussing the psychological aspect (deliberately so!). Let’s not get into a partisan fight over ideological assumptions of aetiology. That never ends well and there are plenty of Topics with heated debate around that already in #research-theories-controversies. I suspect we don’t need to revisit those until some sufficiently significant new findings are made.