Panic

This week I was thinking about the feeling of panic. I don’t necessarily want to write about panic attacks because I don’t think that everyone is able to relate to having one. Plus, I tend to think that this term can be, at times, overused and misunderstood within the general public. I’m also not gearing this blog to people who’ve been diagnosed with panic disorder, which is when panic or panic attacks reach a level that it drastically interferes with one’s life. If you look up information about panic attacks you may find differing definitions about what they are and the symptoms involved. This is interesting to explore, but today I’ll be writing about panic in a more general sense. 

Some people will certainly say that they’ve never had a panic attack, but I think everyone has had moments of feeling panic. While anxiety may be a term that characterizes a spectrum of low to high intensity feelings, Panic is extremely intense and completely dysregulating. If anxiety is like the volume dial on the stereo allowing the music to be anywhere from quiet to loud, panic is an air horn–only incredibly loud. If we’re in panic, we don’t really think. Instead, we just react. 

It has been challenging to find good information for this blog because most of my searches brought up articles about panic attacks, which again, not everyone has experienced. I saw some links for Reddit feeds, like, “What is the evolutionary advantage of panic?” These were a little closer to what I was looking for, but Reddit isn’t exactly a great scientific resource. Then I finally found a great article* on Psychology Today about how panic can be a life saver. They start off by saying that many experiences of panic are a “false-positive,” and they compare this to Covid screenings where a false-positive (testing positive when someone isn’t infected) would mean that you had to stay home when you didn’t actually have Covid. A false-negative, on the other hand (testing negative when someone does have the virus), would mean that you might have allowed yourself to be in situations where you infected others. Given these two possible mistakes, a false positive is probably better than a false negative in many situations. Dr. Rosmarin, who wrote this article, points out that experiencing panic is an indication that someone has a fully functional fight-or-flight response. This is exactly what they need in the event of a life-threatening emergency. He wrote about an encounter with a client who was experiencing frequent panic, and he asked her to share a time when she was truly unsafe. She reported a time in which she was playing catch with her kids and went to retrieve the ball as it rolled toward the street. As she reached the road, a car was barreling directly toward her that she hadn’t previously seen. Her body reacted immediately and she jumped out of the way before she could even process what was happening. Afterward, her stomach was in knots and she was dealing with the after-effects of an adrenaline burst. Dr. Rosmarin pointed out to his client that if she didn’t have a fully functioning panic response, she probably would’ve been hit by the car. 

The article* mentions the body’s fear response to a life-threatening situation as: 

  • Dilated pupils which increase the field of vision.

  • Digestion slows so that energy is available in the muscles. 

  • Blood flow is pulled into the torso so that the organs are functioning at their peak. 

  • Muscles become tense and ready for increased strength. 

  • The heart beats faster and breathing increases in order to flood muscles with oxygen.

When we experience* panic, all of these threat responses occur, which are actually physically uncomfortable, and the panic may not involve life-threatening situations. Dr. Rosmarin recommends that people try to view feelings of panic as a false-positive and an indication that their body is responding exactly the way it should in order to protect them. In this way, it becomes possible to make peace with the reaction because it means that their bodies are trying to protect them. This runs counter to what I often hear from clients who are dealing with intense panic. They tend to worry that it means something is wrong with them. By understanding that their bodies are trying to protect them (but getting the wrong message about the level of danger they are in) people can learn to work on calming the body back down without unnecessarily shaming themselves. 

I think that for most people panic is unpredictable. It just sort of happens when something really awful happens and we have to respond to it. Panic attacks are often reported that way too, and  sometimes people will say that nothing bad happened prior to the attack…the feelings just came out of nowhere. In any case, panic is undeniably uncomfortable. We can’t get rid of panic because doing so would be to get rid of our entire fear-response, and this is responsible for keeping us alive in dangerous situations. We can start to teach ourselves to understand and embrace this (potentially) life-saving physiological response. In doing so, we can realize something very important about panic, which is that the feelings themselves are not dangerous. They are a system of reactions designed to save our lives. 

*https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/thriving-anxiety/202208/how-panic-represents-inner-strength-can-save-us 


A nation divided

This topic has been on my mind for a little while. I have no interest in making this blog a sounding board about my political views, so even though I will be talking about political differences being a big part of what divides us, I will avoid a biased lens that only adds to the problem. Besides, we’re all surrounded by non-stop political news and information. If that’s what people are looking for, there’s no shortage of places to find it. 

Let’s start off with a little good news. Plenty of people are saying that we’re more divided** as a nation than we’ve ever been. I’ve been guilty of thinking that myself. However, we are also a nation that has gone through a Civil War. In more recent history, the 1960s were also a time of major political unrest, and at times, political violence. Our country has been divided before, and long after this particular period of polarization calms down, we will probably find out way back here again. When we think it’s worse than ever, what we’re really saying is that things are more divided now than we can remember, and that has to be put into the context of how many years we’ve actually been aware of political news. For instance, I was born the year Ronald Reagan took office, but I don’t remember anything about his 8 years as president, and I certainly wasn’t aware of “Reaganomics.” I remember Dana Carvey’s impressions of George H. W. Bush after he was elected, but I was aware of very little that Bush was doing. I do remember more of the Clinton years (especially the scandals), but I can’t say that I was particularly knowledgeable about what was actually going on until his last couple of years in office. The George W. Bush years were probably the first that I was consistently paying attention to politics. If I say something like, “This is the worst that things have ever been,” I’m really just basing that statement on less than 30 years of awareness. 

Nonetheless, these are very difficult times. If you think that things are more divided now than you’ve ever seen it, you’re probably right. People** who call themselves Democrat or Republican are much more likely to view members of the other party negatively now than they did 40 years ago. Time Magazine has an article* looking at three different reasons why we’ve become so divided. They start by exploring our country’s troubling history with race, and then mention the evolution of capitalism becoming a system that feeds more and more wealth into the top few. As I was looking at these reasons, it occurs to me that these two areas themselves can be divisive issues. The third reason they cited is the major changes in media that inundate us all with constant, biased, and sometimes incorrect new stories that make us all less informed.

In terms of political issues, sparing over those is expected and not a big deal on its own. I think we could all agree that we’re not going to all agree. However, in the last 30 years** political polarization has increased in the sense that people are more likely to identify with a certain party instead of with individual issues. Sure, it can make sense that we identify with a group that we tend to agree with more, but the problem is when we start seeing the other side as…well…other. Increasing, along with polarization, have been negative views of people who label themselves members of the other party. Add into this a tendency we all have toward confirmation bias (an easier time believing things that fit with our current beliefs) and a constant bombardment from news sources and social media that treat the “other side” with contempt and dehumanizing name-calling, and we all start to feel a lot of disdain for the “others.” 

With a little advice about what to do about this, researcher, Adam Grant, suggests*** that just trying to take another’s perspective is minimally helpful. However, when we try to imagine the circumstances that might have caused someone to develop a different point of view can actually humanize people who have opposing views or party affiliation. His example involves the issue of gun control. He suggests that someone who is for strict gun control laws try to imagine how their views might be different if they had grown up in a family that was highly involved in hunting. He suggests that someone who is against strict gun control laws try to imagine how their views might be different if they had grown up in Columbine. 

At the end of the day, we all have the views we carry because of our particular backgrounds, family histories, and experiences. So do the people who disagree with whatever we happen to believe. Maybe if we can focus a little more on the issues that are important to us, and less on party affiliation, we can remember what is really important to us. It would also be helpful to remember that even when we disagree, people can have opposing views for their own reasons and still be good people. We’re all in this country together with a shared interest in working toward improvement. How we get there isn’t something we’re always going to agree on, and maybe that’s fine. 

*https://time.com/5929978/the-u-s-capitol-riot-was-years-in-the-making-heres-why-america-is-so-divided/ 

**https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-unseen/201809/why-has-america-become-so-divided 

***https://behavioralscientist.org/your-ideas-are-not-your-identity-adam-grant-on-how-to-get-better-at-changing-your-mind/