The summative effect of the three volumes, taken as reviews in the field of psychosomatic medicine—that most unfortunate of terms—points toward the need to view the phenomenon of mental and emotional responses to physical illness, such as cancer, heart disease, and diabetes, in new and more effective terms. For example, to question the standard wisdom of depression in oncology patients, my research group compared the survival differences between depressive symptoms and ego adaptive styles in a sample of advanced-stage cancer patients (1). The maturity of adaptive style predicted 5-year survival far more dramatically than the frequency of depressive symptoms. Do we need a paradigm shift in our thinking with respect to mental and emotional functions and physical illness? Both the reviews in these three volumes and our own explorations contribute to saying yes. Will this paradigm shift occur from the subspecialty of psychosomatic medicine, the field that lately seems to offer a final, although unconvincing, common pathway for all of human misery via the word depression? Probably not, until this subspecialty finds its way. Will it occur in the pages of the Journal or the Archives of General Psychiatry? That too raises considerable doubt in the new age of medical journalism where novel high-risk/high-gain formulations may lower an impact factor. Does it need to be investigated anyway in the interests of better diagnosis and treatment? Without a doubt.