WHAT DOES IT MEAN A BIO-PSYCHO-SOCIAL MODEL?

First of all, I must say that, as I see it, the basic assertion of such a model is either a plain truism, or a meaningless three-partition of a single object, whose essence does not permit any kind of  actual division.

It must be no more than a plain reminder about the crucial importance of a good doctor-patient relationship, holistically oriented, which I am not able to regard but as a mere truism. The reason for this opinion lays in the fact that I cannot accept that any doctor can afford to be so unethical to the point of remaining oblivious to the social and psychological aspects of a patient seeking his/her attention, since these are so important as the biological.
As for its usefulness as a model for the scientific study of diseases and of diseased people, it necessarily faces a serious hindering: men and women are by no means a fusion of three separate layers. What gives rise to an apparent partition, whenever science takes the human being as an object of study, is not any ontological grounded reality but rather a mere observational bias.
No researcher will ever find a living human being which is not also simultaneously, i.e., exactly at that same instant, a psychological self living within a social context. This means that all events whose empirical data we may gather only through one of the B-P-S lenses, as if they corresponded actually to three existing layers, are entangled,  being quite impossible to separate them. Every time we think any phenomenon is a biological, a social or a psychological pure event, a mirage has deceived us!
I hope my ideas may feed your thoughts about such abstract concept so present in our everyday clinical practice,
I'll be waiting your comments.