EMDR Forum Archive, 1999
Re: Brian... anti-EMDR?
Brian G. · 2/10/00 at 12:26 pm ET
I wouldn't say I'm "against" EMDR. I'm simply curious as to why many in the scientific community present evidence that starkly contradicts the claims of EMDR proponents which they fail to adequately address. Ignoring the evidence or explaining away failures is not how the process should work. For instance, if I add an unnecessary component to a standard treatment, then that component should provide an incremental increase in effectiveness. If you went to your doctor for an infection and he/she gave you a prescription for an antibiotic and told you to sing the Star-Spangled Banner 5 times when you take a pill, yes your infection might go away. Does singing have anything to do with it? Why waste time on things that don't add to the effectiveness of a treatment which diverts attention and resources away from better improvements? These unfounded components only seem to muddy the waters of sense and reason. Eye movement's and other "bi-lateral stimulation" does not add to EMDR's effectiveness as was the result in numerous studies. I can give you an extensive list. It seems that EMDR proponents would rather attack the critic than the criticism. This should be distrubing to anyone who is interested in learning this technique. I'm just looking for some answers. Brain G.
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.
