EMDR Forum Archive, 1999
Research on EMDR
Brian G. · 2/10/00 at 5:06 pm ET
Whoever you are, your questions are right on the money. Good to know that that you have critical thinking skills. First, the research to back up my statements. Please refer to a good summary of the research in EMDR in a recently published study: Lohr, J. M., Lilienfeld, S. O, Tolin, D. F., & Herbert, J. D. (1999). Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing: An analysis of specific versus nonspecific treatment factors. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 13, 185-207. In my opinion, a comprehensive review of the literature does not demonstrate that EMDR works better than standard treatments, removing eye movements or other bilateral stimulation does not effect the treatment's efficacy, and when you remove bilaterial stimulation you are left with a form of standard CBT which has been shown to be effective for treating a multitude of conditions. The article will provide you will the specific studies to support these statements which would be too extensive to list here. It seems that you misunderstood my previous comments based on your second comment. To clarify, EMDR appears to work by incorporating supported techniques (CBT). Eye movements, the only real difference, is unnecessary and does not improve outcome. Then what's the point of learning to use EMDR?! There are many examples of people profitting from varying traditional treatments and putting their names on it. Do you really want to sing the "Star-Spangled Banner" while taking your antibiotics [refer to my previous message] without getting additional benefits? And would you make this doctor rich in the process? Next you might have other doctors marketing new treatments by singing "America the Beautiful" with their pills. Instead of improving treatment, we would be putting energy into a fruitless pursuit! Does this clarify the point? Brian
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.
