Re: Brian G.

1) You have been given the Van Etten & Taylor reference in full. I'm sure you can locate the article with due diligence.

2) You cite the Devilly study which is the only outlier in a field of 8. All other civilian controlled studies of EMDR has shown it to achieve results more rapidly than any other treatment method. Devilly's is quite different. He reported (1) only an 18% remission of PTSD in 8 sessions as compared to a mean of 80% after 3-5 sessions generally found in the other studies, (2) approximately three times the drop out rate compared to other studies, and (3) a significantly greater expectancy effect in the cognitive behavior therapy control condition which consisted of a trauma protocol devised by him (both primary researcher and therapist). This is hardly an adequate example. Three other studies have already reported EMDR to be more rapid than simple exposure. Are you aware of the Freund and Ironson study reported at the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy? 7 out of 9 EMDR participants no longer had PTSD after 3 sessions compared to 2 out of 9 with cognitive behavior therapy.

I asked you previously to note any controlled studies of cognitive behavior therapy that reported an 80% successrate in 3 sessions. You haven't done so. Until you do so, your contention that EMDR is simply the same as cbt and has added nothing to traditional use of exposure is untenable

2) Component analyses of complex methods cannot be performed on subclinical populations. They should also not be conducted without fidelity checks. The component analysis you cite has done just that. Would you like cbt to be analyzed in this manner?

3) Rather than reading the articles I cited and noting the difference between what Lohr et al. have reported and the actual data you instead launch an ad hominem attack based upon a supposed profit motive. That is unscientific and absurd. Read the original data and note the discrepancies that abound in the reviews of Lohr et al. I won't bother to attempt to understand the motives of reviewers who consistently misreport data. Nor will I attempt to understand yours. Simply read the continued discrepancies in the data. If you can refute any of my findings please let me know.

Replies:

There are no replies to this message.

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.