Re: new article on EMDR

Dr. Shapiro- I appreciate your willingness and interest in a discussion. I also feel that I was remiss in not commending you on your efforts to empirically validate your theories and treatment. If I may I would like to respond to your comments point by point. I will quote your comments.

"1) An article is posted written by the same group of cognitive behaviorists that have published approximately 90% of the negative articles on EMDR."

I disagree that this group of authors have published 90% of the negative articles. However, they do appear to author the bulk of the published criticism of EMDR. That does not somehow discredit them or make their points less valid.

"2) Dr. Knipe points out that from prior knowledge it will simply be a rehash of already rebutted material."

I would suggest that you not decide the content of the article until you have read it. If upon reading it you decide that it is nothing other than a rehash of the same arguments etc then that is your conclusion.

"3) Without asking why Dr. Knipe believes this, Don’s rejoinder is: Don’t trust EMDR clinicians they are just "true-believers." Instead, trust the cognitive behavior therapists who say it’s just rehashed cognitive behavior therapy and exposure although, as has been pointed out in numerous posts above:"

I never once said to not trust EMDR clinicians. I am sure that there are many extremely competent and talented EMDR clinicians. As far as EMDR being rehashed CBT I think that the data do point in that direction.

"a) No controlled studies of cbt with PTSD have ever reported 85% elimination PTSD in three sessions found with EMDR in repeated studies"

Devilly GJ, Spence SH (1999) The relative efficacy and treatment distress of EMDR and a cognitive-behavior trauma treatment protocol in the amelioration of posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 13(1-2), 131-57.
-This recent study found that CBT was both statistically and clinically more effective than EMDR in reducing pathology related to PTSD and that this superiority was maintained and, in fact, became more evident by 3-month follow-up.

"b) According to the leading exposure researchers EMDR is not conducted in accordance with established exposure principles"

Foa and Meadows (1997) characterized EMDR as a cognitive-behavioral treatment in their review of psychosocial treatments for PTSD.

"c) Many clinicians thoroughly trained in cognitive behavior therapy, including founding members of the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy (e.g., Fensterheim, 1996) say its an integrated form of therapy—Much more than just its cognitive behavioral elements"

However, many more do not.

"4) Don continues: Don’t bother to look up the discrepancies reported by Shapiro and others because Shapiro is the developer of the method. This is important because the tobacco companies line their pockets and so would Don, he claims, if he was in the same position."

I did not say this. I would in fact be happy if everyone had the time and did actually sit down and read every article written about EMDR- pro and con. One of the main reasons is that I think, with all due respect, that you mispresent the extant data on EMDR. I am simply saying that if I want information about something that I go to as many sources as possible, not just the ones that have an interest in me buying.

"5) Therefore, trust this group of cognitive behaviorists because when they say EMDR is just cbt they are really the protectors of science even though repeated misreporting of data has been documented in their reviews. Remember: Don’t bother to check on it, or bother with any of Shapiro’s scientific arguments because she’s an advocate for EMDR, while they are the true scientists because they’ve published extensively in cbt and Shapiro has only published on EMDR."

Agian I dont think this is a fair representation of what I said. I am saying that if I want to find information about buying a Ford, my only source of information is not going to be a Ford salesman. I have personally seen no misrepresentation or misreporting of data in the "cognitive-behaviorists" reviews of EMDR. I do concede that I have not read every single review written about EMDR. I also have not seen it reported or documented that they misreport data by anyone other than EMDR-interested parties. If you are able to post some recommended readings for where independent authors did report this I would appreciate reading them.

"6) Put yourself forth as only a concerned and disinterested psychologist, but make sure to add in some name calling and ad hominem attacks. "

I am not exactly sure of what you mean by this. I do not recall name calling or personally attacking you, but if I did I apoligize. Also, again with due respect, I have seen you cry ad hominem before and think that you should use it more sparingly, namely when someone does actually attack you personally. I think that this exemplifies one of the biggest problems with EMDR. You are so personally enmeshed with your treatment that any criticism against EMDR becomes a personal attack on you.

"I’ve given a large number of posts above over these last two days that contain all the science with sufficient references for anyone who cares to read and investigate them. Since you’ve closed the debate by claiming that everything I have to say is suspect, it’s clearly time to move onto other things. "

Again, respectfully, you have not at all posted "all the science". You have only posted articles that show positive results when you know that there are many articles that show that EMDR does not lose its effectiveness when you take away the lateral stimulation or that EMDR is not more effective than CBT or is less effective than CBT etc. I also never said that I would like to close the debate. I am certainly learning a lot. If you chose to move on to other things or close the debate I will respect you decision. I sincerely appreciate you taking time to respond to my post.

Sincerely,

Don

Replies:

Interesting points Don, by Brian G., 2/17/00 Re: new article on EMDR, by Shapiro, 2/17/00

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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