Re: To Brian: A final observation regarding the interaction

Important: This message keeps being deleted in an attempt to silence me. If you would like to keep this message board free and open for discussants of both viewpoints let the editor know your opinion. By the way, Gil does not speak for me contrary to his previous posting.

Thanks to Dr. Shapiro and a Message to Discussants

First, I would like to thank Dr. Shapiro for engaging in a spirited debate of the issues on this list. In agreement with Dr. Shapiro, I believe that we have both given our views on some of the most important issues facing those using EMDR and now it is up to the readers to make an informed decision.

I never intended to spend this much time debating the issues but I feel better having done it for two reasons. (1) It has allowed me to refresh my knowledge of the research on EMDR. I have been following both sides from some years now because EMDR originally piqued my interests and early reports were so positive. However, as the research evolved I began to think that EMDR failed to live up to its claims. (2) I also am glad that I had a chance to add a skeptical tone to this discussion list. The "other side" was severely lacking here since its inception over 2 years ago. I felt that contradictory evidence was being completely ignored and this was unfortunate. If I used this message board to get all my information about EMDR it would have been quite skewed. Both clinicians who are thinking about paying for training in EMDR and potential clients need to understand that there is another side to the glowing comments given by proponents. I am pleased to see that there has been a string of interesting points being generated by supporters and critics and hope that it provides good food for thought.

I also must apologize for being the one responsible for presenting the critique of EMDR. I am not a researcher and have not published in this area at all. I simply see myself as a consumer of the research and was stating what I had learned through my review of both sides of the arguments. I also regret that I was not able to provide readers with as strong a presentation of the literature as I would have liked to. Dr. Shapiro has created EMDR and defended it for years. I do not have the resources that she does; however I had read many of the studies she cited. I also regret that the credibility of prominent researchers was defamed in this listing. I would much rather that individuals such as Lohr and Lilienfeld, or any of EMDR's more vocal and published critics, could have been here to defend themselves. If anyone knows them please invite them to counter Dr. Shapiro's numerous criticisms of them. I believe that they could much more effectively dispute Dr. Shapiro's conclusions of their articles.

I have come to what I feel are necessary conclusions about EMDR. I believe that there has been so much research on EMDR which as failed to confirm the claims and that future resources could be better used elsewhere. However, I am not intrinsically tied to my conclusions, as I am sure that many on this list would assume. If new and compelling information comes out to challenge my hypotheses I will modify them accordingly. I would have no problem adding bilateral stimulation to my treatments if they would be shown to work. I also am not intrinsically tied to CBT as some have assumed. I consider myself a pragmatic eclectic when it comes to choosing techniques even though I favor the cognitive behavioral perspective as a theoretical framework. However, I do not feel that we cannot improve CBT or find better ways of treating psychological problems. I am hopeful that the field will continue to evolve and improve based on distinguishing those things that work from those things that don't.

Finally, I would like to thank the numerous discussants who have weighed in on the subject. I have found all of your comments to be thought-provoking and I respect your varied points of view. While my messages do not mince words and do not attempt to caudle or cajole, I sought only to engage in a solid debate of the issues. Do not take any comments personally because they were never intended that way. I am pleased with the discussion and was not personally offended by any person's comments. I do not consider discussion of placebo in EMDR a mean-spirited attack. Placebo is a component of all therapies including CBT. It is our failing as clinicians to acknowledge this that can be sad.

Dr. Shapiro and I have made some good points and now it is up to the readers to decide. The first step in the process is to actually obtain and read some of the articles referenced previously with both sides of the argument being represented. Clinicians have an ethical duty to offer the best treatment they can to their clients and this includes keeping up with the research and adjusting procedures accordingly. Would you tolerate a medical doctor who used discredited techniques when better methods had been developed? I hope not.

I will periodically check in and read the interesting postings this list offers clinicians. If new information becomes available I will try to provide it the readers. For example:

Compr Psychiatry 2000 Jan-Feb;41(1):24-7

Five-year follow-up study of eye movement desensitization and
reprocessing therapy for combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder.

Macklin ML, Metzger LJ, Lasko NB, Berry NJ, Orr SP, Pitman RK

This study reports the results of a 5-year follow-up evaluation of 13 Vietnam combat veterans
with chronic posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) who participated in a study of eye movement
desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy previously reported in this journal.
Pretreatment and follow-up psychometric outcome measures were compared with those of a
demographically matched control group of 14 combat veterans with chronic PTSD who did not
receive EMDR. Analysis of variance showed that the modest to moderate therapeutic benefits
that were manifest immediately following EMDR were lost at the 5-year follow-up evaluation, and
there was an overall worsening of PTSD symptomatology over the 5-year period in both
EMDR-treated and nontreated control subjects.

I will look forward to reading this article. This is an interesting study which is sure to stir more interest regarding the long term efficacy of EMDR.

Thank you all for your patience and interest,

Brian

Replies:

Re: To Brian: A final observation regarding the interaction, by , 2/22/00 Re: To Brian: A final observation regarding the interaction, by Don, 2/22/00 Also concerned about veterans, by , 2/22/00 Dose Response Relationship & Design Flaws, by Sandra Paulsen, Ph.D., 2/22/00 Re: Dose Response Relationship & Design Flaws, by vet wife, 2/23/00 Re: Dose Response Relationship & Design Flaws, by Robert P. O'Brien, Ph.D., 2/23/00 To: Vet wife, by , 2/23/00

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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