Re: Initial response

Dear Dr. Paulson-Inobe,

I understand why you say that it would be better if they used the protocol currently in use but it leaves me a bit confused. Isn't the treatment mentioned in the article based on the original protocol that was used by Dr. Shapiro with such success in her original ground-breaking study? Even if it changed somewhat, shouldn't it still work?

Also, therapists use EMDR for a number of different problems and not everyone is "clinical." Are you saying that EMDR is only effective for "clinical" PTSD and shouldn't be used to treat college students or others who don't fit this category?

From what I heard, Dr. Shapiro originally stated that EMDR could provide great improvements in as little as one session. Do you deny this? Even if several sessions (do you know how many are actually required?) are more likely to provide a "cure," wouldn't it also seem likely that if bilateral stimulation is effective, it would show some improvement at some level compared to none at all?

Finally, if you concede that "no one has said it is only eye movements that does the trick," what specifically makes EMDR different or unique? In other words, what studies can you point to that support that idea that EMDR works by mechanisms that are unique to other treatments?

Sorry for all the questions but I appreciate your thoughtful replies.

Replies:

Re: Initial response, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/15/02 Re: Initial response, by Tomas Gould, 10/17/02 Re: Initial response, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/17/02 Re: Initial response, by Tomas Gould, 10/18/02

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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