Thank you for your in depth response. Sorry that I didn't respond sooner. I underestimated the power of coffee. I quit for a day, missing my usual morning two cups, and wow. Lost my power to comprehend. Still a little fuzzy. Anyway, I didn't mean to be rude by not responding. If I understand what you have written correctly, the forms of therapy that are least effective in the treatment of PTSD are relaxation, supportive counseling, and treatment as usual, but you feel that relaxation might have merit. You support exposure therapy, what I called repeating a story to an interested listener, but you feel that it's actually more complex than that. You state that unpublished studies support its effectiveness, and this connection has been shown to be stronger than ever. And, Sandra is pleased that you take the position that EMDR is exposure therapy, which shows that you validate EMDR and the tens of thousands of EMDR practioners. Also, the healing effects of meditation have not been studied in a PTSD population. However, if my fuzzy brain is reading you correctly, most of the studies show that these therapies are only slightly effective, usually when compared to another therapy. How much is this due to the researcher's bias toward a particular therapy? Can I then conclude that what you state is that except for exposure therapy that has been shown to be very effective in unpublished studies, and EMDR by association because it is exposure therapy, that there's little in the way of therapy that has been proven to be highly effective in the treatment of PTSD? So, to put this in terms that are more easily conceptualized, are treatments for PTSD as effective as treatments for cancer, bi-pass surgery, or antibiotics? In other words cancer (pretty miserable results), bypass surgery (improved life and life expectancy), antibiotics (usually a complete cure and normal life).
Replies:
![]() |
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.