Let's leave innuendo out of the discussion

Ricky said:

"I have heard of more than one published RCT comparing EMDR to CBT in which co-authors have made serious complaints, for example that the first author squelched data that was favorable to EMDR. These are not my stories to tell, but the point is that we can't assume things about co-authors or researcher allegiance effects."

How do we fit this comment together with his subsequent indictment, in the very same post, of irrational appeals to emotions: "Demagoguery can have impact."

Because the stories of misbehavior on the part of authors of "more than one RCT comparing EMDR to CBT" are not his to tell, they constitute hearsay and innuendo. If the contents and the sources cannot be revealed, then the charges cannot be investigated to see how reasonable they are. The only fucntion that is served by making such statements is to cast dispersion on others and make the case on emotional terms: The evidence would be stronger if it weren't for those unethical CBT researchers.

Anyone can make such allegations about anything. Unless the evidence is open for examination, mention of such allegations, even just subtle hints, is pure polemics and does not belong in reasoned debate. Please Ricky, don't do this again.

Replies:

Re:Let's leave innuendo out of the discussion, by Ricky Greenwald, 04/28/03

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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