Re:Here's the point

Hmm. I thought I just went through your post and responded point by point?

If you want to follow Cahill 4/24 now, he said in part, "Similarly, if someone makes the claim that EMDR doesn't work, they should make it clear that they either are coming from the strong position, or else recognize that they have the buden of showing why such studies as those by Rothbaum, S. Wilson, Powers et al. are invalid."

You did neither of these. Therefore, naturally I responded as if you meant what you said.

Also re Cahill 4/24, I don't happen to agree that we must be able to prove some unique active ingredient before being able to determine that there is a difference between treatments. This is a fallacy. Again, McNally and I discussed this in a published exchange. He was lauding Ben Franklin's scientific method in debunking Mesmer because there was no magnetism in the water. I pointed out that the baby (hypnosis) was thrown out with the magnetic water (gee! wish I'd said it that way then!) and thus the development of hypnosis was delayed.

We have plenty of evidence already that something unique is happening in EMDR, and that there are some different mechanisms in play. Whether it turns out that EMDR is better, worse, or equal, we should still be learning what makes each work.

Replies:

Something unique happening in EMDR?, by Cahill, 05/01/03 Re:Something unique , by Fred H., 05/09/03

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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