Looks like the scientific data are insufficient to dissuade some EMDR supporters of the possibility that EMDR may work by means of mechanisms such as simple exposure. If it works (when it does work) because of exposure alone, then EMDR is not a unique treatment, provides nothing new, and supporters should move on to something else. EMDR disciples should learn to accept the possibility that EMDR is not effective. Calls for "controls" for "minor" dissociative experiences does not seem useful to the further advance of science. Moreover, some EMDR supporters/boosters are quick to cite all the studies with outcomes favorable to EMDR, but criticize unfavorable (negative finding) studies for failing to include "controls" that are equally absent in the studies that report positive outcomes for EMDR. This is not fair. Finally, someone noted that "often" results are "breathtaking" for "some" clients? So what? Spontaneous recovery is "often" breathtaking.
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.