• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

EMDR treatments.

arthwollipot said:
And chiropractic manipulation is just as effective as physiotherapy. If you can get the benefit without the woo, why wouldn't you?
Click to expand...

If I had to choose between two treatments that I knew to be equally effective, I would definitely not choose based on which one was "woo". I'd choose based on things like cost, convenience (which provider is easier to get to?), and the actual experience of the treatment itself (eg. is one painful and the other not?).

The reason to avoid woo is because it's not effective.

It's probably true that an effective woo treatment is just an effective non-woo treatment with woo elements tacked on. That's a good reason for practitioners of that treatment to reform it and remove the useless stuff while keeping the effective stuff. It could even be a good reason to choose the reformed version. But it's not sufficient reason to disfavor the woo treatment over all other equally effective treatments, which may be different in many dimensions that matter.
 
Roboramma said:
The reason to avoid woo is because it's not effective.
Click to expand...
In the case of EMDR, that is not conclusively demonstrated yet. I accept Steve Novella's suggestion as a clinical neurologist that the claimed mechanism is implausible, but we don't really know for sure the way we do for, say, megadosing Vitamin C.
 
arthwollipot said:
In the case of EMDR, that is not conclusively demonstrated yet. I accept Steve Novella's suggestion as a clinical neurologist that the claimed mechanism is implausible, but we don't really know for sure the way we do for, say, megadosing Vitamin C.
Click to expand...

I don't know whether or not EMDR is effective, so I have no opinion about that.

But Orphia said: "EMDR sessions are just as effective as CBT, which is still effective.", and if that's correct, then I don't think your response in the post of yours I replied to is a valid one. Your response seemed to be based on the premise that it is as effective as CBT.

Of course if it's not effective then you shouldn't use it. But if it's as effective as CBT, then that means it is effective, and it's being "woo" isn't an argument against it.
 
Orphia Nay said:
To be accurate, he doubted whether the eye-movement/tapping part is the bit that makes it efficacious.

"In psychotherapy there are many sources of non-specific effects that would need to be carefully controlled for before the effects of any specific component can be determined. The interaction with the therapist, the time taken to focus on ones problems and symptoms, and the introduction of a novel element into the therapeutic relationship are all recognized factors. In addition, EMDR (not surprisingly) has evolved into a multifaceted treatment approach, that includes many standard elements of therapy. This always reminds me of the commercials who proudly advertise that their products are “part of this nutritious breakfast.” Yes, but are they an important part – or is the breakfast nutritious without it?"

"And in the end these magical elements do not add efficacy. For example, as the review above indicates, EMDR is no more effective than standard cognitive-behavioral therapy."

In other words, EMDR sessions are just as effective as CBT, which is still effective.

And I think in the case of my woo-lite friend, the "magical elements" may have a beneficial placebo effect on top of the CBT's beneficial aspects.
Click to expand...

This is the paper I looked at some time ago, considering whether or not the eye movements were an important component of EMDR:

What is the Role of Eye Movements in Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)? A Review

I haven't had time to follow up on what was published since, but there are more recent reviews.
I recall that one debate was whether the eye movements simply function as a form of distraction, as there is some evidence that distraction during therapy (e.g. finger tapping) may help with desensitization. If so, the question might just be a preference for one form of distraction over another. I haven't had time to follow up with recent research on that either.
 
I found a very recent review and meta-analysis which found no difference between EMDR and other psychological therapies for PTSD, using individual participant data meta-analysis. I don't know a lot about this method of analysis. EMDR did have a slight advantage on some two-stage IPDMA analyses but they felt the one-stage findings were more likely to be true indicators of effect.

It may come down to individual preference.

ETA: There is something called the 'dodo bird effect' in psychotherapy which states that for most conditions, all psychotherapies with a reasonable evidence base are equivalent overall and it is not possible to find reliable evidence favouring one over the other. This is also controversial.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom