Is Primal Therapy woo?

[Dancing David]

there are vast swathes of most people's childhoods that people can't remember, not because anything particularly bad happened in them, but because those times contained, from the child's perspective, painful feelings.

Evidence, data ,research?

Most people remeber trauma quite well. where did you get your information?

and by painful feelings I just mean depression type feelings.

Controlled children due exhibit anxiety which is usually a good marker of depression in children. But painfull feelings=depression, any evidence, data, research?

The Janov theory would say that most people are burdened by repressed feelings and memories, where as the child that they bring into the world is not; but is subject to the repression process which is going on in the parent-this leads to them being sad, lonely, anxious etc, and those memories and feelings are themselves eventually repressed, and so the process goes on.

Sounds like neofreudion psychotwaddle.

 

[Dancing David]

I can't say that it lloks good for repressed memories-

Instead of repressed memory lets look at research, at least some:

dissociation childhood "sexual trauma"
symptomology
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...nel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
link to alcohol
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...nel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

a look at * PTSD “memory”* on PubMed shows no research implying that PTSD impairs memory without brain injury, in fact many treatments appear to be based upon disrupting memory.

*PTSD “amnesia” om PubMed

physical abuse also implicated
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...nel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum


dispelling confusion about PTSD amnesia
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...nel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum


this one seems to say that traumatic memory is not repressed, normal memories are
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...nel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

dissociation but not repression
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...nel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

 

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Evidence, data ,research?

Most people remeber trauma quite well. where did you get your information?

Controlled children due exhibit anxiety which is usually a good marker of depression in children. But painfull feelings=depression, any evidence, data, research?


Sounds like neofreudion psychotwaddle.

So now you're dissing neofreudian psychotwaddle, eh?

and when I talked about depression in children, I really meant "depression type feeling", which I'm sure most people would agree that anyone can feel, at any age.


And I don't think I used the word "trauma", or did I?!, Although Janov uses the word a lot, but he is just referring to moments in a child's life where the suddenly start to realise that "things ain't gonna change", and at that point their system represses that thought along with all the associated feelings. Well that's what I take him to mean; so it isn't trauma in the usual sense of the word; although he does use the word in reference to typical traumatic scenes too, like violence, or painful stuff surrounding birth, or not being fed, when hungry, as a baby.

Anyway people might well remember traumas, but does that mean there aren't traumas that the can't remember?


previous quote

Most 'therapy' is hookum of the first order. Some have a research basis and are grounded in functional analysis of behaviors. The rest are ooga-booga pixie in the sky type stuff.

Real treatments are :
-CBT: cognitive behavioral
-RET: Ellison's version of CBT
- Dialectic based treatment and Pearson's model of borderline treatment
- Boston model of psychosocial rehabilitation
- relapse prevention/harm reduction and life skills models that are based upon CBT

perhaps you can say how these treatments are valid, and we can judge whether what you say sounds like psychobabble.

 

[DuckTapeFileMan]

what about Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing, is that valid, Dancing David?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_Movement_Desensitization_and_Reprocessing


Just as sort of a by the by, the London Association of Primal Psychotherapists, offer EMDR;

EMDR and Post Traumatic Stress.

Since the 1980's there has been increased interest and understanding of the nature of trauma. All expressive and psychodynamic therapies have at their core the notion that painful memories are stored and not forgotten although they might differ in how these memories might be retrieved. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is the name given to a syndrome that can occur after experiencing or witnessing deeply disturbing or life threatening events. People with PTSD can suffer from many symptoms including flash backs, nightmares, sleep disturbance, mood changes and feelings of depression and alienation. These symptoms, if not dealt will not go away, and will with have a severe impact on a person's ability to function in daily life. Research has shown that one of the most effective ways of dealing with the effects of severe trauma is a technique known as EMDR. (Eye Movement Densentisation and Reprocessing) which was developed by Dr. Francine Shapiro in the 1990's. EMDR merges elements from a variety of therapeutic approaches, including cognitive, psycho-dynamic and primal therapy. Bilateral stimulation is used to access and reprocess painful and disturbing memories. The process has been shown to be extremely effective in removing the symptoms of PTSD and reducing distress. EMDR is well researched and in 2005 was approved by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) as one of only two approved treatments for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. There is also good evidence for EMDR being useful in resolving trauma in general. For this reason, some of our therapists have training in the use of EMDR, which is used when appropriate

http://www.lapp.org/

 

[Andrew4589]

There's no way I'm gonna respond to all those "dissections" because it's just too tedious, but here are some things I want to express.

--Incentivise a psychopath to control their behaviour, into societies idea of "right" behaviour, and you've then killed the psychopath? No way. Mental health has more to do with the 'why' behind behaviour, rather than the behaviour itself.

--On remembering trauma:
I remember a probable trauma when I was nearly 5 years old, extremely well.
[simplified] I came home to my mother, after being away with a relative for about 1 week, and expected her to be pleased to see me atfer my absence. She was not. She only tried to fake interest. I then immediately remembered reflected on my life, and all the crap I had to tolerate (especially at that s*hole called kindergarten), and felt what was like a high-pressure hose filling up my whole body and nervous system. It felt like a total psychological shift in absolutely no ambiguous terms. I even said to myself at the time something like: "things will never be the same i.e. I will never be the same person, having the same life". I honestly felt like my life had been stolen from me; and indeed, in part, it probably has I would say. However, though I remember this (supposed) trauma, I did not feel it. I just went colder in my nature and personality - I was in no agony or pain as such. The qualitive step-up in tension that I felt was probably massive repression kicking in. And this event, to me, completely reeks of what Arthur Janov describes as a "major primal scene" i.e. when a child realises that there is no real hope for real love from their parents. However, my example shows the difference between remembering a trauma in terms of "what happened", and remembering the actual feeling of a trauma. I believe that I have no idea how this trauma felt - I just felt the tension and realisation that things had changed. And also, you have to be careful how you define 'trauma' - an extremely painful event in not necessarily traumatic and repressed (like when you slam your fingers in the car door). And remembering some parts of some trauma's doesn't mean you remember all of them. I certainly don't remember being circumcised without anesthetic, and that's a trauma so extreme that some babies have actually died from the pain of it.

I know this doesn't prove anything to anyone, I am only using it as an example to clarify what it does or can mean to remember trauma.

 

[Dancing David]

So now you're dissing neofreudian psychotwaddle, eh?

and when I talked about depression in children, I really meant "depression type feeling", which I'm sure most people would agree that anyone can feel, at any age.


And I don't think I used the word "trauma", or did I?!, Although Janov uses the word a lot, but he is just referring to moments in a child's life where the suddenly start to realise that "things ain't gonna change", and at that point their system represses that thought along with all the associated feelings. Well that's what I take him to mean; so it isn't trauma in the usual sense of the word; although he does use the word in reference to typical traumatic scenes too, like violence, or painful stuff surrounding birth, or not being fed, when hungry, as a baby.

Um, you are making the claim about repression and you still offer no evidence, data or research? Thre claim is your the burden of proof is on you.

Anyway people might well remember traumas, but does that mean there aren't traumas that the can't remember?

Uh huh, your claim , your burden.

previous quote

perhaps you can say how these treatments are valid, and we can judge whether what you say sounds like psychobabble.

Psychobabble is all this high level abstracted poop that sounds pretty but had no data to support it's efficacy.


http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=1d02ac75a38a2f61550e80b3ec4aa9aa

http://pediatrics.jwatch.org/cgi/content/full/2004/913/4

http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/group/sticelab/reprints/Kaufmanetal05.pdf


http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=1d02ac75a38a2f61550e80b3ec4aa9aa

 

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Um, you are making the claim about repression and you still offer no evidence, data or research? Thre claim is your the burden of proof is on you.

I'd be interested to know whether you have read any books by Janov, or other primal therapy advocates.



And could you, in your own words, defend the therapeutic processes you said actually worked, rather than post links?

 

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Psychobabble is all this high level abstracted poop that sounds pretty but had no data to support it's efficacy.

so, your claim is that there can be enough data to support its efficacy?

For a psychotherapy, can you prove that? where is your data that proves this claim?

Or is this claim self evident?

 

[Dancing David]

I'd be interested to know whether you have read any books by Janov, or other primal therapy advocates.

I did in the late seventies or early eighties.

Where is the data?

And could you, in your own words, defend the therapeutic processes you said actually worked, rather than post links?

Excuse me, are you asking for anecdotal evidernce, that might be indicative of a single episode but without verification of why a change actualy occured.

Do you have a problem with the scientific method?

 

[Dancing David]

so, your claim is that there can be enough data to support its efficacy?

For a psychotherapy, can you prove that? where is your data that proves this claim?

Or is this claim self evident?

If someone eants to make a claim that psychotherapy, in the freudian sense, is effective, i would like to see the data. All the therapies I listed have at least some evidence that they are effective.

I remeber that there are people who do think that various forms of therapy are effective without controlled studies.

I regret using the etrminology I used as it was provocative.

I am saying that I have not seen data on the effectiveness on threatments outside the ones I listed, which do have some controlled data to support the effect that they are alleged to have.

I have seen no data that suggest that Freud, Jung, Alder, Perls and others ( I do like Perls/gestalt and Jung a lot to read) have any effect that can be measured.

So if a claim is made that they are effective treatments, in that pyschotherapeutic mode, I have not seen data from controlled studies that would indicate that it has an effect.

Otherwise we can not attribute the alleged effect to the therapy.

I again apologize for my reffering to certain traditions in therapy as psychotwaddle, I will try to control the use of invective. I have yet to see data that would indicate an effect or benefit to those treatments. While CBT and the like have demonstrated an effect in controlled research.

 

[Dancing David]

On EMDR, a breif history, I was intrigues when i first heard about it in the Bosnian war populayions and felt there are some reasons that it might work. It is sort of popular in mental health and one agecy I worked for decided to use it, with positive therapist reactions. However as with many things I learned from the JREF that there was no statistical evidence to support it's use.

However I reviewed the PubMed again and unforntunately the picture while improving is still mixed. There do seem to be a lot of people researching it and a clinician belief in it's efficacy. As more data the results will resolve, at this time the samples are still small and usually uncontrolled. Some reports are case studies and most have small samples sizes. I still feel that it looks as though it may be found to be effective. there is some research into what biological basis there may be as well.

So I have to say, that it is unsure, more sure than it was three years agao, but still tentative.

 

[Cuddles]

Stop asking for evidence!!!!!!

Sums up this whole thread really. Some people just don't care about reality and want to believe without ever having anyone point out that their beliefs are nonsense. That's all very well and you are free to do so if you wish, just don't be so stupid as to come to a skeptics' forum and expect that to still work.

 

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Sums up this whole thread really. Some people just don't care about reality and want to believe without ever having anyone point out that their beliefs are nonsense. That's all very well and you are free to do so if you wish, just don't be so stupid as to come to a skeptics' forum and expect that to still work.

so, you are also claiming that there can be enough evidence to support a psychotherapy theory, and practice?

where is your evidence, or data?

has enough evidence and data ever been collected on any psychotherapy to prove that it works?

 

[Dancing David]

so, you are also claiming that there can be enough evidence to support a psychotherapy theory, and practice?

where is your evidence, or data?

has enough evidence and data ever been collected on any psychotherapy to prove that it works?

Your question is wonderful, psychotherapy as a neo-Freudian practice has no demonstrated ability to reduce symptoms reported by clients unless you want to look at years and years of treatment.

However observation of symptoms and tracking of emotional states by people is a valid construct for the measurement of success. Validdity of a single anecdote gains pwoer in trials with large samples.

In terms of evidence, functional analysis of symptoms and behavior is all there is.

Now if you are saying that is not possible, then I will ask you to explain the basis of such an argument. measurement in a scientific fashion does not require some magic objective stance.

 

[Dancing David]

Now the Onion's point and any agreement with it is ingnorance and requires some strange dualist perspective where humans can not make valid statement about the precense of sensations, thoughts, emotions and perceptions.

You can report u[pon a perceived emotional state, clarifications can be made, judgements about the validity of the report can be made. Functional behaviors can be measured.

Any statements that such things can't be measured , are ignorant. In that they ignore the facts about reality.

A priori philosphical objects are foolish and silly. People may not like behavioral psychology but it is real, functional behaviors can bge measured, self reports can be taken.

 

[Dancing David]

so, you are also claiming that there can be enough evidence to support a psychotherapy theory, and practice?

where is your evidence, or data?

has enough evidence and data ever been collected on any psychotherapy to prove that it works?

Why do you exclude self report as a track of evidence? Validity of reports in an issue, but this seems to be a foolish claim.

You may prefer unsubstantiated forms of treatment, the term psychotherapy is useless. Pleaser call the different methods by their name and school of thought. Your statement is like the phrase "All bugs are yucky." You need to specify which category of things mislabeled as 'psychotherapy' you are reffering to.

CBT and others do have the data to back the claims that they can be effective.

Seriously you do know how much we rely on perceptual reports as very valid evidence of internal states? Validity is an issue but one that can be dealt with.

Despite what some silly people say tracking of effectiveness can even predict which symptom clusters will respond to CBT and which won't respond as well.

 

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Now if you are saying that is not possible, then I will ask you to explain the basis of such an argument. measurement in a scientific fashion does not require some magic objective stance.

well, how is one to trust self reporting?

Someone who is on LSD might report seeing giant butterflies doing ballet in the sky; can you say for sure that those butterflies are there or not?

And anyway, people like me(I presume), or even just me, ARE going by self reporting, such as that which is recorded as case histories in books by Janov.

It's like a detective interviewing a suspect; they may get a gut feeling for whether they are telling the truth or not, or even if they are deluded and just think they are telling the truth.

Hey, perhaps you could do a simple polygraph test on people from various treatments and see how they react when they talk about how they responded to therapy.

 

[idealist]

The idea that Primal Therapy is anything more than BS is a real scream.

Psychophysiological changes in abreactive therapy: I. Primal therapy.
By Karle, Werner; Corriere, Richard; Hart, Joseph
Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice. 1973 Sum Vol 10(2) 117-122

Abstract
Discusses abreactive-cathartic therapies first as originally conceived by Freud and J. Breuer and then as manifested in current approaches. It is hypothesized that abreaction-catharsis may be the physiologically curative component of psychotherapy. 3 groups of Ss (an active control group of 10, an experimental group of 29, and an inactive control group of 10) either began primal therapy or participated in exercise programs. Blood pressures, pulse, rectal temperatures, and EEGs were measured before and after therapy. Temperature, pulse, and EEG measures decreased in the experimental group, suggesting that relaxation was a concomitant of primal therapy. It is concluded that all abreactive therapies would probably demonstrate such changes and that abreaction alone is not the only component of therapeutic change. (26 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=1974-25834-001

In other words, it may be possible that the mechanism of change in primal therapy is physiological relaxation. However, I have not seen comparative treatment studies.

As I cognitive-behavioral psychologist I am highly skeptical of the efficacy of this treatment modality. Scanning their section on the website for treatment providers, I see this:

Senior Therapists Portraying Various Kinds of Ailment and Neurosis to Give Students Experience with a Variety of Problems, From Suicidal Impulses, to Acting Out in the Family Situation.

They do not appear to provide peer reviewed and replicated studies indicating the treatment's effectiveness. Big red flag for me, especially when dealing with suicidal thoughts and behaviors.

Instead of working from symptoms to possible causes, we work from causes to symptoms. The focus is always deep. From this approach we have developed a more profound understanding of who we are and what drives us, our basic, hidden, unconscious motivations.

I notice that he mentions working from causes to symptoms. Yet, I see absolutely ZERO information on their training program on the assessment of symptom type and severity:

The Use of Videotapes to Help in Diagnosis and Therapy.

They do, however, mention diagnosis. I can only assume this means symptoms. Videotapes are an insufficient and inadequate form of training for symptom evaluation. Where are the bonafide psychological assessment measures?

Also, their "Warning" page:

We have rarely seen the therapy practiced correctly by others outside of the Center...

This is a troublesome statement. It implies that the Center is the only place in the world where the therapy can be practiced correctly. Such a statement would make it nearly impossible to engage in replication and efficacy research.

..and spend a great deal of time treating patients from these other so-called "primal" clinics. We have seen the damage that can result when therapy is done incorrectly. If you are thinking of having therapy with someone, we will verify any claims they make regarding training with us and address any concerns you may have.

Damage when therapy is done incorrectly? Another red flag. Legitimate psychological treatments are performed under stringent ethical requirements which require that they do not significantly increase the patient's symptoms. In the event that a psychological treatment may significantly increase a patient's symptom severity, the patient must be informed of such a possibility before therapy is started, which is part of the informed consent process at the outset of therapy. Sadly I do not see any data about informed consent in their descriptions.

The statement in bold implies a potential violation of student confidentiality. Additionally, if a patient is receiving treatment from a provider and feels that their treatment provider is not engaging in ethical practice, the provider and any referring institution should refer them to the state board of psychology to file a formal malpractice complaint. It is inappropriate and potentially unethical for an academic/training institution to address any concerns of a claimant.

However, a review of Janov's license to practice demonstrates that it is valid and there is no information available about citations or disciplinary actions.

 

[Dancing David]

well, how is one to trust self reporting?

maybe you should try to do more than state the obvious.

Someone who is on LSD might report seeing giant butterflies doing ballet in the sky; can you say for sure that those butterflies are there or not?

That has an answer as well, perceptions can be based upon internal stimuli, IE auditory hallucinations. So yes they may be perceiving butterflies where there are none.

Do you think that this isn't obvious again?

What does that have to do with people reporting symptoms?

validity of reports has to be considered.

And anyway, people like me(I presume), or even just me, ARE going by self reporting, such as that which is recorded as case histories in books by Janov.

Ah, yes. i undersatnd that, however in case studies, the samples are rather limited. they are not usually controlled or matched or assigned to random treatment groups.

So assumptions about what caused the efficacy of the treatment may or may not be warranted.

There are manty reasons that in small samples you may get an effect, it might or might be related to the treatment. It might be based upon sample bias, other changes, other parts of the protocol.

So if there were samples of say hundreds of people , and they were assigned to different groups and then an effect is demonstrated. that is evidence.

However many confounding factors exist.

I believe that there ar people who feel they have benefited. However those who do not benefit may self select out of treatment.

That is why in the EMDR case I sated that it is looking better, but in no way definitive.

So in Janow's study, how many subjects, what assignment to random groups and control protocols were involved?

It's like a detective interviewing a suspect; they may get a gut feeling for whether they are telling the truth or not, or even if they are deluded and just think they are telling the truth.

More obvious, there are self coherent signs that a person has beliefs that are not shared by others.

But a gut feeling has to be followed tghrough on and data gathered to explain that feeling.

Take a mental health assesment in the ER, there are many who will seek out medications, they usually give other tells than a gut feeling, such as they can't describe their symptoms. They don't want to set up an appointment for an intake prior to seeing a doctor. They ask for specific medications that have a high sedating or addictive profile. Again there are ways to ask questions and see what the pattern looks like.

delusional people will generally show a number of patterns indicating a thought disorder.

Hey, perhaps you could do a simple polygraph test on people from various treatments and see how they react when they talk about how they responded to therapy.

Considering the lack of any testing which shows the accuracy of polygraph testing, I don't think so.

just because a person has a belief that prayer caused them to win the lotto does not make it so. Random chance and confounding factors should be conseidered and rulled out.

 

[DuckTapeFileMan]

I notice that he mentions working from causes to symptoms. Yet, I see absolutely ZERO information on their training program on the assessment of symptom type and severity:

From the point of view of primal therapy, a lot of the symptoms would be dynamic. So at one point a need to go for a pee, at another feeling hot, or cold, tense, pain in throat.
I think that the symptoms could be anything, although a patient might have a long history of a particular symptom ,like a back pain, or head aches.

As they are not going to treat the symptom, there seems no need to determine "type"; for the primal therapy, the pain/feeling/memories associated with the symptom, is all the matters, and is the way back to the original feelings and trauma.

All a therapist has to do is be able to differentiate between a physiology, and a psychological problem, to detect symptoms; and I suppose the physiological diagnosis would have to involve a MD, which I'm sure they would refer someone to, if they suspected a physical problem.