vladimir commented on 'Bad science: A critique of research claiming all therapies work equivalently'

2009-09-04T09:57:50Z

Hi Mike!

What a post!

Your emotions are still vibrating through the lines. And that provoked me to express my point of view.

At the very beginning I also have to say that I, like you, do not know these individuals, nor do I question their intentions or intelligence. Well, the study is obviously hardly meeting the criteria for a perfect study but we are not here to judge. What matters to us are the facts. And I think we should better focus on making the most out of facts in this study. So I would like to add two things which I feel are commentworthy:

1 - The fact that only 1/3 of the clients completed successfully all of the treatment. So, we have to face the reality - therapy is not for everyone. Yes, it could be of help but that is not all. One needs to have the ability to make it through the therapy process. And of course the kind of therapy has nothing to do with this ability of the client. Remember Freud's words: "Not everyone can be or must be cured." There is a lot to think about here.

2 - It is not the therapy but the personality of the therapist what really matters. If the therapist has not reached his balance and self-actualization as a person what kind of therapy he is practicing is out of the question. That is why a given therapy is not the most well supported or only well supported treatment option for a certain disorder. We do not treat disorders, we treat humans. After one becomes a "human being" he could be able to treat whatever disorder comes with whatever therapy he likes or has.

Finally, I would like to thank you for this post and for your energy to present so interesting studies regularly. I am happy I found your blog.

Best,
Vladimir

drmikemiller commented on 'Bad science: A critique of research claiming all therapies work equivalently'

2009-09-03T22:27:18Z

Thank you for your careful reading, Michael. Your critique is entirely accurate. But..... There MAY be some utility in looking at what happens in the real world. Most people who seek our services don't fall neatly in one box. If someone has Axis II pathology going on while they have panic attacks, they wouldn't qualify for Barlow's study (or whomever). Yet, that is the person who comes in the office daily.

I agree that the findings would have been more powerful if they had listed dx, GAF, prior therapy, meds, etc. so the data could have looked a bit more in depth than what was reported.

Lastly, I don't know anyone who provides routine manualized treatment. Nor am I aware if research shows that a strict adherence to session 1, 2, 3... fares better than using those same techniques utilized in a fashion that makes the best sense to the clinician. There may well be those studies - its been 25 years since I've been on campus.

Thanks for your critiques. I look forward to more.

Mike Miller, PhD
http://drmikemiller.com

Comments on Bad science: A critique of research claiming all therapies work equivalently

vladimir commented on 'Bad science: A critique of research claiming all therapies work equivalently'

drmikemiller commented on 'Bad science: A critique of research claiming all therapies work equivalently'