Mel
You hit the nail on the head!
I can't see that the situation is going to change much either, I do enjoy
your postings especially as they get me thinking about the way we operate.
You'd better be careful you may be considered as the modern day Plato!
Alison

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Barrett Dorko [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
	Sent:	Monday, 3 July 2000 0:02
	To:	[log in to unmask]
	Subject:	Re: THERAPEUTIC OCCULTISM (long)

	Mel,

	As always, I appreciate your thoughtful post and agree that the
shift in 
	our profession is an indication of something much deeper than our 
	educational system.

	Two things: Posts like this rarely generate any in defense from the 
	community mentioned, and I'd like to see some of that. And, a
similar essay 
	about the effects of postmodernism and its manifestation is now at
the top 
	of my web site for those of you who didn't see it posted on PTHER.
It's 
	entitled "What Went Wrong."

	Barrett L. Dorko, P.T.
	<http://barrettdorko.com>



	At 05:17 AM 7/2/00 -0400, you wrote:
	>POSTMODERNISM & THERAPEUTIC OCCULTISM
	>
	>The popularity of alternative therapy now probably has reached a
level
	>rivalling that of medieval or primitive times.  While this
phenomenon has a
	>great deal to do with the gullibility of humans and the successful
invocation
	>of the placebo effect, the medical and pharmacological professions
also have
	>a great deal to do with its modern  rise to eminence.  The latter,
in setting
	>themselves up as the demigods on all therapeutic matters, created
great
	>expectations among the public, who naturally expected consistent
healing
	>miracles to emerge from their kingdoms of health and happiness.
	>
	>PROBLEMS IN THE MEDICAL WORLD
	>
	>Instead, the spectacular general advances in medical science,
surgery and
	>technology have been matched almost every step of the way by an
increased
	>awareness that the world of  medicine is rife with iatrogenic
illness and
	>death; lack of understanding of some of the simplest of disorders,
vast
	>commercial exploitation of the sick by doctors, drug companies and
insurance
	>companies; unwillingness of many medical professionals to admit
their
	>inadequacies; proliferations on endlessly contradictory theories of
major
	>diseases (such as heart disease and cancer); the carrying out of
many
	>unnecessary procedures (such as Caesarian sections and
appendectomies) and
	>the dubious management of mental disorders.
	>
	>While one can appreciate that every discipline is replete with
imperfections
	>and incompleteness, the medical profession, in setting itself up as
a virtual
	>messiah of healing has created a situation in which the public
eventually had
	>to question the messiahs.  The medical profession generally has
closed ranks
	>on itself and its pharmacological partners instead of encouraging a
	>'glasnost' or openness that would have welcomed the involvement of
concerned
	>members of the public.  Often the twin-pronged fork of litigation
has been
	>responsible for this closed-door management of medicine and
pharmacology, so,
	>just as companies like General Dynamics have been loath to admit
errors in
	>their aerospace products, the medical professionals have also been
corralled
	>into a similar box.
	>
	>Consequently, public suspicion and dissatisfaction has led to
fairly
	>widespread, but often unfair, distrust of the medical profession,
which has
	>done little to address the sociopolitical, psychological and
anthropological
	>issues which are leading to an increased reliance on alternative
therapies.
	>The fact that increasing numbers of the medical professions
themselves are
	>also turning to alternative therapies reveal that the medical
edifice itself
	>is aware of a  need for repair.
	>
	>PROBLEMS IN THE EDUCATIONAL WORLD
	>
	>Part of the blame also needs to be laid on our educational systems
which
	>place inadequate emphasis on science education, the scientific
method,
	>linguistic analysis and critical thinking, in general.  This is
revealed in
	>the USA by studies which show that science, mathematics and
language
	>standards have dropped dramatically over the past few decades.
Scientists
	>all too often are regarded like specially gifted or genetically
endowed
	>creatures who really are something different from the average
person.
	>Science thus tends to become the calling of some sort of
earth-based alien
	>elite, certainly not something for everyone.
	>
	>As a result, advertising, marketing and pseudoscience rarely are
questioned,
	>and personal testimonials, misinterpreted reports based on science
releases
	>by Reuter, and TV infomercial claims come to be accepted as
accurate.
	>Methods developed by public figureheads or therapeutic experts come
to be
	>proliferated more because of the hero status of their creators than
their
	>underlying science (e.g. Maitland, McKenzie, McConnell, Bobath).
	>
	>PROBLEMS IN ALTERNATIVE THERAPY
	>
	>Many alternative therapists tend to categorise most allopathic
medicine or at
	>best tolerate it for major surgical reasons, while referring to
their own
	>narrow world as "holistic".  Paradoxically, this attitude reveals
that their
	>methods are partialistic and not holistic. All too often, diseases
and
	>injuries are opportunistic and need opportunistic or ad hoc
approaches from
	>many disciplines for their successful resolution, not just some
magic
	>antibiotic bullet, acupuncture technique or homeopathic potion. The
term
	>"alternative" is not a synonym for "holistic" or "complementary"
therapy, and
	>flags should always be raised when the term "holistic" is bandied
about by
	>medically untrained "holists".  Holism implies the complementarity
and
	>adhocracy of the full spectrum of physical and mental, allopathic
and
	>traditional, therapeutic approaches which have emerged from valid
empirical,
	>theoretical or laboratory research and clinical experience.
	>
	>In understanding the value of any therapy, the possibility of the
decisive
	>role of the placebo effect must never be ruled out, so that we can
always
	>remain aware that the actual healing process may have little to do
with our
	>presumed models.  This can be exceptionally difficult for doctors,
	>herbalists, chiropractors, physios, psychiatrists, chemists,
religious
	>healers and others to accept, because a great deal of the success
in each
	>case still remains scientifically unexplained and healing validity
may often
	>rely more on the faith of the practitioner than any known science.
	>
	>It is especially important not to regard placebos as something akin
to hoaxes
	>or deceipts - if and when they work they should teach us more about
the more
	>holistic nature of our therapies.  If something can elicit a
powerful placebo
	>effect to facilitate a healing, be it therapeutic touch, a
sugar-coated pill,
	>a spinal mobilisation or bogus surgery, then, by all means use it,
but don't
	>attribute it to proven science prematurely or overcharge the
trusting public!
	>
	>DUBIOUS DEFINITIONS
	>
	>The world of "alternative" therapy is replete with its unique
collection of
	>definitions and neologisms to describe the host of ostensibly
innovative,
	>ancient or 'secret' healing techniques and mysteries.  Among the
most misused
	>of all terms is the concept of "energy" in its many therapeutic
forms, such
	>as  "energy fields", "energy balance", "bioenergetics", "healing
energy",
	>"life energy" and so forth. Its original definition in physics is
all but
	>forgotten, even though most folk have some sort of vague
recollection that
	>energy is related to matter by Einstein's famous equation, energy E
= mass
	>times the velocity of light squared (mc^2).
	>
	>Some alternative healers somehow think that energy in the mind and
	>materialisations of matter follow this same equation to
substantiate why
	>gurus like Sai Baba allegedly can create matter out of thin air and
why
	>cancerous growths may appear from disruptions of  "energy fields"
in the
	>human aura.  They seem blissfully aware that the apparent
interchangeability
	>of energy and matter according to the Einstein equation refers to
atomic
	>fission and fusion situations and not ordinary bodily or mental
processes.
	>(We could also comment at length on the huge misuse of "fields" and
"energy
	>fields"  by therapists, some of whom believe that they are somehow
sensing
	>and  orchestrating changes in the body's "energy fields", even
though the
	>stray electromagnetic fields bathing their premises undoubtedly are
of far
	>greater intensity).
	>
	>Try telling this to Deepak Chopra and the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi of
TM fame,
	>who explain all human mysteries on the basis of conjectural quantum
energy
	>effects acting at all levels of human consciousness.  The
best-selling Chopra
	>self help books offer a fascinating mishmash of the same old
inspirational
	>and philosophical aphorisms of the East blended with his medical
training and
	>some impressive terminological borrowings from popular physics
books (like
	>the "Tao of Physics" and "The Dancing Wu-Li Masters").  The result?
- huge
	>hordes of admiring educated, though uncritical,  Western followers
who do not
	>seem to realise that not a single method or idea that he has
extolled has a
	>superior track record to any other allopathic or complementary
healing or
	>self management technique.  No wonder he is smiling his way to fame
and
	>fortune!
	>
	>And he is by no means unique - he has simply exploited the truth
that it is
	>easy to fool most of the people most of the time - especially if
many of the
	>people are dissatisfied with the status quo.  Therein lies the
alpha and the
	>omega of controlling the minds and money of the masses - understand
how they
	>think, how little they really think and then apply some very much
standard
	>methods of persuasion and mass appeal.
	>
	>SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES
	>
	>The following extracts from an interesting article in the Skeptical
Inquirer
	>(July/August 2000: 29-36) are most relevant to this issue of the
	>"postmodernistic" rise of therapeutic occultism.
	>
	>BA Gaudiano & JD Herbert   'Can We Really Tap Our Problems Away?  A
Critical
	>Analysis of Thought Field Therapy'
	>
	><< Abstract:   Thought Field Therapy is marketed as an
extraordinarily fast
	>and effective body-tapping treatment for a number of psychological
problems.
	>However, it lacks even basic empirical support and exhibits many of
the
	>trappings of a pseudoscience.
	>
	>It is nothing new to find enterprising entrepreneurs seeking to
profit from
	>their novel inventions, which are often claimed to produce
miraculous results
	>for their users. The field of mental health is no exception. In
fact, there
	>has recently been a surge of putatively revolutionary treatments
for various
	>psychological problems that claim to be far superior to standard
treatments
	>in both effectiveness and efficiency. Known as "Power" or "energy"
therapies
	>(Gist, Woodall, and Magenheimer 1999; Herbert et al. in press;
Swenson 1999),
	>these treatments are gaining widespread acceptance among mental
health
	>practitioners, despite their frankly bizarre theories and
techniques,
	>extraordinary claims, and absence of scientific support.
	>
	>One of the most popular of these power therapies, known as Eye
Movement
	>Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), involves a therapist
waving his or
	>her fingers in front of the patient's eyes while the client
imagines various
	>disturbing scenes that are thought to be related to the patient's
problems.
	>In fact, EMDR, a 'power therapy' that alludes to neural networks
instead of
	>energy fields for its theoretical basis, has been described as a
prototypical
	>case of pseudoscience within mental health (Herbert et al. in
press; Lohr,
	>Montgomery, Lilienfeld & Tolin 1999; Lilienfeld 1996).
	>
	>There is another treatment approach on the rise that threatens to
overtake
	>EMDR as the premiere power therapy for the 21st century: Thought
Field
	>Therapy (TFT; Callahan 1985). Roger Callahan, TFT's inventor,
claims that he
	>can train therapists to be over 97% effective using his
Orevolutionary'
	>procedures in treating a variety of common psychological problems
including
	>anxiety and depression. Since the history of psychotherapy is
replete with
	>treatments that failed to live up to their initial hype, it seems
prudent to
	>take a closer look at TFT.
	>
	>Origins and Methods
	>
	>Callahan (1997) states that he accidentally discovered TFT while
treating a
	>client named Mary, who had a severe fear of water. Inspired by an
acupuncture
	>class he was taking at the time, Callahan instructed Mary to firmly
tap the
	>area under her eye with her fingers, leading to a miraculous and
immediate
	>resolution of Mary's phobia. Callahan subsequently developed the
	>comprehensive set of techniques and theory that is now known as
TFT. The
	>therapy is based on the idea that invisible energy fields called
"thought
	>fields" exist within the body (Callahan and Callahan 1997).
Environmental
	>traumas and inherited predispositions are theorized to cause
blockages, or
	>what Callahan terms "perturbations" in the flow of energy in these
thought
	>fields.  Callahan theorizes that the commonly observed
neurochemical,
	>behavioral, and cognitive indicators of disorders such as
depression are the
	>result of these perturbations. In other words, the root cause of
all
	>psychological problems are blockages in energy fields.
	>
	>In order to correct these perturbations, clients are directed by
the TFT
	>therapist to tap on the body's "energy meridians" in specific
sequences,
	>called "algorithms," which vary based on the particular problem
being treated
	>(Callahan & Callahan 1997). . . . . The tapping is theorized to add
energy to
	>the system, which then re-balances the overall energy flow, thereby
	>eliminating the distress at the source. . . .
	>
	>TFT also borrows techniques from a procedure known as 'Applied
Kinesiology'
	>that is used to test muscles for "weaknesses" caused by certain
food or
	>chemical pathogens (Sampson & Beyerstein 1996).
	>
	>Applied Kinesiology is a scientifically discredited procedure. For
example,
	>Kenny, Clemens & Forsythe (1988) found that those using the
techniques did no
	>better than chance in determining nutritional status using muscle
testing.
	>Finally, TFT even borrows some of its concepts from quantum
physics. For
	>instance, the idea of active information, in which small amounts of
energy
	>can affect large systems, is used to support the existence of
perturbations
	>(Bohm & Hiley 1993). There are obvious problems with the
theoretical basis
	>for TFT, not the least of which is the complete lack of scientific
evidence
	>for the existence of "thought fields."
	>
	>TFT, as with other new "energy' therapies, is based on
misconceptions or
	>outright distortions of the concept of energy as it is used by
scientists
	>(Saravi 1999). In physics, energy is defined simply as the capacity
to do
	>work, and energy exchanges are observable and measurable. Energy
therapists,
	>in contrast, use the term to describe a kind of universal life
force that
	>influences health, but they provide no direct data to document the
presence
	>of such a force. Saravi concludes that "New Agers' and
psychobabblers'
	>'energy has only a remote relationship with its physical,
scientific
	>counterpart. For them, it is just a word conveniently invoked to
explain
	>phenomena whose very existence is far from certain" (47) . . . . .
.
	>
	>Despite these miraculous assertions, no controlled studies have
been
	>published in peer-reviewed scientific journals to provide evidence
for TFT's
	>claims. Instead, testimonials and uncontrolled case studies are
offered to
	>support these astonishing declarations of success (Callahan 1995).
The vast
	>majority of these claims are made via Internet postings (Lohr,
Montgomery, et
	>al. 1999). Such anecdotes, however, do not constitute probative
data on the
	>question of TFT's efficacy. Callahan often claims that his public
	>demonstrations of TFT on television shows such as The Leeza Gibbons
Show (aire
	>d October 12, 1996) provide dramatic proof of success, thereby
circumventing
	>the need for empirical research. . . . . .
	>
	>Serious psychotherapy innovators go to great lengths to conduct
studies to
	>demonstrate that the hypothesized active ingredients of their
procedures
	>outperform these so-called "nonspecific" effects. No such effort
has been
	>made by the promoters of TFT.   Callahan, however, dismisses the
possibility
	>that TFT could be explained by such mechanisms. He asserts that
"clinical
	>evidence" has ruled out the possibility of nonspecific or placebo
effects
	>accounting for TFT's results, but fails to support this claim
(Callahan and
	>Callahan 1997). He frequently states that placebo effects cannot be
operative
	>in TFT because some clients express skepticism that the tapping
will work
	>(Hooke 1998a). This argument demonstrates a misunderstanding of the
placebo
	>concept, which does not necessarily require the individual to fully
believe
	>in the practitioner's explanation for why a procedure works
(Bootzin 1985;
	>Dodes 1997). . . . . . .
	>
	>Since the emergence of TFT, several therapists have recently
developed
	>offshoot therapies based on treating the body's energy fields. The
most
	>successful of these TFT derivatives was developed by Gary Craig.
Craig
	>(1997), who has a degree in engineering and formerly studied under
Callahan,
	>created what he calls Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT). EFT is
very similar
	>to TFT, except that it employs one simplified and ubiquitous
tapping
	>procedure instead of applying different algorithms to treat
different
	>problems. . . . .
	>
	>The objective of a pseudoscience is often persuasion and promotion,
in lieu
	>of responsible investigation of claims (Bunge 1967). Web sites
advertise
	>courses and multilevel training in TFT techniques for thousands of
dollars.
	>The highest level of training in TFT is called Voice Technology
(VT), which
	>supposedly allows the therapist to diagnosis perturbations and
treat clients
	>entirely over the telephone by analyzing their voices. The
effectiveness of
	>VT is said to approach 100 percent (Callahan 1998). Callahan sells
this
	>technique for $ 100,000, and trainees must sign nondisclosure
contracts that
	>forbid them from discussing or revealing any aspects of the
technique. . . .
	>
	>  . . . . .  thousands of therapists from various professional
disciplines
	>continue to pay for TFT training courses. Much of TFT's marketing
success can
	>be attributed to the prevalence of pro-TFT Web sites that promote
strong
	>claims of its effectiveness. TFT therapists, some of whom have no
traditional
	>training in psychology or psychotherapy, appear to be satisfied
with TFT's
	>vivid anecdotal stories of success, and are not aware of or not
bothered by
	>the overwhelming lack of empirical support for the procedure.
Englebretsen
	>(1995), among others, points to the alarming rise of postmodernist
attitudes
	>currently permeating the mental health field, exemplified by the
willingness
	>of some clinicians to value compelling anecdotal stories over
controlled
	>empirical data. This postmodernist mindset promotes the notion that
all truth
	>is relative and contextual; science is only one of many modes of
thinking,
	>each of which is equally valid. Such attitudes render the mental
health field
	>fertile breeding ground for pseudoscientific therapies such as TFT
and its
	>derivatives. Healthy skepticism competes head-to-head with
extraordinary
	>claims and, as is often the case, many mental health clinicians
choose to
	>ignore the facts in favor of miraculous possibilities. >>
	>
	>The following website of the Skeptical Inquirer is well worth
referring to:
	>http://www.csicop.org/si/
	>The following web page also provides links to many sites (right at
the end of
	>this page) that can be invaluable in the realm of the scientific
method and
	>critical thinking:
http://24.16.71.95/SPORTSCI/JANUARY/archives2.html
	>
	>Mel Siff
	>
	>Dr Mel C Siff
	>Denver, USA
	>[log in to unmask]
	>


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%