Monica Pignotti was a practitioner of TFT and VT. She has just published an insightful, honest revelation of her work with Roger Callahan with regard to Thought Field Therapy. Thought Field Therapy: A Former Insider's Experience

TFT and its direct offshoot Gary Craig's EFT are both fraudulent and bogus derivations based upon Cognitive Bahavioral Therapy. The problem is that these techinques are applied liberally to everything from mental stress to physical ailments. The potential for a patient to seek out these "non-treatments" for legitimate conditions puts them at a severe risk.

Most states regulate psychological practices, however, these TFT / EFT practitioners often use the protection of being an "ordained minister" to conduct their business.

Should you encounter a person embarking on this course, please refer them to the many good mental health resources available in almost all municipalities.

Don't let another person suffer needlessly under this bogus therapy.

Quote
Vigilant
Monica Pignotti was a practitioner of TFT and VT. She has just published an insightful, honest revelation of her work with Roger Callahan with regard to Thought Field Therapy. Thought Field Therapy: A Former Insider's Experience

TFT and its direct offshoot Gary Craig's EFT are both fraudulent and bogus derivations based upon Cognitive Bahavioral Therapy. The problem is that these techinques are applied liberally to everything from mental stress to physical ailments. The potential for a patient to seek out these "non-treatments" for legitimate conditions puts them at a severe risk.

Most states regulate psychological practices, however, these TFT / EFT practitioners often use the protection of being an "ordained minister" to conduct their business.

Should you encounter a person embarking on this course, please refer them to the many good mental health resources available in almost all municipalities.

Don't let another person suffer needlessly under this bogus therapy.

There should be a subsection of the www.culteducation.com research resource devoted to this bogus stuff.

It appears that an incident in which a clinical psychologist, a profession regulated by law, imprudently used TFT, an unproven modality, and was reprimanded for it, led to some important decisions which tightened up regulations for mental health professionals in the state of Arizona, and also led to some newer and more specific recommendations for quality control by the American Psychological Association.

Thought Field Therapy (TFT) is discussed, mostly on pages 255-9 of Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, by Lilienfeld, Lynn and Lohr, Guildford Press, 2003 in Chapter 9 'Novel and Controversial Teratments for Trauma-Related Stress Disorders.' by Jeffrey M Lohr, Wayne Hooke, Richard Gist adn David F. Tolin

Quote

'There is no scientific evidence that extracellular biolelectric currents are pathological mechanisms of emotional disorder, nor ist here evidence that TFT reverses such currents.'

In the Summary of Efficacy Research subsection, the authors reviewed the research done on TFT and summarized the situation:

'It is evident that the scientific research on TFT is minimal in both quantity and quality despite the expansive claims of effectiveness for trauma symptoms made by its promoters (American Psychological Association, 1999, J. Calllahan, 1998; Gallo, 1995). Moreover, this conclusion has been arrived at by other reviewers (Gaudiano & Herbert, 2000, Hooke, 1998). The scientific evidence for other "energy" techniques based loosely on TFT such as emotional freedom technique(Corboy's emphasis) (Craig, 1997) is even weaker.'

'The discrepency between the promotional claims and the scientific evidence for TFT has promped actions to improve the professional accountability of TFT promoters and practioners (see also Chapter 7 of the book).

'The first was the action of a state licensing board (Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners, 1999) that remprimanded a psychologist who used TFT as his principal therapeutic modality. Foremost among the reasons for the Board's action was the inability of the psychologist to substantiate the advertised claims of effectiveness (American Psychological Association, 1999; 1996; see Lilienfeld and Lohr 2000, for a more detailed discussion of the issues involved in the decision.)

'The second was the action of the Continuing Professional Education Committee of the American Psychological Association in rulling that the absence of any compelling scientific support for TFT's efficacy rendered this treatment an inappropriate subject for continuing education . (American Psychological Association, 1999).'

As Vigilent's observation

Quote

Most states regulate psychological practices, however, these TFT / EFT practitioners often use the protection of being an "ordained minister" to conduct their business.

We can only conclude it is because God forgives, but the Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners and other such regulatory agencies do not.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2008 10:36PM by corboy.

Continuing Education Module

'Fringe Psychotherapies: The Public at Risk' by Barry L. Beyerstein

The entire Beyerstein article is great. It is excellent for persons who cannot easily get a copy of Lilienfeld, Lynn and Lohr's book Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology 2003.

[selfhelpfraud.com]

Beyerstein's article is on a website that has additional resources. Name of the site is Americans Against Fraudulent Self Help

[selfhelpfraud.com]

Here are some excerpts from Dr. Beyerstein's article to whet our appetites. Dont stop here. Read the WHOLE thing.

[selfhelpfraud.com]

Quoted Excerpts:


‘And with the growth of the “New Age” movement, the market has also been flooded by a growing cadre of therapists with little formal training but an immense investment in pop-psychology and “post modernist” psychobabble.

"In most jurisdicitions, these entrepreneurs cannot call themselves psychologists or psychiatrists because licensing statutes restrict these titles to professionals with specified credentials and training. They can however, offer their services (where local laws permit) by appropriating unreserved titles** such as counselor, psychotherapist, psychoanalyst, sex therapist, pastoral counselor, Dianetics auditor (one of several pseudonyms for Scientology), New Age guide, relationship advisor, mental therapist, etc.

**(Pop quiz: How many other 'unreserved titles' have we observed in use by persons using powerful methods without proper training, oversight or accountablity? C)


(p3) At the highest levels of the profession, the erosion of the likage between science and clinical practice was further aggravated in recent years when many research psychologists left the American Psychological Association (APA) to form the rival American Psychological Society. The defectors felt that the APA was undervaluing the scientific side of its mandate as it devoted more effort to lobbying and other professional issues primarily of concern to clinicians. Many also felt that the APA had been too timid in disciplining those of its members who engage in scientifically dubious practices. On several occasions, I have witnessed this reluctance to chastise peddlers of outlandish wares myself. My disappointments spring from fruitless attempts to get various psychological associations to rein in their members who charge clients for scientifically discredited services such as subliminal audiotapes, graphology (handwriting analysis), dubious psychological tests, bogus therapy techniques, and various so called ‘rejuvenation’ techniques for recovering supposedly repressed memories.

"I continue to be appalled to see journals of various psychological associations with advertisements for courses carrying official continuing education credits for therapists that promote this kind of pseudoscience.’

"Even if minimally-trained therapists can do some good, there remains the danger that they will divert clients from treatments that would help them more.

"More worrisome is the possibility that their limited knowledge will lead them to apply risky procedures than exacerbate existing conditions or even create serious problems of their own.

"When such malpractice occurs, these uncertified therapists have no professional associations and disciplinary boards to whom dissatisified customers can turn. It is when therapeutic fads emerge from a research vacuum and treatments lack proper outcome evaluations that these safety concerns arise. "

And..the Beyerstein article was published in a special issue of this new and much needed publication:

The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine

Their website is here:

[www.sram.org]

Quote

The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine (SRAM) is the only peer-reviewed journal devoted exclusively to objectively analyzing the claims of "alternative medicine."

The purpose of the Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine is to apply the best tools of science and reason to determine whether hypotheses are valid and treatments are effective. It will reject no claims because it fits, or fails to fit, some paradigm. It will simply seek justified answers to two questions: "Is it true?" and "Does this treatment work?"

The publication of SRAM has been endorsed by the Commission for Scientific Medicine and Mental Health, a panel that includes prominent physicians, scientists, and Nobel prizewinners.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2008 10:46PM by corboy.

Monica Pignotti is now discussing this same situation on her blog, via this excellent article Thought Field Therapy in the Media

[psychjourney_blogs.typepad.com]

Monica wrote:

Quote

"The promotions and claims for TFT and VT on the internet are getting so out of hand that I have decided that it's time to begin a TFT Horror File and Hall of Shame.

Periodically, I will feature websites I have selected as the most egregious examples."

Click the link and read the rest the article, including the comments. In the article, Monica Pignotti referred to the Arizona decision, mentioned earlier in Lilienfeld, Lynn and Lohr.

When one gets to and reads the comments section, I thought it spoke poorly for TFT that the persons who disagreed with Monica behaved with shocking rudeness and in ways similar to the worst trolls we have had on RR.com.

This was very different from the way, while scientists and professional healers behave when disagreeing with one another. Their discussions can get raucous but it is nearly unheard of for matters to descend to the level of trash talk that was directed at Monica. Anyone who behaved that way would probably lose reputation among his or her peers.

In a university setting, a junior faculty member who engaged in such trollish trash talk would probably never gain tenure. If a clinician, a person like that would be looked at askance by colleagues and suffer a drop off in new referrals and would be steadily marginalized as a crank and perhaps even reprimanded for breach of decorum by his or her professional association.

Even when energetic, discussions among professional healers and teachers center upon the quality of evidence, how statistical tests were used and the type of research design. Character is never impugned.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2008 11:53PM by corboy.