• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

American Psychological Assoc. ME/CFS feature article 10 2014

adreno

PR activist
Messages
4,841
Actually I do not think CBT is standardized, though you can create standardized treatment manuals for a given application, like the PACE trial. CBT is a very broad therapy.
Perhaps you are right. But it is a structured and manualized form of therapy, with clearly defined goals and techniques. Compared to psychodynamic therapy for example, it is fairly standardized.
 

chipmunk1

Senior Member
Messages
765
Perhaps you are right. But it is a structured and manualized form of therapy, with clearly defined goals and techniques. Compared to psychodynamic therapy for example, it is fairly standardized.

I don't think it can be completely standardized. A lot of the CBT therapy is about identifying distorted thinking patterns. The therapist decides what is distorted and what not and why it is distorted which adds some subjective ideas and beliefs to it.
 

jimells

Senior Member
Messages
2,009
Location
northern Maine
Carollynn Bartosh, 54, says that... since her diagnosis a decade ago, she's had to cope with countless losses, she says — from small (the inability to hike near her California home) to immense (the loss of a successful career in marketing and public relations).

Well, now I finally understand what is wrong with me. My losses are exactly opposite! The inability to hike near my farm is way more significant than no longer working, leaving aside the financial devastation. I guess my priorities have always been wrong, come to think of it...
 

jimells

Senior Member
Messages
2,009
Location
northern Maine
Please keep in mind this is the A Psychological A, not A Psychiatric A.

The APA are hardly saints. They have a long and twisted relationship with the US government when it comes to interrogation and torture. I think they are currently against it.

counterpunch.org said:
“The position of the American Psychological Association is clear and unequivocal: For more than 25 years, the association has absolutely condemned any psychologist participation in torture.”

Statement by the APA, November 2013

“The American Psychological Association, the largest professional organization for psychologists, worked assiduously to protect the psychologists who did get involved in the torture program.”

–James Risen, Pay Any Price: Greed, Power, and Endless War, October 2014
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/10/14/new-evidence-links-cia-to-apas-war-on-terror-ethics/
 

chipmunk1

Senior Member
Messages
765
Messages
60
Location
Seattle
Perhaps you are right. But it is a structured and manualized form of therapy, with clearly defined goals and techniques. Compared to psychodynamic therapy for example, it is fairly standardized.
CBT isn't a "manualized" form of therapy. "Manualized" means that everyone follows a very rigid way of treating - about the only time CBT would be used in a "manualized" way is in a research study to compare the effectiveness of two (or more) different kinds of treatments. (If you want a chapter long discussion, see http://sites.udel.edu/delawareproject/files/2011/10/Wilson.pdf ) In a research study, you generally want to keep everything as similar as possible except for the levels of the independent variable(s) - in this case, the different kinds of treatments. Thus, in this case, an attempt would be made to get all therapists involved in the study on the same page, using a fairly similar approach, to treat a given condition (a "treatment manual" would be created of some sort). Yes, it is somewhat artificial, but it's the the best way to make a good assessment of whether one form of treatment is more effective than another, in a given situation. This approach can be criticized because external validity (the degree to which findings from this somewhat artificial situation generalize to real world situations) is somewhat compromised (therapy in the real world is generally not done in a manualized manner).

More and more clinical psychologists/counselors are being trained to use a fairly eclectic approach - to switch between therapeutic approaches depending on the patient's situation, as well as what we know to be most effective, based on well-designed and well-conducted studies. (It's actually fairly uncommon (outside of psychodynamic approaches) for training in counselling & clinical psychology to be restricted to one theoretical approach these days, although that was more often the case 20+ years ago). CBT stands for cognitive-behavioral therapy; it is a combination of approaches from cognitive therapy and behavioral therapy, and thus, is already a merging of 2 separate approaches.

CBT approaches in general have better research evidence supporting their effectiveness than psychodynamic approaches do. While there is a good deal of weak research in both areas (poor design, poor controls, poor definitions of disorder, poor classification of participants, too few participants, poor statistical analysis, and so on; clinical psychologists, who often have conducted these studies, generally are not well trained in research, although there are some who are), there is far more fairly strong research for CBT compared to psychodynamic approaches.
(See http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/looking-for-evidence-that-therapy-works/ for more information to the paragraphs above.)


http://condor.depaul.edu/ljason/ Scroll way down and there is are links to a series of 6 webinars on ME/CFS by Leonard Jason, among other great things at his website.
http://condor.depaul.edu/ljason/cfs/ CFS specific links
 
Last edited:

Dx Revision Watch

Suzy Chapman Owner of Dx Revision Watch
Messages
3,061
Location
UK
Co-cure is still around? I tried to sign back up for emails, but could not even find the website!

GG

The Co-Cure mailing list is still operating but please be aware that this year, there have been significant delays in the moderation of posts submitted to Co-Cure for distribution to the mailing list.

Co-Cure is a pre-moderated Listserv mailing list.

A few years back, during a technical hitch, the list owner changed the settings of some of those who regularly submit posts for distribution to "self-approval". This meant that some posts are distributed without moderation but others placed in a mod queue.

You can determine whether any Co-Cure post is moderated or not by looking at the source details. A moderated post will include the line:

Approved-By: [Co-Cure moderator's email address]

whereas a "self-approved" post will include the line:

Approved-By: [Sender's email address]


As an example of delays, this year, between submission and distribution, I submitted a post on September 27. Over a month later, this has yet to be distributed.

I have written several times to the Listserv owner, Ray Colliton, about this delay and previous delays, this year.

I have offered to assist with moderation (years ago, Co-Cure had several international mods on a rota but now appears to be down to just Ray, himself).

As a long-term user of Co-Cure, I have asked for "self-approval" posting privileges.

But I've received no response.

So if you are submitting to Co-Cure, please be aware that distribution of posts is taking, in some cases, weeks, unless you are one of those on the "self-approval" list.

Co-Cure has been going for years and at one time distributed to several thousand members. Whatever Ray's circumstances, I hope that the list will not have to close and that Ray will accept some assistance with moderation.

It is problematic, at the moment, submitting notices that are time sensitive or for example, add important context or corrections to earlier posts, if this information is not going to be circulated until several weeks later.

The Listerv archives can be read online here:

https://listserv.nodak.edu/archives/co-cure.html

More discussion on the status of Co-Cure here:

http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/is-the-co-cure-org-website-still-operating.32746/
 
Last edited:

Snowdrop

Rebel without a biscuit
Messages
2,933
CBT isn't a "manualized" form of therapy. "Manualized" means that everyone follows a very rigid way of treating - about the only time CBT would be used in a "manualized" way is in a research study to compare the effectiveness of two (or more) different kinds of treatments. (If you want a chapter long discussion, see http://sites.udel.edu/delawareproject/files/2011/10/Wilson.pdf ) In a research study, you generally want to keep everything as similar as possible except for the levels of the independent variable(s) - in this case, the different kinds of treatments. Thus, in this case, an attempt would be made to get all therapists involved in the study on the same page, using a fairly similar approach, to treat a given condition (a "treatment manual" would be created of some sort). Yes, it is somewhat artificial, but it's the the best way to make a good assessment of whether one form of treatment is more effective than another, in a given situation. This approach can be criticized because external validity (the degree to which findings from this somewhat artificial situation generalize to real world situations) is somewhat compromised (therapy in the real world is generally not done in a manualized manner).

More and more clinical psychologists/counselors are being trained to use a fairly eclectic approach - to switch between therapeutic approaches depending on the patient's situation, as well as what we know to be most effective, based on well-designed and well-conducted studies. (It's actually fairly uncommon (outside of psychodynamic approaches) for training in counselling & clinical psychology to be restricted to one theoretical approach these days, although that was more often the case 20+ years ago). CBT stands for cognitive-behavioral therapy; it is a combination of approaches from cognitive therapy and behavioral therapy, and thus, is already a merging of 2 separate approaches.

CBT approaches in general have better research evidence supporting their effectiveness than psychodynamic approaches do. While there is a good deal of weak research in both areas (poor design, poor controls, poor definitions of disorder, poor classification of participants, too few participants, poor statistical analysis, and so on; clinical psychologists, who often have conducted these studies, generally are not well trained in research, although there are some who are), there is far more fairly strong research for CBT compared to psychodynamic approaches.
(See http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/looking-for-evidence-that-therapy-works/ for more information to the paragraphs above.)


http://condor.depaul.edu/ljason/ Scroll way down and there is are links to a series of 6 webinars on ME/CFS by Leonard Jason, among other great things at his website.
http://condor.depaul.edu/ljason/cfs/ CFS specific links

Even if CBT did work the way you say as effect as you say, what does that have to do with treating ME/CFS?
 

jimells

Senior Member
Messages
2,009
Location
northern Maine
If the likes of Jason don't speak, then how are we to have any reasonable voices at the P2P?

The sad part is that he has to waste his time on this charade when he could be doing something useful or, heavens forbid, have a day off. Most Americans have damn few of them any more.

Since the end result is predetermined, I don't see how reasonable voices can really help. But I can see where the outcome could be even worse if there are no reasonable voices.

Kinda reminds me of "Lesser Evilism"...