Severe ME Day of Understanding and Remembrance: Aug. 8, 2017
Determined to paper the Internet with articles about ME, Jody Smith brings some additional focus to Severe Myalgic Encephalomyelitis Day of Understanding and Remembrance on Aug. 8, 2017 ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Research Check: can ‘Lightning Process’ coaching program help youths with chronic fatigue?

Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by hixxy, Oct 5, 2017.

  1. hixxy

    hixxy Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes:
    1,304
    Australia
  2. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Hibernating

    Messages:
    4,614
    Likes:
    12,447
    South Australia
  3. Hutan

    Hutan Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes:
    6,431
    New Zealand
    Yeah, that was my initial reaction. And then I read a bit and thought, well it could be worse.

    But then I read a bit more. And sighed again.
     
  4. Woolie

    Woolie Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,930
    Likes:
    14,558
    Everybody seems to have gotten so clever lately at noticing that participants weren't blind to treatment and that this might affect the outcome.

    But no-one was saying this about CBT and GET. Didn't get a mention by anyone other than patients and a tiny group of sympathetic researchers. Neuroskeptic, who's quite perceptive in other areas, didn't notice this problem at all.

    Its like some sort of blind spot that everyone seems to have. As if their belief that CBT and GET are plausible is enough to blind them to the problem. Yet they can see the problem so clearly when critiquing obvious 'woo'.

    As someone else said in relation to David Colqhuhoun on another thread: a lot of these science critics can only hit the mark if its an easy target.
     
  5. Alvin2

    Alvin2 If humans were rational...

    Messages:
    1,307
    Likes:
    3,654
    This is why we need a disease mechanism, then it becomes akin to will counseling cure cancer. They would be laughed out of the medical ethics board hearing never mind funding the ridiculous study
     
  6. RuthT

    RuthT

    Messages:
    65
    Likes:
    371
    Funnily enough no-one asks for the mechanism by which these ‘treatments’ operate, not even the BPS mechanisms that are supposed to be addressed by them.
     
  7. Alvin2

    Alvin2 If humans were rational...

    Messages:
    1,307
    Likes:
    3,654
    Of course not, when you can shame people by claiming illness in in their head explanation is not required. Bullies have more apologists and enablers then enemies.
     
  8. RuthT

    RuthT

    Messages:
    65
    Likes:
    371
    Yes, but what are the mechanisms ‘in the head’ and where is the research/evidence to show the mechanism by which they can trigger/heal illnesses? ie any theory and evidence for causation. None offered either in theory or backed by evidence.
     
  9. Alvin2

    Alvin2 If humans were rational...

    Messages:
    1,307
    Likes:
    3,654
    Thats my point, they don't care, they just want to make themselves feel important and believe their lies.
     
  10. RuthT

    RuthT

    Messages:
    65
    Likes:
    371
    Is see your point. I would characterise them as basing their work with vulnerable people uncritically on unsubstantiated & deeply flawed assertions.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2017
  11. Alvin2

    Alvin2 If humans were rational...

    Messages:
    1,307
    Likes:
    3,654
    basically
     
    Luther Blissett and RuthT like this.
  12. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Hibernating

    Messages:
    4,614
    Likes:
    12,447
    South Australia
    Yes, the skeptics who only question methodology when a study has a non-conventional result.
     
  13. user9876

    user9876 Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,583
    Likes:
    18,182
    When reading some of the comments on Smile I get the impression that some people don't know what to say. They know it is bad and formed from pseudo-science but at the same time they don't want to be criticizing other academics. So they point out issues that they would normally ignore with CBT but they only seem to make a small point of doing so. I can feel their confusion - perhaps because they use similar methods?

    It doesn't help that the LP intervention is not fully explained and hence the really high likelihood of bias is not as obvious as it should be.

    When people criticize LP because it is based on NLP which has no scientific basis it did make me wonder what the scientific basis for CBT actually is. Looking at the history in Wikipedia it seems to come from behaviourism and I thought psychology had moved on from that.
     
  14. Woolie

    Woolie Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,930
    Likes:
    14,558
    The B does stand for behaviourism. The CBT treatments that are probably effective are the ones based on the B. Like systematic desensitisation for spider phobias (based on the idea of decoupling the classically conditioned association of spiders with fear). The B also stands for any approach that builds in some sort of reward for good behaviour or a withdrawal of reward for bad (that's the other one, operant conditioning). For example, interventions for bedwetting use a lot of rewards, and those for really troublesome kids involve identifying the rewards they get from bad behaviour, withdrawing them, and rewarding better behaviours.

    Behaviourism is not fashionable, but its damned good if you ask me. Good careful science, measuring patterns of responding and seeing how rewards, punishments, stimulus pairings influence behaviour. Lots of things we 'know' about human nature are from behaviourism - like the idea that rewards reinforce desired behaviours more than the threat of punishment.

    Its the C part that's more problematic. Its founded on the idea that a key cause of psychological problems is maladaptive/negative thought patterns. The idea of the C part is to "correct" these negative thought patterns by bringing them to the person's awareness, challenging them, and replacing them with better cognitions. That will fix the depression. anxiety, whatever. The therapist might use a range of tools here including practical exercises.

    A big part of the original model of CBT was based on the idea that unhappy people had a distorted reality, in which they saw things as more negative than they are - and needed to be 'corrected'. This part of the foundation has been challenged, since depressed people's assessments of their life and future possibilities tend to actually be more realistic that non-depressed people's.

    There is also a huge assumption underlying the 'C' part - that thoughts and cognitions 'drive' the problems we see in anxiety, depression, etc., so intervening on them will change the situation. But what if these thoughts, cognitions are a by-product of the problem, they don't play a major causal role? Then the whole idea collapses. I think that's a very real possibility.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2017
    daisybell, Dolphin, MEMum and 11 others like this.
  15. Sean

    Sean Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,257
    Likes:
    17,985
    There is another huge underlying and very problematic assumption in the 'C' part: that the therapist can reliably classify thoughts into good and bad, that they have some grand sweeping insight and understanding of the human condition that grants them the power to safely judge the meaning and value of thoughts.

    It's arrogant delusional bollocks.
     
    Dolphin, MEMum, Snowdrop and 11 others like this.
  16. Woolie

    Woolie Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,930
    Likes:
    14,558
    Yea, CBT is inherently 'corrective'. If a therapist tells you they don't attempt to 'correct' the client's thoughts/cognitions, they just help support the client to find their own way through their problems, then they are not doing actual CBT.
     
    Joh, Sean, MEMum and 10 others like this.
  17. trishrhymes

    trishrhymes Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes:
    17,871
    Thank you, @Woolie, that's a really helpful analysis.
     
    Woolie, JohnM, MEMum and 2 others like this.
  18. Snowdrop

    Snowdrop Rebel without a biscuit

    Messages:
    2,896
    Likes:
    10,091
    It has been my personal experience that happy people are just as capable of distorting reality in ways that prevent them from assessing a situation for what it is. Usually this distorted thinking results in harm to others rather than themselves. Selecting out people who are seen as negative is a political agenda.

    That's not to say that people who are depressed can't benefit from CBT. I think that it's possible they can.
     
    Woolie, Luther Blissett, Sean and 2 others like this.
  19. Kenshin

    Kenshin

    Messages:
    72
    Likes:
    159
    "The Lightning Process has ... also attracted criticism because it is a psychological intervention for a medical problem, which some sufferers perceive as undermining the severity of their symptoms." - And Type of symptoms, severity and type of symtoms. The symptoms we suffer from are common in physical diseases, not one's that can be improved by psychological intervention.
     
  20. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,449
    Likes:
    28,522
    Phil Parker keeps claiming it's not a psychological intervention anyway.

    This was a pretty weak piece of analysis tbh. The fact the LP is loopy leads to some instinctive scepticism, but there's not much willingness to really dig into all the problems.
     
    Woolie, Luther Blissett, Sean and 4 others like this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page