Episode 6: EMDR and the Military, with Cmdr. Mark Russell
Subscribe via 
My apologies for taking so long between episodes. I just finished unpacking after a move, which will explain the harsher sound in my outro this time. The room I'm recording in now is much more echoic than my old recording space. I also just finished studying for the GREs, as I'm on the march toward grad school application season. But, never fear, I'm committed to keeping this going. It's just too much fun!
This episode features a great interview with Commander Mark Russell, Ph.D. Commander Mark Russell and I discuss Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), with a focus on its use in treating post-traumatic stress disorder in war veterans. EMDR is a controversial treatment. We discuss evidence for its efficacy, doubts about its proposed mechanism of action, and Cmdr. Russell's battles with the military hierarchy. Spoiler: He lost the battle, but he's hoping to win the war.
I came into my research for this episode a knee-jerk skeptic, but I'm leaving more curious than ever. It works as well as other conventional treatments: the Cochrane review seems to show this pretty conclusively. But how does it work? Supporters say that bilateral stimulation of the brain, achieved by inducing rapid horizontal eye movement, helps reprocess the memory. The more "out there" supporters say that EMDR works by manipulating an as-yet-undiscovered energy field in the brain. There is evidence to suggest that it works by having the patientperform a distraction task while recalling the memory, and that anydistraction task — Tetris, for example — might help. What seems clear to me is that some more research into its mechanism is a good idea.
I hope you'll give it a listen, and let me know what you think! I'm especially interested to see if the conversation changes anybody's mind. I know it changed mine. And let me know if I shouldn't have changed mine; let me know why you still think EMDR is bunk!
Commander Mark Russell's faculty page at Antioch University, Seattle
British Psychological Society Research Digest reports on a study questioning the mechanism of EMDR
Cochrane review showing EMDR's efficacy
USA Today article chronicling Cmdr. Russell's travails
My apologies for taking so long between episodes. I just finished unpacking after a move, which will explain the harsher sound in my outro this time. The room I'm recording in now is much more echoic than my old recording space. I also just finished studying for the GREs, as I'm on the march toward grad school application season. But, never fear, I'm committed to keeping this going. It's just too much fun!
This episode features a great interview with Commander Mark Russell, Ph.D. Commander Mark Russell and I discuss Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), with a focus on its use in treating post-traumatic stress disorder in war veterans. EMDR is a controversial treatment. We discuss evidence for its efficacy, doubts about its proposed mechanism of action, and Cmdr. Russell's battles with the military hierarchy. Spoiler: He lost the battle, but he's hoping to win the war.
I came into my research for this episode a knee-jerk skeptic, but I'm leaving more curious than ever. It works as well as other conventional treatments: the Cochrane review seems to show this pretty conclusively. But how does it work? Supporters say that bilateral stimulation of the brain, achieved by inducing rapid horizontal eye movement, helps reprocess the memory. The more "out there" supporters say that EMDR works by manipulating an as-yet-undiscovered energy field in the brain. There is evidence to suggest that it works by having the patientperform a distraction task while recalling the memory, and that anydistraction task — Tetris, for example — might help. What seems clear to me is that some more research into its mechanism is a good idea.
I hope you'll give it a listen, and let me know what you think! I'm especially interested to see if the conversation changes anybody's mind. I know it changed mine. And let me know if I shouldn't have changed mine; let me know why you still think EMDR is bunk!
Download | Duration: 00:40:40
Commander Mark Russell's faculty page at Antioch University, Seattle
British Psychological Society Research Digest reports on a study questioning the mechanism of EMDR
Cochrane review showing EMDR's efficacy
USA Today article chronicling Cmdr. Russell's travails
Posted by Psyconoclast at 8/27/2009 9:32 PM 
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: episode 6 science interviews with believers psychology EMDR research PTSD
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: episode 6 science interviews with believers psychology EMDR research PTSD
No one behind EMDR has said that it manipulates energy fields. You must be thinking of the energy psychology people. The primary theory has to do with reprocessing memories into functionally encoded experiences much as sleep does for us, when it is able to do the job. But they are not claiming to have figured out the physiology with certainty. The theory is called adaptive information processing. It assumes a physiological basis that is only partly understood. QEEG studies show significant changes in brain function before and after EMDR.
Best Regards,
Robert Yourell, LMFT
Trained in 1992 in EMDR
Reply to this
Important correction: the people behind EMDR are not claiming anything about energy fields. I've followed EMDR since 1992 (was trained then) and had not come across that idea until now. Perhaps your confusing EMDR with the energy psych people (TFT, EFT, EDxTM...)
The best theory of EMDR is that it helps re-encode memories in a more functional way, permitting stabilization through factors such as restored REM sleep. (Disturbing memories that are too arousing interfere with sleep, and this contributes a great deal to the progression of PTSD.) This reprocessing of memories is part of adaptive information theory. It presumes that there is a physiological basis, not cosmic energy or chi. The physiology is being explored, and before and after QEEG brain measurements show significant improvements to brain function. Please remove the statement about energy. It does not represent the vast majority of people working with EMDR, and none of the credible theorists. It harms the credibility of people who deserve more credit than that.
By the way, last I heard, EMDR was the most researched modality for PTSD. There is an extensive bibliography maintained by the EMDR Institute at EMDR.com.
I share information and recordings related to bilateral stimulation inspired by EMDR at my web site, including sample experiences.
Reply to this
Thanks for your feedback. I'm sure you would not deny that some practitioners and supporters of EMDR link its efficacy to the energy fields proposed in energy psychology. You're right, of course, that the core supporters point to brain mechanisms. I think I sufficiently distanced the two by saying that the "more out there" supporters of EMDR point to energy fields, but thank you for making it clearer.
I hope you get a chance to listen to the podcast, you might be interested to hear what an EMDR supporter from the military thinks about the level of research being done.
Reply to this
Thank you for this interview! Delighted to hear Mark Russell's experience. I am just beginning to understand the military mindset and the difficulty with EMDR.
As a serving Army officer, I was sanctioned by my chain of command in 1980 when I was quoted in the 1st Armor Division newspaper saying that we were already in our next war, it was a war on terrorism, that like Vietnam, we often would not be able to tell our enemies from the general populace and that we would have a high level of PTSD. As an old soldier and a relatively new EMDR therapist, I have hit a wall with the Army. It has taken me years to go back to grad school (MA, LPC-Intern) and get the EMDR training only to be told that only chaplains, social workers and clinical psychologists can do counseling for the military AND that, even if I had the right degree, that EMDR is not the treatment of choice.
I find it fascinating that for all of our 'Lessons Learned' from previous wars, we have done so little in the field of healing the mental wounds the military experience has exacerbated.
Reply to this
Hello,
Thanks for plugging my podcast at the end of your show.
By the way, I never asked you to quit - or stop - doing your podcast. Maybe just to do (a lot) more mainstream psychology and (a lot) less fringe claims. But I don't remembre even saying that...
Your podcast is really not what I hoped it would be after the first interview. And also you shouldn't have promoted it on the Skeptics' Guide to the Universe forum under the title "New skeptical psychology podcast".
I get it now: it's not a skeptical look at psychology, but a podcast about fringe and controversial claims in psychology. Not at all the same thing...
If being a "nasty skeptic" is not being happy with you promoting astrology as science and ufologist alien abduction claims in an uncritical fashion, then yeah, I'm a "nasty skeptic". The only thing is that me I call that simply being a skeptic.
I love psychology and good science. It's fun to listen to fringe claims, but it's really not what I was hopping for.
Take care,
ps: I hope you'll have an interview with someone skeptical about EMDR in the futur, and - let's be wild - maybe an interview about the very mainstream behavioral-cognitive psychotherapy...
Reply to this
I just got back from listening to the latest episode on EMDR on my walk. . David, you did a bang-up job of interviewing the Commander! I also started out as an EMDR skeptic. After the interview I did with founder, Dr. Francine Shapiro, on my WiseCounselPodcast.com, I felt open enough to it to recommend a family member see a local Shaprio-trained psychologist for an issue he was dealing with. He found it helpful.
I thought you did a great job of making it conversational and thoughtfully interesting with your own input. One direction I, personally, would have liked you to pursue is the experience of EMDR from the therapist's perspective. I'm imagining it as perhaps rather routine, mechanical, and eventually boring? How much room is there for the therapist's intuition, creativity, etc. Maybe this shouldn't be a criterion but, personally, I wouldn't want to do a boring, routine, repetitive job.
I'd love to hear you do a similar show on EFT, which I guess is one of those "energy" approaches that you rather summarily rejected. I was intrigued by the dual-attention hypothesis that the two of you discussed and it seems to me that could perhaps also explain the efficacy of EFT which so many practitioners tout. Superficially, EFT looks to me very much like EMDR except that instead of bi-lateral eye movement, the client is busy tapping on a series of acupuncture points. Even though the mechanism for acupuncture's effectiveness is controversial, I am under the impression that there is a good deal of scientific evidence supporting it's efficacy for a variety of complaints. I'm not convinced, however, that the acupuncture points being tapped in EFT are as important as the split-attention you two discussed.
You've got a great voice for radio/podcasting and a wonderful interviewing style. Definitely keep it up!
Reply to this