Picking a winner

[Guest guest]

In my almost 62 years I've learned very little.One thing I haven't learned is how to pick a "winner", ie, a genuine helpmate from all the pretenders out there.By "pretenders" I mean those misguided individuals like those who advised Steve Jobs to opt for acupuncture and special diets to treat his rare form of pancreatic cancer. (Disclosure: my mother died a horrible death from the more common form of this disease.) Although unprovable, there is a chance Jobs might have survived had he availed himself of the prevailing treatment regime. He chose not to. It might have cost him his life.For me, and I guess others on this list, it comes down to whether ACT or CBT or any of the similar modalities extant out there actually make a difference to lives lived from day to day.Reading the posts here I gather that for some of you, at least, practicing ACT has some hopefully positive effect. Those of us reading these posts have no evidence except your words.For me, ACT seems like just another "whee-giz" new-fangled therapy that is apparently "just right" for some, but woefully inadequate for many others - others whose pain shines through in their posts.I'm on the fence regarding this. In the past decades I've "gotten something" from reading Buddhist texts, but that "something" has been diluted by my skepticism and downright cynicism. After all, how do we know that Buddha achieved anything at all? Perhaps he just ingested some particular mushrooms that had a verifiable effect on his neurobiology.I'm wondering if practitioners of the new "whee-giz" therapies, including ACT, are experiencing genuine change, or whether they are experiencing a transient "high", more attributable to other factors.I know there is some apparently sound methodological evidence for CBT and ACT, but I'm not too sure of the experimental designs, nor of the evaluation of the so-called evidence. I don't consider self-reporting on a scale prepared by someone else as evidence of anything.What I'm driving at is this: there are many people out there who claim to have "the answer", or who "suggest" that their particular approach will be helpful, if only you'd try it. But actual evidence is hard to come by, unless you accept what is published wholesale.ACT and CBT have been around for decades, yet there doesn't seem to be any groundswell of support for either approach; they are two approaches among a great many.So how do you "pick a winner"? How do you know that one or another approach to what ails you will work for you?Up to now, all I've learned is that certain medications will ease my pain. The psychiatrist I see once a week -- who first told me about ACT -- seems to not practice ACT in any way that I can discern. In fact, all he has done is recommend The Happiness Trap to me.I bought that book, plus a host more, but really, folks, there is no substitute for actual human interaction, no matter what or any of the others may say. And if your therapist isn't "into" genuine human interaction, perhaps it's time to look for someone else.So "picking a winner" is difficult, given our particular handicaps -- difficult, but not impossible. The ultimate winner may not even be a therapist.There are people who claim to know more and better than you. I guess wisdom comes in knowing who is bullshitting and who isn't.Regards,Detlef

[Guest guest]

Picking a winner, unless you are playing the lottery, means doing the research - and I mean your very own investigation. Having fantastic writing and grammatical skills may make it sound like you are making a profund point via this missive, but you are not, IMO.

You've been on this list for years, but you have yet to read any one ACT book in its entirety. That means you have not done your personal research. You have not tried to practice what you've read. Perhaps you prefer the quick fix - the capsule you can swallow, the bourbon you can swig. Those of us who have done the homework and the groundwork are pissed off at your cavalier stance on this. Well, let me be clear: I am pissed off; I cannot speak for anyone else.

I am attracted to your obvious intelligence and your obvious writing skills. For someone so smart, I have to ask: Why don't you delve in and do the homework, do your own personal "try it" research, before you spout off about how there ain't no winner?

Regards,

Helena

To: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 2:24:30 PMSubject: Picking a winner

In my almost 62 years I've learned very little.One thing I haven't learned is how to pick a "winner", ie, a genuine helpmate from all the pretenders out there.By "pretenders" I mean those misguided individuals like those who advised Steve Jobs to opt for acupuncture and special diets to treat his rare form of pancreatic cancer. (Disclosure: my mother died a horrible death from the more common form of this disease.) Although unprovable, there is a chance Jobs might have survived had he availed himself of the prevailing treatment regime. He chose not to. It might have cost him his life.For me, and I guess others on this list, it comes down to whether ACT or CBT or any of the similar modalities extant out there actually make a difference to lives lived from day to day.Reading the posts here I gather that for some of you, at least, practicing ACT has some hopefully positive effect. Those of us reading these posts have no evidence except your words.For me, ACT seems like just another "whee-giz" new-fangled therapy that is apparently "just right" for some, but woefully inadequate for many others - others whose pain shines through in their posts.I'm on the fence regarding this. In the past decades I've "gotten something" from reading Buddhist texts, but that "something" has been diluted by my skepticism and downright cynicism. After all, how do we know that Buddha achieved anything at all? Perhaps he just ingested some particular mushrooms that had a verifiable effect on his neurobiology.I'm wondering if practitioners of the new "whee-giz" therapies, including ACT, are experiencing genuine change, or whether they are experiencing a transient "high", more attributable to other factors.I know there is some apparently sound methodological evidence for CBT and ACT, but I'm not too sure of the experimental designs, nor of the evaluation of the so-called evidence. I don't consider self-reporting on a scale prepared by someone else as evidence of anything.What I'm driving at is this: there are many people out there who claim to have "the answer", or who "suggest" that their particular approach will be helpful, if only you'd try it. But actual evidence is hard to come by, unless you accept what is published wholesale.ACT and CBT have been around for decades, yet there doesn't seem to be any groundswell of support for either approach; they are two approaches among a great many.So how do you "pick a winner"? How do you know that one or another approach to what ails you will work for you?Up to now, all I've learned is that certain medications will ease my pain. The psychiatrist I see once a week -- who first told me about ACT -- seems to not practice ACT in any way that I can discern. In fact, all he has done is recommend The Happiness Trap to me.I bought that book, plus a host more, but really, folks, there is no substitute for actual human interaction, no matter what or any of the others may say. And if your therapist isn't "into" genuine human interaction, perhaps it's time to look for someone else.So "picking a winner" is difficult, given our particular handicaps -- difficult, but not impossible. The ultimate winner may not even be a therapist.There are people who claim to know more and better than you. I guess wisdom comes in knowing who is bullshitting and who isn't.Regards,Detlef

[Guest guest]

Detlef,

You are so provocative, so piquant, in your writing! I imagine you in

your cell scribbling away, then slipping the note under the door to

bait your jailers.

To quote you, " I guess wisdom comes in knowing who is bullshitting and

who isn't. " Well -

A) What if the person doing the bullshitting is yourself?

That is not my definition of wisdom. It's closer to my definition

of self-imposed cynicism.

C) I feel your pain, as they say. Or rather, I feel my pain, and it

sounds close to yours in some ways even if not identical.

Yes, I have found it hard to make ACT work for me, likewise Buddhism.

On the other hand, they work better for me than a lot of other things.

And I am not done yet. I've gone through a summer of dislocation due

to various causes, including a hurricane, major political issues at

the art colony where I live, an almost complete absence of paying work

all summer long, and just now, a move back to New York City for the

winter - pulling up a household and trying to reassemble it twice a

year is not easy.

Today as I have for weeks I feel lethargic, apathetic, pessimistic,

apprehensive, etc. On the other hand I just picked up some notes I

made to myself earlier in the summer (pre-hurricane) about what to do

next with my ACT study, and I am almost dizzy with the intelligence &

perception I find in them - as if someone other than me had written

them like a note in a bottle for me to find today.

ACT does work for some folks. So does CBT. Nothing works for

everybody. Various people find various ways to live in spite of the

fact of death.

You can buy your own cynicism the way I very often buy mine, but now &

then you might try letting go of it for a little while, just as I now

and then let go of mine. Luck to us both.

- Randy