You are behaving like an authoritarian follower of a leader high in social dominance orientation (SDO; see work by Altemeyer). Janov has been dealing with the problem of dissent by pathologizing and diagnosing dissenters for many years, much like L Ron Hubbard did when he was alive.

What I observed at the center was pretty awful at times for all the trainees, not just me, but still, I left the training to go back to school because I needed an MFT to practice. I told them that I may return to the training after I have an MFT (or a psych assistant qualification, although I never found out how that works), and they indicated that it would be a good idea and I would be welcome back (I have it documented). I also have documented letters of recommendation from the primal therapists recommending me for MFT programs. Not that I deserve those letters, given my debunking later, and I do feel guilty about that, but certainly they document that I was planning to leave to go back to school, and was in somewhat good standing.

Janov is misleading in his assessment of the reason I left his center. The struggles of the training for me were almost identical to all the trainees – everybody was insulted in the most incredible way, so I don’t feel anyone got away from that. ALL the trainees were frequently encouraged to take time away from the training (especially when the training was suspended due to low enrollment numbers), spend lots of money on extra therapy, and then return to the training.

After a certain amount of time I became unsure about whether they were going to completely drain all my money. Some were starting to advise me to sell my assets, and they did not like the fact that I was hesistant to sell everything. They really did start to interfere like that and in my relationships in the most inappropriate way, and some seemed to hold a grudge towards me for not spending every last penny, perhaps they themselves did sell everything and felt an inequality or injustice that I wouldn’t.

Those that stayed on, and could tolerate Janov’s authoritarianism, (and a complete loss of their life savings sometimes) generally became therapists just because they stayed on and there were no other choices for the center, nor the trainee. I actually happened to be from a financially poorer background compared to other trainees, so I wanted to get an MFT, secure other paid work in counselling as a backup, and then return to primal therapy.

Once I learned more in college, I changed my mind, big time!
:)

I am pretty sure Janov believes what he says, but he has selective memory about this. Bear in mind his re-appraisal of what happened many years ago is probably influenced by my decision to debunk his theory many years later.
I actually do not enjoy this conflict, and feel sad that I have hurt primal therapists feelings with this debunking, but I do feel strongly that other people should know things about primal therapy and psychology so that they don’t get scammed.

best wishes,

Editor DPT

– PT has its problems, but the only underlying problem I see here is that you failed to make the grade as a therapist and lacked the emotional maturity to deal with that. Janov kicked you out, isn’t that right?

Your listing of four assumptions – an assumption in itself and something of a straw man strategy – and the accompanying attempted debunking by citing papers and journal articles is no more convincing than Janov’s continual such citing to back up his own claims. So who are we to believe? Someone who continues after 40 years to practice and refine the therapy, or someone who failed to cut it as a trainee therapist?

RD

I think almost all the evidence that came out of the Primal Center is unreliable information, to be honest. I personally found a gulf of difference between the reliability of claims made in popular books in psychology, and the peer reviewed literature in psychology. Although both sometimes contain errors, I found peer-reviewed work is more reliable and less exaggerated. Dr Christy did not do a psychology doctorate, I think it was in nutrition, and Dr Janov did his doctorate dissertation on Jewish identification (not repression, memory, or trauma).

Brain scans have a remarkable persuasive quality to them. Researcher found that merely adding a picture of a brain map to a text about psychology led to the readers rating the text better than those rating the same text without a brain map. Even when the brain picture added no information at all to the text.

It is remarkable how easy it is to take EEG patterns and make them match whatever theory (or even religion) you ascribe to.

best wishes
Editor Debunking Primal Therapy

best wishes
Editor Debunking Primal Therapy

But the effect of Janov overwhelming everyone with an enormous number of words is that it can be convincing. The reader tends to think – okay I don’t have time for all this, but he has a PhD, so I’ll take his word for it.

Why does Arthur Janov write so much on his blog and so many books? It never seems to end. If words are a metaphor for bullets, it feels like he’s taking an Uzi submachine gun and saturating targets in every conceivable direction. Is there a strategy behind this copious writing?
Are there some inherent mental advantages to writing more material compared to less that we, the public, should be aware of?

I don’t agree with your summary, but I think your ideas illustrate the motivations behind why intelligent people have gotten involved in primal therapy in the past. The claim that there are double blind studies that prove primal therapy works was certainly one of the reasons I got involved many years ago. I learned that that evidence is not really what it says it is. By all means find that evidence and email it to me, just in case I missed something.

The idea that Real Primal Therapy exists only in one center is mildly cultic in my opinion. Similar claims are made by scientology. My guess is that in some instances the primal therapy in Australia was remarkable similar to the primal therapy in Los Angeles. The idea that there has been no wierd cultic nonsense go on in Los Angeles Primal Therapy is mildly insane, and ahistoric.

After seeing behind the scenes of primal therapy, I don’t actually trust claims like “a million dollars was spent doing double blind studies.” I just don’t trust that there is no exaggeration there. I don’t think they actually understand the difficulties involved in double blinding in psychotherapy, and I doubt very much that they can show payments amounting to a million dollars going out to a truly independant research team. I don’t doubt that over a period of years, staff salaries of those involved in “research” added up to a million dollars – but that is not unusual for a psychotherapy practice, nor is it unusual for a pseudoscientific healing cult. Not only that some of that spending may have been to people with dual or multiple appointments (e.g. therapist, trainee, participant, and/or “researcher.”) I am not saying necessarily that primal therapy is a pseudoscientific healing cult, but you must understand that Scientology also claims to be leaders of science of the mind, and they also have spent millions on various things they would also call research.

Your post represents the type of misinformation that has prompted young people to adopt primal therapy as a cause and a vocation – and at much financial cost, opportunity costs, and sometimes a great emotional cost to themselves and their families.

My advice to young people is to take what Richard says with some skepticism.

If I had just a few sentences to say to a curious person considering investing time in primal therapy, I would simply counter Richard’s rhetoric with my advice and opinion:

“Primal therapy is a dishonest cultic psuedoscientific therapy that actually makes believers wacky in of itself, yet it gets them to write fantastic testimonials. It is a repressed memory therapy that runs the risk of creating false memories, and splitting up or spoiling family relations. Despite advocates’ claims, there is no credible scientific evidence for primal therapy, in the same way there is no credible scientific evidence for Scientology, multiple personality therapy, or speaking-in-tongues.

Young people: avoid this therapy and this vocational choice – that is my advice – take it or leave it.”

Editor,
DBT

Real Primal Therapy has never been practiced in Australia. The Australian psychotherapists who originally practiced it, and the ones doing it today, were not trained at the Primal Center in Los Angeles. Dr. Arthur Janov states that the Australian “Mock therapy” is completely different to his therapy.

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy does not provide any evidence of permanent normalisation of vital signs and hormones. Patient testimonials are the only evidence provided, and any respectable therapist will know that patients frequently provide statements which are unwittingly invented to appease the therapist, or invented because of an overwhelming desire to believe there has been some improvement, or written factually in response to a numbing of emotions and sensations. The Primal Center does not consider the numbing of feelings (increasing repression) to be satisfactory evidence of a cure. Correctly practiced Primal Therapy does the very opposite; it allows the patient to feel and resolve memories from the past. It is the resolution of feelings that extinguishes the alarm signals coming from the unconscious.

The Primal Center will not invest in more studies until it receives interest from other parties. Currently the Primal Center is investing in ongoing research and development, and also provides some financial aid for patients who cannot afford the therapy. In addition to physiological improvement, the vast majority of real Primal Therapy patients claim to feel far more alive, relaxed, and happy. Their testimonials are not less credible than the testimonials provided by CBT patients or any other patients for that matter.

I feel that this website has missed the point. We need to investigate Primal Therapy to see if their claims are correct. There is definitely a lack of peer-reviewed evidence, so let’s find some reviewers who are willing to look at the evidence.

Richard Atkin

richardatkin@windowslive.com