Dear Phil

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

If hypnotism is simply about using a set of tools one can acquire
for money, then you might be right. I'm not sure it is.

I started cooking with Delia Smith's Complete Cookery Course. I
followed the instructions and over time managed to produce results
similar to those she must have produced. (It never occurred to me to
wear a frock or go to watch Norwich City on a Saturday in order to
make her chilli con carne, and I don't think it would have helped.
Such behaviour just seems daft, to be frank, as does growing beards
and affecting accents. I mean, really very silly.)

My wife has used the same book from which to cook and, sadly, I
don't think her results are even vaguely similar to Delia's (or, for
that matter, mine) despite following the same instructions and using
the same kitchen equipment. (Maybe she does need to become a
Canaries fan?)

Over the last 18 years or so I have used other cookbooks too, and
more recently I've cooked without following the script. Most
recently I've concocted a few dishes of my own; for example I made a
paella using mostly Thai ingredients, and called it a Thaiella. I
was really proud of that. I guess you could say I can cook, now. But
I'm not A Cook in the way that Delia is, and I never will be.

My son is a musician. I know that however long I spent practising, I
would never be a musician the way he is. He looks at a score, hears
it in his head and the notes come out of the piano/flute/bassoon he
happens to be playing at the time without much conscious
intervention at all. Me, I have to think about what I'm seeing and
what I'm supposed to be doing, and it's very hard work which I don't
do very well.

I'm a better cook than musician despite having had more tuition in
the latter. But I'm a hypnotist the way my son is a musician, and
I'd been doing hypnotism for five years before I ever saw anyone
else do it. I've never 'modelled' anyone.

What is the active ingredient in hypnotism? Rapport? Empathy?
Relaxation? Understanding eye accessing cues? Mirroring, pacing and
leading? Respecting their map of the world? It's none of the above.
So, it seems to me, that NLP is saying "Copy everything and (with a
bit of luck) you'll have included somewhere in there the thing that
makes it effective even though we can't tell you what that is." And
it's true – those people who have the capacity to do hypnotism like
my son does music will find themselves doing hypnotism; but they'd
have found themselves doing that anyway without the modelling. And
everyone else will be doing impersonations.

After all, all the great hypnotists got to be great hypnotists
without NLP.

But that's just my perspective and I may well be wrong.

Best wishes

barry



--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "phillipmattingly"
<phil@p...> wrote:
>SNIP
>
> Hi Barry,
>
> That quote is true but I would disagree with your perception of
NLP.
>
> All of us have learned to be hypnotists by studying, copying and
> imitating the skills of past masters. Are today's clinical
hypnotists
> pastiches of Elman, Hull and LeCron? No. Over time, the things
those
> men did that worked have been passed down and used by new
generations
> of hypnotists. It is just that the body of what is now clinical
> hypnosis isn't particularly influenced by any one man so its
> practitioners don't seem like pastiches.
>
> NLP on the other hand does seem like a pastiche because it's
hypnosis
> element is famously dominated by one man. And for good reason.
> Erickson's reputation and skill in working with difficult patients,
> and particularly his use of indirect suggestion, were pretty
unique.
>
> So Bandler and Grinder used their skill as modellers to
> comprehensively take apart what he was doing and produce a set of
> tools that anyone could learn. In the introduction to Patterns I,
> Erickson wrote: 'Although this book by John Grinder and Richard
> Bandler, to which I am contributing this preface, is far from a
> complete description of my methodologies, as they so clearly state
it
> is a much better description of how I work than I, myself, can
give.'
>
> Of course, because all the NLP hypnosis techniques tend to be
> attributed to one guy (somewhat erroneously given the fact that
they
> modelled Leslie LeCron and others), it's practitioners seem like
> pastiches. If NLP was dogmatic, taking the line that the only way
to
> be a good hypnotist was to do an impression of Milton, I would
agree
> with you. But I don't think it is. I think it offers a set of
tools,
> as clinical hypnotism does, for each person to improvise with and
> build upon. But it also encourages each practitioner to mix and
match
> those tools in their own style.
>
> Bandler modelled Fritz Perls by copying everything he did, even to
the
> point of growing a beard and affecting a German accent. Slowly but
> surely, he removed certain elements to find out what made Gestalt
> therapy work and the final result was the meta-model. That tool is
in
> use by thousands of people today who do not speak German, smoke
> cigarettes, wear beards or fight with furniture and yet get good
> therapeutic results the way Fritz did. I know I used to, when my
> confidence was less, affect an Ericksonian gravelly monotone but
> slowly but surely I let it go. A lot of the techniques I still use
are
> sufficiently close approximations of what Milton did to get
> sufficiently close approximations of his results. No, I'm not a
> perfect replica and I don't get perfect replicas of his results.
But I
> get close enough and that's fine as far as I'm concerned.
>
> I don't think NLP just enables practitioners to exude being a great
> hypnotist. I think it actually makes them great hypnotists. Maybe
not
> great if you equate 'great' with 'original' but Pink Floyd
coverbands
> survive because people want to hear them.
>
> Yes, a given person might have become a greater hypnotist if they
had
> struck out on their own and developed their art from first
principles.
> But equally, I think NLP has done a great service in producing a
set
> of tools that quickly and reliably turns out competent hypnotists,
> even if they do all affect a gravelly American monotone at
first. ;)
>
> Have fun,
>
> Phil

Fascinating stuff, Donald. I should, however, want to know the figures
for the 4% of studies that included placebo and no-treatment trials.
You did not mention these. Did Evans? I agree with you that this twist
on placebo effect is important. I had not considered this point.

One question. What is 'no-treatment'? The wording of any talk between
doctor and patient might well be construed as placebo, e.g. "Don't worry
about it. The pain will go away. No treatment is necessary."

Despite what you say about Evans's study, there may be things he has missed.
Ron Banks

Cobden@...
Norton protected
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: HypnoSynthesisUK@...
   To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com ; nlp-UK@yahoogroups.com ;
hypnosis-hypnotherapy@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 11:06 PM
   Subject: [UKhypno] Placebo/Suggestion/Bandler


   I've been reading Dylan Evans' fascinating book Placebo.  I think this  is a
   must-read for anyone interested in the relationship between suggestion and
   placebo, and the field of psychoneuroimmunology (PNI).

   I've heard Richard Bandler say that we know more about placebos than about
   any other drug because almost every modern research study contains a
   placebo-control trial.  I get his point and it is made to good  effect... 
However, it
   looks like he's probably very wrong.

   Evans, a philosopher of science, rightly points out a basic logical flaw in
   the typical scientific thinking about placebos.  Placebo trials often  produce
   therapeutic results in approx. 30% of the control  group, sometimes as much
   as 60%.  Many people naturally conclude from  this that the "placebo effect"
   itself is typically 30%.  However, this  appears to be an invalid conclusion
in
   most cases.

   Evans astutely notes that the placebo trial would have to be compared
   against a "non-treatment" control, where subjects do not receive anything not 
even
   a sugar pill.  There need to be TWO different control groups to work  out the
   placebo effect.  For example, if we found that drug x significantly  reduced
   pain in 60% of people, and that a placebo achieved 55%, we might assume  that
   the placebo effect for this kind of pain was 55%.  However, that  ignores the
   fact that symptoms often go into remission spontaneously, or simply  fluctuate
   during measurement.  Another group receiving *no treatment*  whatsoever might,
   over the same period of time, exhibit significant pain  reduction among 55%
   of members.  That would make the placebo effect 0%, as  the response in both
   control groups would be a result of naturally occuring  spontaneous remission,
   or fluctuation, or an "artefact" of the research  methodology itself.

   To put it simply, you have to DEDUCT the spontaneous remission rate from  the
   placebo control trial result to discover the actual "placebo effect" in any
   given case.  Evans' research suggests that only 4% of studies employ a "no
   treatment" control trial as well as a placebo group.  Therefore, pace 
Bandler,
   only 4% of research studies measure the placebo effect.  This also  means that
   the average placebo effect is probably significantly lower than the  30%
   commonly assumed.

   Hope that's not going into too much detail.  But I really think this  is as a
   hugely important point for our understanding of the placebo effect, and
   therefore for suggestion in general.  Thoughts and comments welcomed as 
always...

   Yours  Sincerely,

   Donald Robertson (Training Director)

   Senior Clinician  Hypnotherapist (NCH)
   Registered Psychotherapist (UKCP)


   The HypnoSynthesis®  Centre

   Hypnotherapy Clinic, Self-Hypnosis & Hypnotherapist  Training
   _www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)
   Freephone  0800 195 9809


   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



   You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
   Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
   <a href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>

   Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp; Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite

   All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be approved.  Please
keep your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and polite.  All
advertisments must be authorised by the moderators.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

     a..  Visit your group "hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK" on the web.

     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I've been reading Dylan Evans' fascinating book Placebo.  I think this  is a
must-read for anyone interested in the relationship between suggestion and
placebo, and the field of psychoneuroimmunology (PNI).

I've heard Richard Bandler say that we know more about placebos than about
any other drug because almost every modern research study contains a
placebo-control trial.  I get his point and it is made to good  effect... 
However, it
looks like he's probably very wrong.

Evans, a philosopher of science, rightly points out a basic logical flaw in
the typical scientific thinking about placebos.  Placebo trials often  produce
therapeutic results in approx. 30% of the control  group, sometimes as much
as 60%.  Many people naturally conclude from  this that the "placebo effect"
itself is typically 30%.  However, this  appears to be an invalid conclusion in
most cases.

Evans astutely notes that the placebo trial would have to be compared
against a "non-treatment" control, where subjects do not receive anything not 
even
a sugar pill.  There need to be TWO different control groups to work  out the
placebo effect.  For example, if we found that drug x significantly  reduced
pain in 60% of people, and that a placebo achieved 55%, we might assume  that
the placebo effect for this kind of pain was 55%.  However, that  ignores the
fact that symptoms often go into remission spontaneously, or simply  fluctuate
during measurement.  Another group receiving *no treatment*  whatsoever might,
over the same period of time, exhibit significant pain  reduction among 55%
of members.  That would make the placebo effect 0%, as  the response in both
control groups would be a result of naturally occuring  spontaneous remission,
or fluctuation, or an "artefact" of the research  methodology itself.

To put it simply, you have to DEDUCT the spontaneous remission rate from  the
placebo control trial result to discover the actual "placebo effect" in any
given case.  Evans' research suggests that only 4% of studies employ a "no
treatment" control trial as well as a placebo group.  Therefore, pace  Bandler,
only 4% of research studies measure the placebo effect.  This also  means that
the average placebo effect is probably significantly lower than the  30%
commonly assumed.

Hope that's not going into too much detail.  But I really think this  is as a
hugely important point for our understanding of the placebo effect, and
therefore for suggestion in general.  Thoughts and comments welcomed as 
always...

Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson (Training Director)

Senior Clinician  Hypnotherapist (NCH)
Registered Psychotherapist (UKCP)


The HypnoSynthesis®  Centre

Hypnotherapy Clinic, Self-Hypnosis & Hypnotherapist  Training
_www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)
Freephone  0800 195 9809


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

HypnoSynthesis(rtm) Hypnotherapy Practitioner Training Courses

Latest News (July 05)
Our July Hypnotherapy Practitioner Certificate (HPC) training course went
very smoothly indeed despite the threat of disruption caused by the ongoing
terrorist situation affecting central London.  In fact the only practical
difficulty was the temporary heatwave that struck!

We had a good attendance, approx. 20 students this time around, which is a
nice size group for the large number of practicals that we do -everyone gets a
chance to hypnotise and be hypnotised by a variety of different people, all
with  their own styles of delivery.

A big thank you to all of our students.  We look forward to seeing you  on
the Stage II Diploma training in March.

Next Stage I Certificate Training: November 6th - 12th

_www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com)

Call free on 0800 195 9809


STUDENT FEEDBACK

Overall student satisfaction score based on evaluation forms: 92%

"Highly constructive in many ways.  Your jokes are even usually pretty  good.
  Brilliant course.  I got an awful lot out of this, personal  development,
learning, etc.  BIG THANK YOU."

"The pace of the course was excellent even though exhausting.  Very
therapeutic -on many levels.  Very relaxing, reassuring.  Thank  you."

"I truly can't think of how you could improve this course!  Very well
packaged and delivered.  Thank you."

"Totally satisfied.  Excellent course."

"What I liked the best was the practical down-to-earth style that was used,
a good balance of seriousness and humour."

"I liked the balance between theory and practical work -and also the  balance
between the serious aspects and the fun and humour that made it  such an
enjoyable experience.  Feeling to relaxed to think of any other  comments right
now!"

"Excellent trainer in Donald and a great bunch of students."

"I really liked the wide-ranging theory and practicals, stress-free
atmosphere, and expert teacher."

"I liked everything!  I believe the training is of a very high  standard.
Just great."

"Very enjoyable, obvious you know your stuff.  Common sense  approach."


(Handwritten student feedback forms retained on file.)


Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson (Training Director)
Senior Clinician  Hypnotherapist (NCH)
Registered Psychotherapist (UKCP)

The  HypnoSynthesis® Centre

Hypnotherapy Clinic,  Self-Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy Training Courses
_www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)
Freephone  0800 195 9809


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "Barry Thain"
<bt@m...> wrote:
> Dear Don
>
> I think your summation of the relationship between hypnosis and NLP
> is spot on, and I agree with Erickson. I imagine most hypnotists
> would say much the same.
>
> NLP, I understand, is about getting in your guts what Erickson had
> in his guts because thats what it takes to be a great hypnotist, and
> no one but Erickson had Erickson's guts naturally.
>
> I think most NLP practitioners would argue that they are modelling
> the behaviour (inc phraseology, language patterns, tones &c) that
> came to Erickson (and other greats) naturally, so that by repitition
> and rehearsal it can come to them naturally too, and then they will
> be able to exude being a hypnotist just like Erickson did.
>
> The problem with that, as I see it, is that no Pink Floyd cover band
> will ever be Pink Floyd. They will still only be a pastiche even
> when the guitarist plays the Comfortably Numb solo without thinking
> about it. But a Pink Floyd copycat act might otherwise have been a
> great original band in it's own right.
>
> Dr Ken Saichek said "No one except Erickson can do Erickson's
> handshake because only Erickson was Erickson." How true.

Hi Barry,

That quote is true but I would disagree with your perception of NLP.

All of us have learned to be hypnotists by studying, copying and
imitating the skills of past masters. Are today's clinical hypnotists
pastiches of Elman, Hull and LeCron? No. Over time, the things those
men did that worked have been passed down and used by new generations
of hypnotists. It is just that the body of what is now clinical
hypnosis isn't particularly influenced by any one man so its
practitioners don't seem like pastiches.

NLP on the other hand does seem like a pastiche because it's hypnosis
element is famously dominated by one man. And for good reason.
Erickson's reputation and skill in working with difficult patients,
and particularly his use of indirect suggestion, were pretty unique.

So Bandler and Grinder used their skill as modellers to
comprehensively take apart what he was doing and produce a set of
tools that anyone could learn. In the introduction to Patterns I,
Erickson wrote: 'Although this book by John Grinder and Richard
Bandler, to which I am contributing this preface, is far from a
complete description of my methodologies, as they so clearly state it
is a much better description of how I work than I, myself, can give.'

Of course, because all the NLP hypnosis techniques tend to be
attributed to one guy (somewhat erroneously given the fact that they
modelled Leslie LeCron and others), it's practitioners seem like
pastiches. If NLP was dogmatic, taking the line that the only way to
be a good hypnotist was to do an impression of Milton, I would agree
with you. But I don't think it is. I think it offers a set of tools,
as clinical hypnotism does, for each person to improvise with and
build upon. But it also encourages each practitioner to mix and match
those tools in their own style.

Bandler modelled Fritz Perls by copying everything he did, even to the
point of growing a beard and affecting a German accent. Slowly but
surely, he removed certain elements to find out what made Gestalt
therapy work and the final result was the meta-model. That tool is in
use by thousands of people today who do not speak German, smoke
cigarettes, wear beards or fight with furniture and yet get good
therapeutic results the way Fritz did. I know I used to, when my
confidence was less, affect an Ericksonian gravelly monotone but
slowly but surely I let it go. A lot of the techniques I still use are
sufficiently close approximations of what Milton did to get
sufficiently close approximations of his results. No, I'm not a
perfect replica and I don't get perfect replicas of his results. But I
get close enough and that's fine as far as I'm concerned.

I don't think NLP just enables practitioners to exude being a great
hypnotist. I think it actually makes them great hypnotists. Maybe not
great if you equate 'great' with 'original' but Pink Floyd coverbands
survive because people want to hear them.

Yes, a given person might have become a greater hypnotist if they had
struck out on their own and developed their art from first principles.
But equally, I think NLP has done a great service in producing a set
of tools that quickly and reliably turns out competent hypnotists,
even if they do all affect a gravelly American monotone at first. ;)

Have fun,

Phil

--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, HypnoSynthesisUK@a...
wrote:
>

Hi Don,

> Bandler and Grinder frequently refer to and place emphasis upon the
> structure of Erickson's communication, i.e., language patterns, etc.
   However, when
> Erickson himself talks about what is important in hypnosis it is
noticeable
> that he usually places far more emphasis upon the attitude and
personal
> qualities of the hypnotist.  In the passages below he specifically
downplays the
> role of phraseology and voice tonality and clearly states that the
crucial
> element is the authentic sense of confidence that comes from a clear
  understanding
> of the nature of hypnosis.

I think that what you have said is true but in some ways incomplete.

Bandler and Grinder were originally modellers. Remember that back in
the 70s, no-one, including Erickson himself, consciously understood
most of what Erickson did to be so effective in therapy with his clients.

Bandler and Grinder studied everything about him and produced a series
of models - descriptions of experience that can be consciously passed
from one person to another. Once, no-one knew what Milton did so
no-one could reproduce what Milton did. Now, anyone can purchase a
copy of Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton Erickson Vol.1
and begin to learn the same skills he used. Hence the emphasis on
technique.

Although I haven't trained with John Grinder, I have trained with
Richard Bandler and I would say that he does stress the importance of
confidence in his own way. He talks a lot about going first - that is,
going into the emotional state you desire your client to achieve. If
you want them to go into trance, go into trance yourself before they
do the induction. If you want them to be confident it will work, make
yourself confident it will work. If you want them to be optimistic
about their future, be optimistic about their future.

>     I have heard NLP trainers saying that it doesn't matter  whether
someone
> believes in the NLP techniques or not as they work because of  their
structure
> rather than because of any belief invested in the process.   This is
> important to NLP as a "brand", as its popularity is largely based
upon  the notion
> that it contains techniques that are effective beccause of their
design.

I would agree but I would also say that NLP is not a single, unified
school of thought anymore than hypnosis is a single unified school of
thought. After all, most hypnotists cannot even agree on a standard
definition of what hypnosis actually is. We could, I think, quite
easily find two different hypnotherapists who practiced in very
different ways and yet both call what they do 'hypnosis'. The same is
true for NLP.

I think it is true that NLP techniques work regardless of any belief
invested in the process _by the client_. After all, there's the belief
the practitioner invests and the belief the client invests. The belief
the practitioner invests is, as you've said, quite critical. Without
it, he or she is unlikely to correctly execute the technique. But
those techniques, when correctly executed, rely on principles of human
functioning that are unaffected by belief on the part of the subject.
Anchoring, submodalities and so on all work if applied correctly
whether the person receiving them believes in it or not.

Of course, it helps if they do. Milton knew this and described it as
'response potential'. But it's not vital.

>  On the
> other hand, most non-NLP therapists, etc., seem to believe  that NLP
is no
> more or less effective than most other schools of therapy, and  that
the
> effectiveness of the process has more to do with the personal
qualities  of the
> therapist, especially their sense of confidence.

Well, I would argue that NLP demonstrably works better as a phobia
cure than systematic desensitisation. NLP is famous for it's five
minute phobia cures, traditional psychotherapy using systematic
desensitisation takes weeks or months.

Yes, confidence on the part of the practitioner is important but only
really, in my opinion, as regards ensuring that techniques are
correctly executed. As long as you do the swish pattern correctly, it
will work, regardless of whether the client or the practitoner believe
it will. It's just that if you believe, you're more likely to be in
the right frame of mind to get it right.

>  Though Erickson is  often cited
> as the major inspiration behind NLP, Erickson's view as expressed
below shows
> he was much more consistent with traditional hypnosis (even Elman)
than with
> modern NLP.
>   I know this is a controversial area.  Indeed, I think that it
strikes at
> the very heart of the relationship between hypnotism and NLP.   My
position, is
> that Erickson is basically correct and that NLP in  its basic
presuppositions
> has abandoned this emphasis upon personal  qualities over technique.  I
> expect some people have strong views one way  or the other, and I'd
be interested
> to hear what you think.  Thanks in  advance, Don.

Broadly, I think what you say is true Don. In my opinion, Richard
Bandler still places emphasis on confidence and congruence with the
skills and in many ways, NLP is an easier and more technique-based
discipline than hypnosis.

Hypnosis is about generating and maintaining a particular state of
consciousness in the client. The hypnotist's state cannot help but
affect that... as Richard says "my favourite induction is to go right
into trance and drag them in with me."

NLP techniques are often about manipulating the unconscious functions
of the brain - submodalities, anchoring and so on. These are less
dependent on the states of the two people involved, but it's still
important. I would say that any NLP trainer who thinks that the level
of confidence of the practitioner is unimportant is mistaken.

Cheers,

Phil Mattingly

Hypnotherapist and NLP Trainer

Hello all.



We have just launched our new website www.alternativehealth.co.uk
<http://www.alternativehealth.co.uk/>  I would like to invite you all to
list your business for free. I would also like to hear any feedback
(good or bad) about the site.



Regards



Graham



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Don,
      I appreciate your viewpoint.
      Dave Dobson once quoted Erickson as saying about Bandler and Grinder,
"Those boys think they got me in a nut shell. Well, they may have the shell, but
they ain't got the nut."
      Which is to say I agree with you in principle, but I must also take
exception on a couple of issues. One is that Bandler does not make the emphasis
upon language techniques that you ascribe to him. Maybe he did once, but as
currently taught by Bandler and Lavalle, the emphasis in their approach to NLP
is
primarily also on attitude. Wyatt Woodsmall has put it thus: "NLP is an
attitude that has left behind a trail of techniques."
      Secondly, it would be wrong to infer that since Erickson places
confidence as of primary importance in that one piece you have quoted, that he
thought
technique was of no importance whatsoever. It would be like a mechanic saying
that since the engine is the most important part of a car that the wheels are
of no importance. In fact, as important as the engine is, there are many
factors that go into the successful operation of a motor vehicle. Seats, fuel,
windows, wipers, fan belts, radiators. None as important as the engine, but try
driving without them.
      In other recordings of Erickson you can hear him emphasizing the vital
importance of knowing the diagnosis. "You must know the diagnosis!" is repeated
several times throughout the Ocean Monarch lecture from 1961 (if I remember
correctly). It is arguable that it is because he placed so much importance on
diagnosis that he would only teach his methods to people who were fully
accredited PhDs or otherwise licensed to do psychotherapy with people. The
Milton H.
Erickson foundation maintains this restriction to this day.
      Erickson published over 100 articles throughout his career and gave many
talks. We must be careful in reading any one passage from any one article or
transcript from a talk to think we've found the definitive secret to his
success.
      And, yes! I agree that placing undue importance on techniques leads to
false impressions and bad therapy, but it is not so simple as implied by this
one quote of Milton's. Technique does need to be at the service of the
therapeutic relationship, which is primary.
      I liken the hypnotic art to the performing arts. I was trained as a
classical pianist and know the value of good technique. I also know musicians
who
placed such disproportional importance on technique that their music was
devoid of expression and quite painful to listen to, in spite of having all the
right notes. I also know other musicians who are the opposite - filled with
expression and oozing with feeling but dreadfully sloppy with the notes and
other
technical aspects. The results were equally unsatisfactory. A true artist
combines both. And as Stephen Gilligan might say, "Isn't it nice to know that
you
can enjoy both at the same time?"
      I should also add that, since I write a weekly e-newsletter about
Ericksonian Language Patterns, I am a bit sensitive to this criticism. I
sincerely
hope that no one who carefully reads the site (www.Ericksonian.info), would
come away with the impression "sophisticated language equals good quality
hypnotherapy," although I admit that that danger exists. The weekly offerings
are
meant to help people get a little bit better at a particular area of the
hypnotic
art, and to draw them to the site as a whole so all of the offerings can be
appreciated.
All the Best,
Doug

Doug O'Brien & Associates
Center for NLP & Hypnosis
www.Ericksonian.com



In a message dated 7/26/05 8:22:45 PM, HypnoSynthesisUK@... writes:


> Bandler and Grinder frequently refer to and place emphasis upon the 
> structure of Erickson's communication, i.e., language patterns, etc.  
> However, when
> Erickson himself talks about what is important in hypnosis it is  noticeable

> that he usually places far more emphasis upon the attitude and  personal
> qualities of the hypnotist.  In the passages below he specifically 
> downplays the
> role of phraseology and voice tonality and clearly states that the  crucial
> element is the authentic sense of confidence that comes from a clear 
> understanding
> of the nature of hypnosis.
>     I have heard NLP trainers saying that it doesn't matter  whether
someone
> believes in the NLP techniques or not as they work because of  their
> structure
> rather than because of any belief invested in the process.   This is
> important to NLP as a "brand", as its popularity is largely based upon  the
> notion
> that it contains techniques that are effective beccause of their  design. 
> On the
> other hand, most non-NLP therapists, etc., seem to believe  that NLP is no
> more or less effective than most other schools of therapy, and  that the
> effectiveness of the process has more to do with the personal qualities  of
> the
> therapist, especially their sense of confidence.  Though Erickson is  often
> cited
> as the major inspiration behind NLP, Erickson's view as expressed  below
> shows
> he was much more consistent with traditional hypnosis (even Elman)  than
> with
> modern NLP.
>   I know this is a controversial area.  Indeed, I think that it  strikes at
> the very heart of the relationship between hypnotism and NLP.   My position,
> is
> that Erickson is basically correct and that NLP in  its basic
> presuppositions
> has abandoned this emphasis upon personal  qualities over technique.  I
> expect some people have strong views one way  or the other, and I'd be
> interested
> to hear what you think.  Thanks in  advance, Don.
>
> Erickson on Doing Hypnosis
>
> "Next of basic importance is the doctor’s own understanding of hypnosis as 
> a
> phenomenon in itself. He should know with absolute certainty that hypnosis
> is
> a phenomenon common in human experience both as an induced and a spontaneous
> development. He should know with utter certainty that hypnosis has been
> induced  in many different peoples, in many different times, in many
> different 
> situations. That hypnosis is possible for the old and the young, the sick
> and 
> the well. That all of human history discloses that hypnosis is a phenomenon 
> common to all people. With this well in mind, he can reasonably expect his 
> patient to do the same thing that countless thousands have done throughout 
> history, what countless thousands of patients are doing today, tomorrow,
> and  next
> week, are doing every day for his colleagues throughout the world. With 
> this
> in mind, and with full respect for his patient, he can confidently expect 
> of
> his own patient a better accomplishment than that of patients in less
> tutored 
> hands.
>
> Knowing then that he can reasonably and rightfully expect his patient  to
> accomplish as much as thousands of other average patients have achieved, he 
> can
> radiate full confidence and expectation to his patient as a nonverbal but 
> highly effective communication which in turn will affect most favorably the 
> effectiveness of the induction technique. Of basic importance in any
> induction 
> technique is that the doctor, from the very beginning of his induction,
> realize 
> that what is needful for his patient is not the words, not the tones, but
> the
> understanding of hypnosis as state of learning and being. It is not the
> words  used that induce the trance. Rather it is the understandings given to
> the 
> patient that a trance state is inevitable. And the words are no more than a 
> means of helping him learn an inner process of self-experience. To induce a 
> trance, one needs to communicate by words, bearing, manner, emotional
> attitude, 
> intellectual awareness that the patient is really and truly expected, 
> confidently expected, to be as able to learn how to develop a trance as
> readily  and
> as well as any of his fellows. That it is not a matter of argument or 
> elaborate explanation any more than is pain and distress. That with
> attention 
> given, the patient’s
> mind, by itself, can use the words employed to discover  its own
> understandings of what is necessary in that needful situation to develop  a
> trance. Thus
> by manner, attitude, bearing, in every conceivable way of  expression, one
> simply expects and wants the patient to develop a trance and the  words
> employed
> are thus only the means of communicating this expectation and  confidence." 
> (Erickson, transcript of recording, 1962)
>
> Yours  Sincerely,
>
> Donald Robertson
> Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist  (NCH)
> Registered Psychotherapist (UKCP)
>
> The  HypnoSynthesis® Centre
>
> Hypnotherapy Clinic,  Self-Hypnosis Workshops, Hypnotherapist Training
> Courses
> _www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)
> Freephone  0800 195 9809
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Don

I think your summation of the relationship between hypnosis and NLP
is spot on, and I agree with Erickson. I imagine most hypnotists
would say much the same.

NLP, I understand, is about getting in your guts what Erickson had
in his guts because thats what it takes to be a great hypnotist, and
no one but Erickson had Erickson's guts naturally.

I think most NLP practitioners would argue that they are modelling
the behaviour (inc phraseology, language patterns, tones &c) that
came to Erickson (and other greats) naturally, so that by repitition
and rehearsal it can come to them naturally too, and then they will
be able to exude being a hypnotist just like Erickson did.

The problem with that, as I see it, is that no Pink Floyd cover band
will ever be Pink Floyd. They will still only be a pastiche even
when the guitarist plays the Comfortably Numb solo without thinking
about it. But a Pink Floyd copycat act might otherwise have been a
great original band in it's own right.

Dr Ken Saichek said "No one except Erickson can do Erickson's
handshake because only Erickson was Erickson." How true.

Best wishes

barry



--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com,
HypnoSynthesisUK@a... wrote:
> Bandler and Grinder frequently refer to and place emphasis upon
the
> structure of Erickson's communication, i.e., language patterns,
etc.   However, when
> Erickson himself talks about what is important in hypnosis it is
noticeable
> that he usually places far more emphasis upon the attitude and
personal
> qualities of the hypnotist.  In the passages below he
specifically  downplays the
> role of phraseology and voice tonality and clearly states that
the  crucial
> element is the authentic sense of confidence that comes from a
clear  understanding
> of the nature of hypnosis.
>     I have heard NLP trainers saying that it doesn't matter
whether someone
> believes in the NLP techniques or not as they work because of
their structure
> rather than because of any belief invested in the process.   This
is
> important to NLP as a "brand", as its popularity is largely based
upon  the notion
> that it contains techniques that are effective beccause of their
design.  On the
> other hand, most non-NLP therapists, etc., seem to believe  that
NLP is no
> more or less effective than most other schools of therapy, and
that the
> effectiveness of the process has more to do with the personal
qualities  of the
> therapist, especially their sense of confidence.  Though Erickson
is  often cited
> as the major inspiration behind NLP, Erickson's view as expressed
below shows
> he was much more consistent with traditional hypnosis (even
Elman)  than with
> modern NLP.
>   I know this is a controversial area.  Indeed, I think that it
strikes at
> the very heart of the relationship between hypnotism and NLP.   My
position, is
> that Erickson is basically correct and that NLP in  its basic
presuppositions
> has abandoned this emphasis upon personal  qualities over
technique.  I
> expect some people have strong views one way  or the other, and
I'd be interested
> to hear what you think.  Thanks in  advance, Don.
>
> Erickson on Doing Hypnosis
>
> "Next of basic importance is the doctor’s own understanding of
hypnosis as  a
> phenomenon in itself. He should know with absolute certainty that
hypnosis is
>  a phenomenon common in human experience both as an induced and a
spontaneous
>  development. He should know with utter certainty that hypnosis
has been
> induced  in many different peoples, in many different times, in
many different
> situations. That hypnosis is possible for the old and the young,
the sick and
> the well. That all of human history discloses that hypnosis is a
phenomenon
> common to all people. With this well in mind, he can reasonably
expect his
> patient to do the same thing that countless thousands have done
throughout
> history, what countless thousands of patients are doing today,
tomorrow, and  next
> week, are doing every day for his colleagues throughout the world.
With  this
> in mind, and with full respect for his patient, he can confidently
expect  of
> his own patient a better accomplishment than that of patients in
less tutored
> hands.
>
> Knowing then that he can reasonably and rightfully expect his
patient  to
> accomplish as much as thousands of other average patients have
achieved, he  can
> radiate full confidence and expectation to his patient as a
nonverbal but
> highly effective communication which in turn will affect most
favorably the
> effectiveness of the induction technique. Of basic importance in
any induction
> technique is that the doctor, from the very beginning of his
induction, realize
> that what is needful for his patient is not the words, not the
tones, but the
>  understanding of hypnosis as state of learning and being. It is
not the
> words  used that induce the trance. Rather it is the
understandings given to the
> patient that a trance state is inevitable. And the words are no
more than a
> means of helping him learn an inner process of self-experience. To
induce a
> trance, one needs to communicate by words, bearing, manner,
emotional attitude,
> intellectual awareness that the patient is really and truly
expected,
> confidently expected, to be as able to learn how to develop a
trance as readily  and
> as well as any of his fellows. That it is not a matter of argument
or
> elaborate explanation any more than is pain and distress. That
with attention
> given, the patient’s
> mind, by itself, can use the words employed to discover  its own
> understandings of what is necessary in that needful situation to
develop  a trance. Thus
> by manner, attitude, bearing, in every conceivable way of
expression, one
> simply expects and wants the patient to develop a trance and the
words employed
> are thus only the means of communicating this expectation and
confidence."
> (Erickson, transcript of recording, 1962)
>
> Yours  Sincerely,
>
> Donald Robertson
> Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist  (NCH)
> Registered Psychotherapist (UKCP)
>
> The  HypnoSynthesis® Centre
>
> Hypnotherapy Clinic,  Self-Hypnosis Workshops, Hypnotherapist
Training Courses
> _www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)
> Freephone  0800 195 9809
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Bandler and Grinder frequently refer to and place emphasis upon the
structure of Erickson's communication, i.e., language patterns, etc.   However,
when
Erickson himself talks about what is important in hypnosis it is  noticeable
that he usually places far more emphasis upon the attitude and  personal
qualities of the hypnotist.  In the passages below he specifically  downplays
the
role of phraseology and voice tonality and clearly states that the  crucial
element is the authentic sense of confidence that comes from a clear 
understanding
of the nature of hypnosis.
     I have heard NLP trainers saying that it doesn't matter  whether someone
believes in the NLP techniques or not as they work because of  their structure
rather than because of any belief invested in the process.   This is
important to NLP as a "brand", as its popularity is largely based upon  the
notion
that it contains techniques that are effective beccause of their  design.  On
the
other hand, most non-NLP therapists, etc., seem to believe  that NLP is no
more or less effective than most other schools of therapy, and  that the
effectiveness of the process has more to do with the personal qualities  of the
therapist, especially their sense of confidence.  Though Erickson is  often
cited
as the major inspiration behind NLP, Erickson's view as expressed  below shows
he was much more consistent with traditional hypnosis (even Elman)  than with
modern NLP.
   I know this is a controversial area.  Indeed, I think that it  strikes at
the very heart of the relationship between hypnotism and NLP.   My position, is
that Erickson is basically correct and that NLP in  its basic presuppositions
has abandoned this emphasis upon personal  qualities over technique.  I
expect some people have strong views one way  or the other, and I'd be
interested
to hear what you think.  Thanks in  advance, Don.

Erickson on Doing Hypnosis

"Next of basic importance is the doctor’s own understanding of hypnosis as  a
phenomenon in itself. He should know with absolute certainty that hypnosis is
  a phenomenon common in human experience both as an induced and a spontaneous
  development. He should know with utter certainty that hypnosis has been
induced  in many different peoples, in many different times, in many different
situations. That hypnosis is possible for the old and the young, the sick and
the well. That all of human history discloses that hypnosis is a phenomenon
common to all people. With this well in mind, he can reasonably expect his
patient to do the same thing that countless thousands have done throughout
history, what countless thousands of patients are doing today, tomorrow, and 
next
week, are doing every day for his colleagues throughout the world. With  this
in mind, and with full respect for his patient, he can confidently expect  of
his own patient a better accomplishment than that of patients in less tutored
hands.

Knowing then that he can reasonably and rightfully expect his patient  to
accomplish as much as thousands of other average patients have achieved, he  can
radiate full confidence and expectation to his patient as a nonverbal but
highly effective communication which in turn will affect most favorably the
effectiveness of the induction technique. Of basic importance in any induction
technique is that the doctor, from the very beginning of his induction, realize
that what is needful for his patient is not the words, not the tones, but the
  understanding of hypnosis as state of learning and being. It is not the
words  used that induce the trance. Rather it is the understandings given to the
patient that a trance state is inevitable. And the words are no more than a
means of helping him learn an inner process of self-experience. To induce a
trance, one needs to communicate by words, bearing, manner, emotional attitude,
intellectual awareness that the patient is really and truly expected,
confidently expected, to be as able to learn how to develop a trance as readily 
and
as well as any of his fellows. That it is not a matter of argument or
elaborate explanation any more than is pain and distress. That with attention
given, the patient’s
mind, by itself, can use the words employed to discover  its own
understandings of what is necessary in that needful situation to develop  a
trance. Thus
by manner, attitude, bearing, in every conceivable way of  expression, one
simply expects and wants the patient to develop a trance and the  words employed
are thus only the means of communicating this expectation and  confidence."
(Erickson, transcript of recording, 1962)

Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson
Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist  (NCH)
Registered Psychotherapist (UKCP)

The  HypnoSynthesis® Centre

Hypnotherapy Clinic,  Self-Hypnosis Workshops, Hypnotherapist Training Courses
_www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)
Freephone  0800 195 9809


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Lauretta,
Looking at your post regarding an nlp practioner who  guarrantees their work,
for your husband to stop smoking, I was wondering, do  you you guarrantee
your own nlp work?

If so what do you guarantee? for instance that the results  will be
successful?

Best wishes,
Raymond Neal


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello people,

I am a psychologist and clinical hypnotherapist using NLP and solution focused
counselling. I have a practice in SE london but am moving to SW london. I am
wondering if there are 1. any practices/people who would be willing to share
their premises with me in SW london or even central london so I can continue
practicing
2. any ideas re good links/advertising in that area for the therapy I offer.

Lastly, my husband wants to stop smoking. I'm not willing to do NLP etc with him
and thus am after a good NLP practitioner in London who guarantees their results
for him to see.

Thanks for your time and help.

Lauret

"Donald Robertson's class in Self-Hypnosis is an investment in
self-discovery.   I highly recommend it!"
- Gil  Boyne, Exec. Director, American Council of Hypnotist Examiners
(ACHE).

Special one-day Certificated Self-Hypnosis Workshops
Next Workshop: Saturday, July 30th
Kensington, London

A practical training in self-hypnosis for newcomers and therapists  alike.
Learn techniques for conquering stress and building self-confidence  by means
of hypnosis.

Your workshop is taught by Donald Robertson, Certificated Hypnosis  Educator
and Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist (NCH) and Hypno-Psychotherapist  (UKCP).

The Self-Hypnosis Certificate workshop is externally validated by the
General Hypnotherapy Standards Council (GHSC).

Visit our website to book securely online:
_www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)

Or call us now free of charge on 0800 195 9809


Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson
Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist  (NCH)
Registered Psychotherapist (UKCP)

The  HypnoSynthesis® Centre

Hypnotherapy Clinic,  Self-Hypnosis Workshops, Hypnotherapist Training
Courses_ www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)
Freephone  0800 195 9809


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Andy

Some would argue that there is no such thing as evidence-based
psychotherapy, and that even CBT does not abide by the same rules of
evidence as chemotherapy.

There are many anecdotes (some in my link, below) in which an
analytical approach has been successful but that doesn't mean
nothing else might have worked just as well.

Equally, where a cognitive approach has worked that doesn't mean
analysis might not have worked too.

There is no evidence that analysis never works and there is no
evidence that cognitive therapies never work so both remain among
the valid therapeutic models available to the hypnotist.

Best wishes

barry
http://mindsci-clinic.com/cases.htm


--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "andyfi99"
<andy@h...> wrote:
> Hello
>
> CBT and solution focussed therapies are popular these days and
make no
> attempt to find the original cause of the problem. Many posters on
this
> group take the view that this is essential if true resolution is
to be
> acheived. If this is the case then why are the techniques
mentioned
> above producing the goods?
>
> Is there any good evidence that seeking out the root cause is
truly
> effective?
>
> Andy

HI,

Sorry to be a few days late in my reply - I only get the digest and don't
always get time to reply on the same day.
Venlaflaxine (Trade name usually Effexor) is still very much used today and
is, in fact, a step up from the SSRI's. It works on both serotonin and
dopamine, and is highly effective with patients who do not respond well to
standard ssri's.
It works best where 'depression' takes the form of irritation (i.e. the
'short fuse' of PMS!). It is also often used for patients with ADD or ADHD
where indicated for mood disorder.

Regards,
Gayle

Gayle Joubert
www.timica.com


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/55 - Release Date: 21/07/2005

I find that for the more simple problems we often can spend time loking for past
causes and don't alwayss need too.  However, this a judgement the therapist must
make very carefully as in many cases (in my experience) the individual needs to
have the causal event(s) found and cleared, because if this does not happen, the
symptom will either persist, go away temporarily, or more likely another
replacement (and possibly worse) symptom will appear.  The subconscious mind is
not so easily fooled as many quicky therapies would have us believe. 
Unfortunately some therapists do insist in many sessions of free association
type analysis when a simple regrression to cause will do, and that's not helpful
wither.  You see, if the only tool you have in your tool box, you will treat
everything like a nail.  Then there is the ballance of therapy needed versus
income for you...but you must always look for the right and best approach for
your client.  I tend to find that for panic and anxiety atacks
  (my speciality) most people need 3 to 4 sessions and these include thorough
case analysis, regression to cause, IDEO-Motor, and sometimes identifying the
cause through parts of symbol therapy. I follow this with NLP to desensitise the
event(s) and use suggestion therapy to make a positive start forward for the
client.

Regards,

Alan

andyfi99 <andy@...> wrote:
Hello

CBT and solution focussed therapies are popular these days and make no
attempt to find the original cause of the problem. Many posters on this
group take the view that this is essential if true resolution is to be
acheived. If this is the case then why are the techniques mentioned
above producing the goods?

Is there any good evidence that seeking out the root cause is truly
effective?

Andy







You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
<a href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>

Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp; Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite

All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be approved.  Please
keep your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and polite.  All
advertisments must be authorised by the moderators.



---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


     Visit your group "hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK" on the web.

     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------




Alan Crisp
Clinical Hypnotherapist
email: alancrisp@...
Website: www.yourtruth.co.uk









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

hi andy.

i can only say that solution focused therapies appear to work for
more
minor/narrow problems or temporary superficial resolutions. e. g.,
lady
helped with horse jumping difficulties, nlp. with me dealt with being
anally raped, 4 yrs old, behind that, constant physical abuse by mom
since very young age. parts of her personality that she had "walled
of
restored to the mainstream. this transformed her entire life.

another salesman, nlp helped him deal with blocks on performance
level,
some therapeutically related to his dad. he knew that he had hit a
ceiling in his performance. with me, arrested whole life pattern of
poly substance abuse/alcolism. first exploratory session of
analytical
hypnotherapy, uncovered episode with his mom he was totally unaware
of,
that had severely arrested his progress. resolving this and inserting
positivity, whether direct suggestion, resource anchoring,
whathaveyou,
lead to rapid huge gains.

i have also had clients who had change from more superficial
approaches, only to find they revert, but that opening up the
causation
and "cleaning it out" gave permanent relief. it depends on how you
regard yourself and your work. i regard myself as a healer, who uses
hypnosis, counseling, psychology, some ericksonian/nlp etc. to help a
person heal themselves. they may or may not get healing by other
methods, but i try to obtain as complete a healing as i can insofar
as
they will allow.


best, thoughts from the experience of the brain of brian.


--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "andyfi99"
<andy@h...>
wrote:
> Hello
>
> CBT and solution focussed therapies are popular these days and make
no
> attempt to find the original cause of the problem. Many posters on
this
> group take the view that this is essential if true resolution is to
be
> acheived. If this is the case then why are the techniques mentioned
> above producing the goods?
>
> Is there any good evidence that seeking out the root cause is truly
> effective?
>
> Andy

NO! I have used, and still use, Ericksonian, Elman, Rossi, NLP and Solution
Focused
approaches. Finding the cause is good for detective stories, but not necessary
for
permanent success in therapy. Sometimes it can be useful. Read Erickson and
Rossi
on Unconscious Processing without Conscious Awareness. It's the Conscious mind
that fouls things up, the other one is clean and can be used. I have a paper on
these
methods. If anyone would like a copy, please mail me off list if you want one.
I have had the most single session successes with this approach, including
Bulimia.
Not good for income, but good for your soul!   NB  I am away from Monday until
Saturday
and will get my server to delete all my messages (500 rubbish and a few good
ones, including
those from this list) so, if you mail me, it will have to be Sunday or after
next Saturday.

The cause is never the answer. The client's response to the trauma is the key.
You can
help change the response.
Ron Banks
Bath

Cobden@...
Norton protected
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: andyfi99
   To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 10:09 AM
   Subject: [UKhypno] Evidence


   Hello

   CBT and solution focussed therapies are popular these days and make no
   attempt to find the original cause of the problem. Many posters on this
   group take the view that this is essential if true resolution is to be
   acheived. If this is the case then why are the techniques mentioned
   above producing the goods?

   Is there any good evidence that seeking out the root cause is truly
   effective?

   Andy







   You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
   Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
   <a href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>

   Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp; Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite

   All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be approved.  Please
keep your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and polite.  All
advertisments must be authorised by the moderators.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

     a..  Visit your group "hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK" on the web.

     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello

CBT and solution focussed therapies are popular these days and make no
attempt to find the original cause of the problem. Many posters on this
group take the view that this is essential if true resolution is to be
acheived. If this is the case then why are the techniques mentioned
above producing the goods?

Is there any good evidence that seeking out the root cause is truly
effective?

Andy

hi barry,

i disagree. i consider his level of distrust/mistrust,
powerful enough to make him unwilling to close his
eyes, as paranoid. paranoid delusions are a different
matter. the fbi, thought police, etc. are watching me,
out to get me, etc. etc. perhaps a semantic
difference. i too have been paranoid at times in my
history, usually, but not only, residual drug
psychosis from my over-enthusiastic participation in
the 60's. it's one reason as i have stated, perhaps
elsewhere, that i am able to relate to many badly
disturbed/distressed people.

i also re-iterate, often the content of paranoid
delusions is irrelevant, as they are the result of
disturbed or distorted process. correcting the out of
kilter thought process, with meds or other methods if
they can be found, leads to the delusions often
vanishing. just as many manics when stabilized, do not
continue in their compulsive hypersexuality, alcohol
abuse, gambling, delusions of grandeur, etc. that are
the product of that particular underlying state.

conversely, i have had people whose beliefs were
rooted in something real, but again, the "illness"
makes them swell and distort literally beyond all
reason, totally out of proportion and virtually
unrecognizable. reducing that process, they diminish
and can be dealt if necessary (or possible), at their
source as other psychological events. every person is
different.

To quote the gist of erickson, whose experience in
these matters as head psychiatrist at psychiatric
institutions etc. was non-pareil. (as the french say
though i sincerely doubt if that is how they spell it,
beyond compare i guess.)"There are some general rules
of psychology, but the closer one gets to an
individual, the less importance they have." i have
found this to be generally true also.

thoughts from the once and sometime befuddled brain of
brian.

--- Barry Thain <bt@...> wrote:

> Dear Brian
>
> You may be right and his beliefs may be unimportant.
> Originally you
> described him as paranoid. Since then you've also
> described him as
> schizophrenic, manic, depressed and degenerate. As a
> sufferer of
> paranoia I was interested, not unreasonably, to know
> how your
> treatment had influenced his beliefs. As it now
> seems he wasn't
> paranoid at all (whatever else he was) I appreciate
> that I was
> asking the wrong question.
>
> Please appreciate this isn't an issue of labels. I
> do understand
> that people do not necessarily fit into neat little
> diagnostic
> boxes. When someone says "I treated someone for
> flight fright,"
> however, it is reasonable to assume the treatment
> had something to
> do with being able to travel in aircraft, rather
> than insomnia.
>
> Anyway it sounds as if you psychotic, schizophrenic,
> manic-
> depressive patient is recovering miraculously, so
> very well done.
>
> Best wishes
>
> barry
>
>
> --- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com,
> "mindmagic123@y..."
> <mindmagic123@y...> wrote:
> > hi barry.
> >
> > saw him again, and his speech and demeanor are now
> so improved, he
> is not far from appearing "normal". when you ask him
> about himself,
> he no longer refers to his mother. i do not share
> your belief that
> the content of his beliefs is particularly relevant.
> they were a
> symptom of deranged thought processes, not the cause
> of them. as his
> mental derangement is now subsiding at such a rate,
> i expect them to
> continue to diminish. i see the crux of mental
> problems of this type
> and severity as a breakdown in the processing
> mechanisms, as opposed
> to emotional content/problems, (though severe
> emotional problems can
> give rise to processing problems, that may also need
> help with
> medication before the emotional content is
> accessible to
> amelioration.) the emotional content of the
> processing is like a
> dysfunctional tv, with nonsense dots, flashes,
> patterns etc. on the
> screen. twiddling the knobs achieves nothing, the
> "repair" needs to
> be the "machinery" of the tv. repair a circuit, and
> the screen,
> >  (i.e. thoughts, emotions, and feelings, come back
> into focus
> again.) i suggested that his subconscious/
> spirit/etc. do just that,
> right back to when things began to go out of kilter.
>
> >
> > looking into the eyes of the third "manic" in
> locked psychiatric
> intensive care unit, the eyes glowing like a lion, i
> had that sudden
> insight. "This persons brain is not out of whack
> from his "bad
> attitude". his "bad attitude" is the result of his
> brain being out
> of whack." it then becomes necessary to "put out the
> fire" first, as
> with abstinence for severe addiction/alcoholism.
> later, if possible,
> or even necessary, causations may be addressed.  i
> once read a book
> by a german psychiatrist who worked emergency
> admissions to a
> psychiatric hospital. he saw schizophrenia as a
> reverse gestalt to
> the persons other functioning. this would be only an
> interesting
> theoretical approach, except that he had transcripts
> of using his
> method to reverse acute attacks, flipping the newly
> admitted patient
> back over into their more functional way of being.
> he did not deal
> with the content of their schizophrenia at all,
> seeing it this way.
> i could barely understand the principles he was
> using,
> >  (published in english), but he washighly renowned
> in his own
> country.
> >
> > the purpose of my original post, (other than to
> glorify myself, a
> worthy motive in and of itself), was to to initiate
> any discussion
> of this kind of healing. my amazement was that my
> first attempt at
> contacting the subconscious directly in waking
> trance, and the
> healing process i suggested, appear to have been so
> profoundly
> effective. i just came across my copy of gil
> boyne's, "hypnotherapy
> and healing." some of these ideas for healing
> outside of the usual
> arena are in there, though he is too free with the
> words god and
> jesus for my non-christian outlook. i was not born
> one. my family if
> origin were agnostic/atheistic, of jewish ethnicity.
> (no need to get
> into if judaism is a religion or race, etc. etc., a
> side issue
> here).  Creative Intelligence, Organising Principle,
> Spirit, etc.
> translate to the same idea for me.
> >
> >
> > my man still sees his outside stressors as the
> primary cause,
> rather than the result of his mental collapse, but
> last session, for
> the first time, he was able to mention "my disease",
> his inverted
> commas, in the way it was verbalized.
> >
> > i use simple analagies/descriptions like
> processing machinery and
> emotional content, etc, as i find clarity and
> utility as the result.
> one major dissaffection i have with psychology is
> tries to reason
> back to causations from signs and symptoms. after
> three stutterers,
> none of whom had remotely similar causations, etc.,
> as a
> hypnotherapist, i realised that this was a major
> flaw that
> invalidated so much of what i had read.
> incidentally, i did read
> psychoanalytic and psychotherapeutic theory for over
> twenty five
> years. nowadays, when i begin read the more abstract
> and theoretical
> stuff, especially the psychoanalytic, i get a
> literal feeling of
> physical nausea. my system won't "stomach" or
> "swallow" it any more.
> it is actually averse, as if i have been immunized
> against that kind
> of information.
> >
> > i believe erickson stayed so "atheoretical"
> because he was
> primarily focused on problem resolution, change and
> forward
> movement. causation was low on his range of
> priorities, unless it
> had direct bearing on producing this. much
> psychotherapy is of the
> nature of attempting to produce a positive by
> removing or resolving
> a negative. it comes from the logic of cause and
> effect. i do
> regression to cause(s), if it is useful or
> necessary. but
> hypnotherapy may be accomplished without that, by
> putting in
> positives, or beginning positive change. at the
> beginning, i had to
> consciously learn to add positivity after uncovering
> work, i was so
> steeped in years of that type of psychological
> thinking. now, after
> nearly 11 years as a hypnotherapist, it is fading
> into the
> background. improvement without resolution or
> understanding, by the
> client or even myself, is perfectly acceptable if
> that is what
> occurs.
> >
> > best,
> >
> > thoughts from the brain of brian.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train
> you...
> Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
> <a
>
href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>
>
> Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp;
> Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
>
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite
>
> All postings are moderated, only suitable messages
> will be approved.  Please keep your postings short,
> on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and polite.
> All advertisments must be authorised by the
> moderators.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK/
>
>
> hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>




__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html

Dear Brian

You may be right and his beliefs may be unimportant. Originally you
described him as paranoid. Since then you've also described him as
schizophrenic, manic, depressed and degenerate. As a sufferer of
paranoia I was interested, not unreasonably, to know how your
treatment had influenced his beliefs. As it now seems he wasn't
paranoid at all (whatever else he was) I appreciate that I was
asking the wrong question.

Please appreciate this isn't an issue of labels. I do understand
that people do not necessarily fit into neat little diagnostic
boxes. When someone says "I treated someone for flight fright,"
however, it is reasonable to assume the treatment had something to
do with being able to travel in aircraft, rather than insomnia.

Anyway it sounds as if you psychotic, schizophrenic, manic-
depressive patient is recovering miraculously, so very well done.

Best wishes

barry


--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "mindmagic123@y..."
<mindmagic123@y...> wrote:
> hi barry.
>
> saw him again, and his speech and demeanor are now so improved, he
is not far from appearing "normal". when you ask him about himself,
he no longer refers to his mother. i do not share your belief that
the content of his beliefs is particularly relevant. they were a
symptom of deranged thought processes, not the cause of them. as his
mental derangement is now subsiding at such a rate, i expect them to
continue to diminish. i see the crux of mental problems of this type
and severity as a breakdown in the processing mechanisms, as opposed
to emotional content/problems, (though severe emotional problems can
give rise to processing problems, that may also need help with
medication before the emotional content is accessible to
amelioration.) the emotional content of the processing is like a
dysfunctional tv, with nonsense dots, flashes, patterns etc. on the
screen. twiddling the knobs achieves nothing, the "repair" needs to
be the "machinery" of the tv. repair a circuit, and the screen,
>  (i.e. thoughts, emotions, and feelings, come back into focus
again.) i suggested that his subconscious/ spirit/etc. do just that,
right back to when things began to go out of kilter.
>
> looking into the eyes of the third "manic" in locked psychiatric
intensive care unit, the eyes glowing like a lion, i had that sudden
insight. "This persons brain is not out of whack from his "bad
attitude". his "bad attitude" is the result of his brain being out
of whack." it then becomes necessary to "put out the fire" first, as
with abstinence for severe addiction/alcoholism. later, if possible,
or even necessary, causations may be addressed.  i once read a book
by a german psychiatrist who worked emergency admissions to a
psychiatric hospital. he saw schizophrenia as a reverse gestalt to
the persons other functioning. this would be only an interesting
theoretical approach, except that he had transcripts of using his
method to reverse acute attacks, flipping the newly admitted patient
back over into their more functional way of being. he did not deal
with the content of their schizophrenia at all, seeing it this way.
i could barely understand the principles he was using,
>  (published in english), but he washighly renowned in his own
country.
>
> the purpose of my original post, (other than to glorify myself, a
worthy motive in and of itself), was to to initiate any discussion
of this kind of healing. my amazement was that my first attempt at
contacting the subconscious directly in waking trance, and the
healing process i suggested, appear to have been so profoundly
effective. i just came across my copy of gil boyne's, "hypnotherapy
and healing." some of these ideas for healing outside of the usual
arena are in there, though he is too free with the words god and
jesus for my non-christian outlook. i was not born one. my family if
origin were agnostic/atheistic, of jewish ethnicity. (no need to get
into if judaism is a religion or race, etc. etc., a side issue
here).  Creative Intelligence, Organising Principle, Spirit, etc.
translate to the same idea for me.
>
>
> my man still sees his outside stressors as the primary cause,
rather than the result of his mental collapse, but last session, for
the first time, he was able to mention "my disease", his inverted
commas, in the way it was verbalized.
>
> i use simple analagies/descriptions like processing machinery and
emotional content, etc, as i find clarity and utility as the result.
one major dissaffection i have with psychology is tries to reason
back to causations from signs and symptoms. after three stutterers,
none of whom had remotely similar causations, etc., as a
hypnotherapist, i realised that this was a major flaw that
invalidated so much of what i had read. incidentally, i did read
psychoanalytic and psychotherapeutic theory for over twenty five
years. nowadays, when i begin read the more abstract and theoretical
stuff, especially the psychoanalytic, i get a literal feeling of
physical nausea. my system won't "stomach" or "swallow" it any more.
it is actually averse, as if i have been immunized against that kind
of information.
>
> i believe erickson stayed so "atheoretical" because he was
primarily focused on problem resolution, change and forward
movement. causation was low on his range of priorities, unless it
had direct bearing on producing this. much psychotherapy is of the
nature of attempting to produce a positive by removing or resolving
a negative. it comes from the logic of cause and effect. i do
regression to cause(s), if it is useful or necessary. but
hypnotherapy may be accomplished without that, by putting in
positives, or beginning positive change. at the beginning, i had to
consciously learn to add positivity after uncovering work, i was so
steeped in years of that type of psychological thinking. now, after
nearly 11 years as a hypnotherapist, it is fading into the
background. improvement without resolution or understanding, by the
client or even myself, is perfectly acceptable if that is what
occurs.
>
> best,
>
> thoughts from the brain of brian.

hi all.

among other causes of anxiety/panic attacks/depression. at one time i had 3
clients. what they had in common was all 3 were married to alcoholics! all 3
were of armenian origin too! lots of them in this area of l.a. it has now
reached the position that i answer a call from such a person as  follows. "are
you in a relationship?"  95% respond yes. "how is it?" 95% respond bad. "what is
the reason it is bad?"  95%, he drinks or uses drugs.

this is only a limited clinical sample, and i'm aware there are other
causations. one major cause is conflict between anger and guilt on a
subconscious level, from physical/sexual abuse. "if i get angry, i'm bad" =
Guilt. "if i push it down, i feel lousy and hate myself"= suppressed anger.
therefore i will suppress awareness of the whole no win conflict, and then any
time anger from mistreatment, real or not, is triggered, all i become aware of
is anxiety. this also applies to any other major ongoing developmental conflict
that was untenable at the time. this also is often a factor for those in abusive
or partner alcoholic relationships.

thoughts from the experience of the brain of brian.

Iain <netean@...> wrote:
To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
From: "Iain" <netean@...>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 17:01:54 -0000
Subject: [UKhypno] Re: GAD

so sad that so many doctors feel that giving people drugs will fix
problems like this - they partly cover over the cracks but fail to
actually help people get "better".

I help people with depression and anxiety disorders all the time and
what I find is that most people need better skills and strategies to
help them think and feel different.

It's great using hypnosis with anxiety (and it responds very well in
my experience) but it empowers people when they can consciously
change
how they think about things, and consciously change how they react.

Use hypnosis, use NLP, use pschotherapy techniques, teach them how to
use them all, they'll choose the techniques that work best for them,
but giving them an arsenal of abilities gives them choices.

Iain


> Any other suggestions






You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
www.HypnoSynthesis.com

Submit your Website to the Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite

All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be approved. Please keep
your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and polite. All
advertisments must be authorised by the moderators.
Yahoo! Groups Links








---------------------------------
  Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Barry,

It's an honour and a privilege (and something of a reversal of the norm) for me
to be able to help you.

Here's a couple of relevant links;

http://www.npc.co.uk/MeReC_Extra/2004/no16_2004.pdf

http://www.biopsychiatry.com/vengad.html

You'll need to register for this one:

http://www.bnf.org.uk/bnf/bnf/current/openat/index.htm

Kind regards

Kurt


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Barry Thain
   To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 10:29 PM
   Subject: [UKhypno] Re: GAD


   Dear Kurt

   I learn something new every day, and today I learned it from you.

   I've never seen a patient on efexor for anxiety, so the fact that it
   is licensed for it is news to me. And I didn't know about the heart
   complications either.

   Thank you so much.

   Best wishes

   barry

   ps ... Norcot, I notice a typo in my previous post which should
   read "... withdraw from the world ..."


   --- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "Kurt Ramsden"
   <kurt.ramsden@n...> wrote:
   > Hi Norcot / Barry,
   >
   > Just to clarify venlafaxine is licensed for both depression and
   GAD. It is less common now than a couple of years ago because of
   recent studies suggesting it can cause or worsen the effects of
   certain types of heart disease. As a result it tends to be used
   under specialist supervision and is now rarely initiated by GPs. So
   your client is probably accessing specialist mental health services.
   >
   > Regards
   >
   > Kurt
   >   ----- Original Message -----
   >   From: Barry Thain
   >   To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
   >   Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 10:42 PM
   >   Subject: [UKhypno] Re: GAD
   >
   >
   >   Dear Norcot
   >
   >   Well ... Ven was the medication of choice for out-patient
   clinical
   >   depression a couple of years ago. I don't see so much of it
   today. But
   >   it's an SSRI-style anti-depressant; not an anxiolytic. So I'd
   write to
   >   the physician first and check the diagnosis.
   >
   >   If, as the medication suggests, the patient is depressed, you
   may want
   >   to think again about encouraging her to retreat from the word.
   >
   >   If, as the diagnosis suggests, she has an anxiety disorder, find
   the
   >   aversive stimulus and depotentiate it. Otherwise you're just
   papering
   >   over the cracks.
   >
   >   Best wishes
   >
   >   barry
   >   http://mindsci-clinic.com
   >
   >
   >   --- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "norcot"
   >   <norcot@y...> wrote:
   >   > I have been approached by a patient with a diagnosis of
   Generalised
   >   > Anxiety Disorder. She is being treated with venlafaxine. I was
   >   > wondering if the following approach would help.
   >   >
   >   > Suggest patient has a safe place  -with no problems, a safe
   refuge
   >   from
   >   > the worries of the day, somewhere where non of her worries can
   >   effect
   >   > her. Having succeeded in imprinting this, teach her self-
   hypnosis so
   >   > that she can retreat there at will.
   >   > Any other suggestions
   >   >
   >   >   Many Thanks
   >   > Norcot
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >   You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
   >   Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
   >   <a
   href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>
   >
   >   Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp; Hypnotherapy UK
   Webring: http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite
   >
   >   All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be
   approved.  Please keep your postings short, on the topic of
   hypnosis, respectful and polite.  All advertisments must be
   authorised by the moderators.
   >
   >
   >
   > -------------------------------------------------------------------
   -----------
   >   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
   >
   >     a..  Visit your group "hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK" on the web.
   >
   >     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   >      hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
   >
   >     c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
   of Service.
   >
   >
   > -------------------------------------------------------------------
   -----------
   >
   >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







   You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
   Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
   <a href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>

   Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp; Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite

   All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be approved.  Please
keep your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and polite.  All
advertisments must be authorised by the moderators.



   SPONSORED LINKS Adolescent mental health  Mental health job  Mental health
disorder
         Teen mental health


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

     a..  Visit your group "hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK" on the web.

     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

hi barry.

saw him again, and his speech and demeanor are now so improved, he is not far
from appearing "normal". when you ask him about himself, he no longer refers to
his mother. i do not share your belief that the content of his beliefs is
particularly relevant. they were a symptom of deranged thought processes, not
the cause of them. as his mental derangement is now subsiding at such a rate, i
expect them to continue to diminish. i see the crux of mental problems of this
type and severity as a breakdown in the processing mechanisms, as opposed to
emotional content/problems, (though severe emotional problems can give rise to
processing problems, that may also need help with medication before the
emotional content is accessible to amelioration.) the emotional content of the
processing is like a dysfunctional tv, with nonsense dots, flashes, patterns
etc. on the screen. twiddling the knobs achieves nothing, the "repair" needs to
be the "machinery" of the tv. repair a circuit, and the screen,
  (i.e. thoughts, emotions, and feelings, come back into focus again.) i
suggested that his subconscious/ spirit/etc. do just that, right back to when
things began to go out of kilter.

looking into the eyes of the third "manic" in locked psychiatric intensive care
unit, the eyes glowing like a lion, i had that sudden insight. "This persons
brain is not out of whack from his "bad attitude". his "bad attitude" is the
result of his brain being out of whack." it then becomes necessary to "put out
the fire" first, as with abstinence for severe addiction/alcoholism. later, if
possible, or even necessary, causations may be addressed.  i once read a book by
a german psychiatrist who worked emergency admissions to a psychiatric hospital.
he saw schizophrenia as a reverse gestalt to the persons other functioning. this
would be only an interesting theoretical approach, except that he had
transcripts of using his method to reverse acute attacks, flipping the newly
admitted patient back over into their more functional way of being. he did not
deal with the content of their schizophrenia at all, seeing it this way. i could
barely understand the principles he was using,
  (published in english), but he washighly renowned in his own country.

the purpose of my original post, (other than to glorify myself, a worthy motive
in and of itself), was to to initiate any discussion of this kind of healing. my
amazement was that my first attempt at contacting the subconscious directly in
waking trance, and the healing process i suggested, appear to have been so
profoundly effective. i just came across my copy of gil boyne's, "hypnotherapy
and healing." some of these ideas for healing outside of the usual arena are in
there, though he is too free with the words god and jesus for my non-christian
outlook. i was not born one. my family if origin were agnostic/atheistic, of
jewish ethnicity. (no need to get into if judaism is a religion or race, etc.
etc., a side issue here).  Creative Intelligence, Organising Principle, Spirit,
etc. translate to the same idea for me.


my man still sees his outside stressors as the primary cause, rather than the
result of his mental collapse, but last session, for the first time, he was able
to mention "my disease", his inverted commas, in the way it was verbalized.

i use simple analagies/descriptions like processing machinery and emotional
content, etc, as i find clarity and utility as the result. one major
dissaffection i have with psychology is tries to reason back to causations from
signs and symptoms. after three stutterers, none of whom had remotely similar
causations, etc., as a hypnotherapist, i realised that this was a major flaw
that invalidated so much of what i had read. incidentally, i did read
psychoanalytic and psychotherapeutic theory for over twenty five years.
nowadays, when i begin read the more abstract and theoretical stuff, especially
the psychoanalytic, i get a literal feeling of physical nausea. my system won't
"stomach" or "swallow" it any more. it is actually averse, as if i have been
immunized against that kind of information.

i believe erickson stayed so "atheoretical" because he was primarily focused on
problem resolution, change and forward movement. causation was low on his range
of priorities, unless it had direct bearing on producing this. much
psychotherapy is of the nature of attempting to produce a positive by removing
or resolving a negative. it comes from the logic of cause and effect. i do
regression to cause(s), if it is useful or necessary. but hypnotherapy may be
accomplished without that, by putting in positives, or beginning positive
change. at the beginning, i had to consciously learn to add positivity after
uncovering work, i was so steeped in years of that type of psychological
thinking. now, after nearly 11 years as a hypnotherapist, it is fading into the
background. improvement without resolution or understanding, by the client or
even myself, is perfectly acceptable if that is what occurs.

best,

thoughts from the brain of brian.



Barry Thain <bt@...> wrote:
Dear Brian

That's interesting but, as I asked last time, if he was paranoid
what happened to his whacky beliefs when you treated him?

Best wishes

barry


--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "mindmagic123@y..."
wrote:
>
>
> > hi barry.
> >
> >
> > oh would that everything was that clear cut and
> > simple. i thought when i
> > first saw him he was schizophrenic. my psychiatrist
> > referral dubbed him
> > manic depressive. two other psychiatrists
> > subsequently labeled him
> > schizophrenic. the kind of info you write sounds
> > like textbook descriptions.
> > though they do have the grace to have "mixed
> > symptoms", and "mixed
> > disorders" even there. things being that clear cut
> > has not been my
> > experience, both in and out of psychiatric
> > hospitals. in fact my
> > psychiatrist colleague once said to me, "i have seen
> > psychosis in so many
> > forms." not about this case. i don't find analysis
> > of the interior of this
> > level of illness is helpful in dealing with it's
> > symptoms, and try to work
> > symptomatically if at all.
> >
> > i often don't accept client's with long term, full
> > blown mental disorders,
> > who are degenerated. my reputation brings me an
> > occasional referral like
> > this, ("i hear you can do miracles"), but i don't
> > want to feed false hopes.
> >
> >
> > his thought/speech disorder was evidenced by being
> > meandering, fragmented,
> > obscure, tangential, loosened associations, etc.
> > etc.to use the jargon. he
> > literally "skittered" all over the place, and
> > despite having been formerly a
> > brilliant award winning chemist, his speech content
> > was barely
> > comprehensible, even though i have some degree of
> > ability decyphering
> > "schizophrenese" etc., if it not too degenerated.
> > the first meds he got
> > made him worse. after a brief hospitalization a year
> > ago, approx, (some
> > months after our initial sessions), he has improved
> > a bit on a new one. also
> > the involuntary detention, (caused by minor violence
> > + aggressive behavior
> > towards his mom), was like a bucket of cold water in
> > the face to him. the
> > amazing thing is he can still function academically,
> > and he told me that
> > chemistry textbooks calm his mind! he took a days
> > long exam and still got an
> > above average result, though not as high as his
> > former brilliance, (yet).
> >
> >
> > we think he has been "hearing voices" of some sort
> > since young, but he is so
> > cagey, i.e. paranoid, that only the most minimal
> > glancing reference has been
> > given to his mom, current caregiver. when i asked
> > him why he would not close
> > his eyes on direct suggestion, all other methods
> > being unproductive, at the
> > start of our relationship, he said, "you can't trust
> > all of the people all
> > of the time!" pretty paranoid, mis/distrustful, i
> > would say. though i may be
> > using it with less precision, more colloquially. i
> > would describe his
> > perception as "askew".>
> >
> > one delusion that he had was that his problems were
> > due to being unemployed,
> > rather than vice versa, and that most of the
> > problems were in fact his mom,
> > something i have seen in paranoid schizophrenics
> > before. but he had this
> > bizarre process where you would ask him how he was
> > doing/feeling, and he
> > would launch into long vague fragmented descriptions
> > of how his mom was
> > doing/feeling. very odd. almost as if her identity
> > was in some way his. in
> > his mid thirties. breakdown took place two years
> > before i saw him the first
> > time, followed, as it often is, by a slow continuous
> > deterioration.
> >
> >
> >
> > he was on ritalin as a kid. though they hand stuff
> > out like candy here in
> > the usa, it indicates he was having problems enough
> > even when young. at
> > times he shows flashes of regression, appearing
> > briefly as if he has the
> > demeanor of a child. also an overall childlike
> > compliance that i have seen
> > so often before. the improvement in his
> > speech/thought processes i mentioned
> > from these last two sessions, at least coincidental
> > to them as stated, has
> > been a lessening of this aspect, a tad more maturity
> > showing. but when you
> > look in his eyes, there is a look that is not right.
> > dulled, no sparkle, no
> > "windows to the soul" aspect. shuttered comes to
> > mind.
> >
> >
> > at one time shortly before he was hospitalized, he
> > had a spontaneous mild
> > remission for a short period, and i saw glimses and
> > glimmers of the "real"
> > person in his eyes. i had to caution his family that
> > this kind of thing was
> > often not permanent, to cushion them from the grim
> > realities of psychosis.
> > it seems like a last ditch attempt by the
> > personality/organism? to fight
> > back perhaps. it faded. i have observed and read of
> > the inexorable
> > progression of these types of disorders. that is why
> > i was so surprised and
> > delighted that this ericksonian waking hypnosis
> > apparently produced such a
> > dramatic improvement.
> >
> >
> > i may have mentioned, i have been pondering recently
> > what i believe is some
> > other connection erickson formed with his client's
> > subconscious, a direct
> > pipeline that did not even necessarily involve
> > "formal" hypnosis, though it
> > is certainly a trance, often a waking trance,
> > connection. i am this very
> > morning having my third session with a 20 year old,
> > deeply depressed after
> > hospitalization 2 months ago for a classic "manic"
> > episode. he goes into
> > trance, but denies he has a subconscious mind, or
> > ever goes in trance. i am
> > seeing slight but definite improvement after each
> > session in his depressive
> > symptoms. he has the expressionless face (depressive
> > mask), toneless voice,
> > flat emotions, etc. also brilliiant in some ways.
> > like me, a brilliant
> > former nutcase myself. and who am i to say so much
> > of it is former, with the
> > symptomology i still have. so i can relate easily to
> > the insane, though i
> > never got to be a full blown crazy, (i think!). i
> > would like improvement to
> > come faster, though i know that comparitively what i
> > am getting is usually
> > regarded as very very good. i am cautiously trying
> > to get his subconscious
> > to emerge while he is awake. i saw it in the eyes of
> > the first one. no luck so far.
> >
> >
> >
> > reply from the the brain of brian.
> >
> >
> > Barry Thain wrote:
> >
> > Dear Brain of Brian
> >
> > I'm confused.
> >
> > You report two sessions with a medicated 'paranoid
> > psychotic' whom,
> > after treatment, had massively less disordered
> > speech and an
> > obviously more normal state of being, which is
> > fantastic! But ...
> >
> > Paranoia is a delusional disorder. The delusions are
> > either non-
> > bizarre in that they refer to situations which could
> > obtain in real
> > life but either don't or are greatly exaggerated, or
> > they are
> > bizarre like believing you are Cleopatra or that
> > aliens want you to
> > be their leader.
> >
> > Disorganized speech is not a significant feature of
> > delusional
> > disorders, nor is an abnormal 'state'. It's about
> > whacky beliefs.
> >
> > What happened to your patient's beliefs which, if
> > they
> > were 'paranoid psychotic' were the crux of their
> > problem?
> >
> > Best wishes
> >
> > barry
> >







You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
www.HypnoSynthesis.com

Submit your Website to the Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite

All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be approved. Please keep
your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and polite. All
advertisments must be authorised by the moderators.
Yahoo! Groups Links










---------------------------------
  Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 20/07/2005 9:29am GMT Standard Time,
bt@... writes:



hi barry.



saw him again, and his speech and demeanor are now so  improved, he is not
far from appearing "normal". when you ask him about  himself, he no longer
refers to his mother. i do not share your belief that  the content of his
beliefs
is particularly relevant. they were a symptom of  deranged thought processes,
not the cause of them. as his mental derangement  is now subsiding at such a
rate, i expect them to continue to diminish. i see  the crux of mental problems
of this type and severity as a breakdown in the  processing mechanisms, as
opposed to emotional content/problems, (though  severe emotional problems can
give rise to processing problems, that may also  need help with medication
before
the emotional content is accessible to  amelioration.) the emotional content
of the processing is like a dysfunctional  tv, with nonsense dots, flashes,
patterns etc. on the screen. twiddling the  knobs achieves nothing, the "repair"
needs to be the "machinery" of the tv.  repair a circuit, and the screen,
(i.e. thoughts, emotions, and feelings, come  back into focus again.) i
suggested
that his subconscious/ spirit/etc. do just  that, right back to when things
began to go out of kilter.



looking into the eyes of the third "manic" in locked  psychiatric intensive
care unit, the eyes glowing like a lion, i  had that sudden insight. "This
persons brain is not out of  whack from his "bad attitude". his "bad attitude"
is
the result of his brain  being out of whack." it then becomes necessary to
"put out the fire" first, as  with abstinence for severe addiction/alcoholism.
later, if possible, or even  necessary, causations may be addressed.  i once
read a book by a german  psychiatrist who worked emergency admissions to a
psychiatric hospital. he saw  schizophrenia as a reverse gestalt to the persons
other functioning. this  would be only an interesting theoretical approach,
except
that he had  transcripts of using his method to reverse acute attacks,
flipping the newly  admitted patient back over into their more functional way of
being. he did not  deal with the content of their schizophrenia at all, seeing
it
this way. i  could barely understand the principles he was using, (published
in english),  but he washighly renowned in his own country.




the purpose of my original post, (other than to  glorify myself, a worthy
motive in and of itself), was to to initiate any  discussion of this kind of
healing. my amazement was that my first attempt at  contacting the subconscious
directly in waking trance, and the healing process  i suggested, appear to have
been so profoundly effective. i just came across  my copy of gil boyne's,
"hypnotherapy and healing." some of  these ideas for healing outside of the
usual
arena are in there, though he is  too free with the words god and jesus for my
non-christian outlook. i was not  born one. my family if origin were
agnostic/atheistic, of jewish ethnicity.  (no need to get into if judaism is a
religion or race, etc. etc., a side issue  here).  Creative Intelligence,
Organising
Principle, Spirit, etc.  translate to the same idea for me.




my man still sees his outside stressors as the primary  cause, rather than
the result of his mental collapse, but last session, for  the first time, he was
able to mention "my disease", his inverted commas, in  the way it was
verbalized.



i use simple analagies/descriptions like processing  machinery and emotional
content, etc, as i find clarity and utility as the  result. one major
dissaffection i have with psychology is tries to reason  back to causations from
signs
and symptoms. after three stutterers, none of  whom had remotely similar
causations, etc., as a hypnotherapist, i realised  that this was a major flaw
that
invalidated so much of what i had  read. incidentally, i did read
psychoanalytic and psychotherapeutic  theory for over twenty five years.
nowadays, when i
begin read the more  abstract and theoretical stuff, especially the
psychoanalytic, i get a literal  feeling of physical nausea. my system won't
"stomach"
or "swallow" it any  more. it is actually averse, as if i have been immunized
against that kind of  information.



i believe erickson stayed so  "atheoretical" because he was primarily focused
on problem resolution, change  and forward movement. causation was low on his
range of priorities,  unless it had direct bearing on producing this. much
psychotherapy is of the  nature of attempting to produce a positive by removing
or resolving a  negative. it comes from the logic of cause and effect. i do
regression to  cause(s), if it is useful or necessary. but hypnotherapy may be
accomplished  without that, by putting in positives, or beginning positive
change. at the  beginning, i had to consciously learn to add positivity after
uncovering  work, i was so steeped in years of that type of psychological
thinking. now,  after nearly 11 years as a hypnotherapist, it is fading into the
background.  improvement without resolution or understanding, by the client or
even
myself,  is perfectly acceptable if that is what occurs.



best,



thoughts from the brain of  brian.




Barry Thain  <bt@...> wrote:

Dear  Brian

That's interesting but, as I asked last time, if  he was paranoid
what happened to his whacky beliefs when you treated  him?

Best wishes

barry




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by  AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.1/51 - Release  Date: 18/07/2005





Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson
Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist  (NCH)
Registered Psychotherapist (UKCP)

The  HypnoSynthesis® Centre

Hypnotherapy Clinic,  Self-Hypnosis Workshops, Hypnotherapist Training Courses
_www.HypnoSynthesis.com_ (http://www.hypnosynthesis.com/)
Freephone  0800 195 9809


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Kurt

I learn something new every day, and today I learned it from you.

I've never seen a patient on efexor for anxiety, so the fact that it
is licensed for it is news to me. And I didn't know about the heart
complications either.

Thank you so much.

Best wishes

barry

ps ... Norcot, I notice a typo in my previous post which should
read "... withdraw from the world ..."


--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "Kurt Ramsden"
<kurt.ramsden@n...> wrote:
> Hi Norcot / Barry,
>
> Just to clarify venlafaxine is licensed for both depression and
GAD. It is less common now than a couple of years ago because of
recent studies suggesting it can cause or worsen the effects of
certain types of heart disease. As a result it tends to be used
under specialist supervision and is now rarely initiated by GPs. So
your client is probably accessing specialist mental health services.
>
> Regards
>
> Kurt
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Barry Thain
>   To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 10:42 PM
>   Subject: [UKhypno] Re: GAD
>
>
>   Dear Norcot
>
>   Well ... Ven was the medication of choice for out-patient
clinical
>   depression a couple of years ago. I don't see so much of it
today. But
>   it's an SSRI-style anti-depressant; not an anxiolytic. So I'd
write to
>   the physician first and check the diagnosis.
>
>   If, as the medication suggests, the patient is depressed, you
may want
>   to think again about encouraging her to retreat from the word.
>
>   If, as the diagnosis suggests, she has an anxiety disorder, find
the
>   aversive stimulus and depotentiate it. Otherwise you're just
papering
>   over the cracks.
>
>   Best wishes
>
>   barry
>   http://mindsci-clinic.com
>
>
>   --- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "norcot"
>   <norcot@y...> wrote:
>   > I have been approached by a patient with a diagnosis of
Generalised
>   > Anxiety Disorder. She is being treated with venlafaxine. I was
>   > wondering if the following approach would help.
>   >
>   > Suggest patient has a safe place  -with no problems, a safe
refuge
>   from
>   > the worries of the day, somewhere where non of her worries can
>   effect
>   > her. Having succeeded in imprinting this, teach her self-
hypnosis so
>   > that she can retreat there at will.
>   > Any other suggestions
>   >
>   >   Many Thanks
>   > Norcot
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
>   Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
>   <a
href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>
>
>   Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp; Hypnotherapy UK
Webring: http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite
>
>   All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be
approved.  Please keep your postings short, on the topic of
hypnosis, respectful and polite.  All advertisments must be
authorised by the moderators.
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     a..  Visit your group "hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK" on the web.
>
>     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>      hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Norcot / Barry,

Just to clarify venlafaxine is licensed for both depression and GAD. It is less
common now than a couple of years ago because of recent studies suggesting it
can cause or worsen the effects of certain types of heart disease. As a result
it tends to be used under specialist supervision and is now rarely initiated by
GPs. So your client is probably accessing specialist mental health services.

Regards

Kurt
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Barry Thain
   To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 10:42 PM
   Subject: [UKhypno] Re: GAD


   Dear Norcot

   Well ... Ven was the medication of choice for out-patient clinical
   depression a couple of years ago. I don't see so much of it today. But
   it's an SSRI-style anti-depressant; not an anxiolytic. So I'd write to
   the physician first and check the diagnosis.

   If, as the medication suggests, the patient is depressed, you may want
   to think again about encouraging her to retreat from the word.

   If, as the diagnosis suggests, she has an anxiety disorder, find the
   aversive stimulus and depotentiate it. Otherwise you're just papering
   over the cracks.

   Best wishes

   barry
   http://mindsci-clinic.com


   --- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "norcot"
   <norcot@y...> wrote:
   > I have been approached by a patient with a diagnosis of Generalised
   > Anxiety Disorder. She is being treated with venlafaxine. I was
   > wondering if the following approach would help.
   >
   > Suggest patient has a safe place  -with no problems, a safe refuge
   from
   > the worries of the day, somewhere where non of her worries can
   effect
   > her. Having succeeded in imprinting this, teach her self-hypnosis so
   > that she can retreat there at will.
   > Any other suggestions
   >
   >   Many Thanks
   > Norcot








   You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
   Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
   <a href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>

   Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp; Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite

   All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be approved.  Please
keep your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and polite.  All
advertisments must be authorised by the moderators.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

     a..  Visit your group "hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK" on the web.

     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

so sad that so many doctors feel that giving people drugs will fix
problems like this - they partly cover over the cracks but fail to
actually help people get "better".

I help people with depression and anxiety disorders all the time and
what I find is that most people need better skills and strategies to
help them think and feel different.

It's great using hypnosis with anxiety (and it responds very well in
my experience) but it empowers people when they can consciously
change
how they think about things, and consciously change how they react.

Use hypnosis, use NLP, use pschotherapy techniques, teach them how to
use them all, they'll choose the techniques that work best for them,
but giving them an arsenal of abilities gives them choices.

Iain


> Any other suggestions

Many thanks to all those who took the time and trouble to respond to my request
for thoughts on how it might be possible to help a young girl with idiopathic
scoliosis.

Your feedback is much appreciated.  Its lovely to feel that there is that much
support out there somewhere!

With very best regards

Sue

Sue McIntyre  Dip.Adv.Hyp.  Dip.Pers.Dev.  Cert.Couns.
Hypnotherapy, Coaching, Counselling, Stress Management
www.theconsultingrooms.co.uk
+44 (0)1278  784490

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Sue,

I tried posting this to the list, but not sure it will work as ive just
changed my email address,  please could you forward if you dont see it
posted.  Im sure it could be of use to others on the list.

As an Alchemical Hypnotherapist, I work with a transpersonal model.  An
aspect of this work is Somatic Healing, which involves amongst other things,
connecting the client with their inner healer, who may perform psychic
surgery to straighten the spine.  It could also be useful to regress back to
the time when the spine first began to malform and to ascertain the reasons
why.  You could dialogue with the spine for clarity.  David Quigley (USA)
who is the founder of Alchemical Hypnotherapy will be  staying with me in
September as we are running an empowerment here in Weston Super Mare.  So we
are in fact neighbours and it would be lovely to meet with you.

You might also speak to Berne, (our mutual friend) regarding Thought Pattern
Management, which again works with subconscious mind, and parts work.  It
would be neccessary to have some knowledge of the medical condition and also
of the mechanics of any operation to help with suggestion work as the client
performs their own surgery.

I, myself worked with a young man of 30 who was told he needed hip
resurfacing or replacement, he was connected with his inner healer, we
dialogued with his hip and he worked on and processed relationship issues
that came up during this dialogue.  He was then instructed to allow his body
to move in the way that it needed to move and this hypnotic movement which
he continued to use with self hypnosis now has him with 70% less pain and
80% greater mobility.

I am running a training course in Alchemical Hypnotherapy which is
accredited by the GHSC if you or anyone else is interested in this approach.
Many more details are on the website, including emotional clearing,
sub-persoanlity work, inner guides (archetypes), past lives, etc.

Sue would be lovely to connect and be in touch with you, so please do feel
free to give me a call and I can give you further information on this
process.

Kim

SOULUTIONS International Healing Arts Centre
Transpersonal Hypnotherapy Training
Complementary Therapy Training

Tel: 01934 522665

www.soulutions.uk.com

   -----Original Message-----
   From: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Sue McIntyre
   Sent: 12 July 2005 21:50
   To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
   Subject: [UKhypno] Any thoughts on this please?


   Hi

   I received this enquiry recently and wondered if anyone in the group has
experience in dealing with this condition?  All ideas much appreciated.  (I
DO have the author's permission to post this!).

   Regards

   Sue

   Sue McIntyre  Dip.Adv.Hyp.  Dip.Pers.Dev.  Cert.Couns.
   Hypnotherapy, Coaching, Counselling, Stress Management
   www.theconsultingrooms.co.uk
   +44 (0)1278  784490


   Dear Sue,

   Our 12 yr old daughter has quite a severe idiopathic scoliosis (abnormal
spinal growth) we are being advised to have an operation to deal with the
condition. We of course want to explore all other possible options before
committing to a serious operation.

   We are currently doing a number of therapies in an attempt to deal with
this scenario. As the cause of the condition is unknown treatment is
symptomatic. A friend mentioned that maybe NLP/hypnotherapy might add to
this multi-faceted approach.

   I would be interested in your opinion




   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





   You want to be a Hypnotherapist? We will train you...
   Clinical Hypnotherapy Training Courses:
   <a href="http://www.HypnoSynthesis.com/">www.HypnoSynthesis.com</a>

   Submit your Website to the Hypnosis &amp; Hypnotherapy UK Webring:
http://l.webring.com/wrman?ring=ukhypnotherapy&addsite

   All postings are moderated, only suitable messages will be approved.
Please keep your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis, respectful and
polite.  All advertisments must be authorised by the moderators.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

     a..  Visit your group "hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK" on the web.

     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]