THE MYTH OF C.B.

by Dr Philip Andrew

Commencing this paper with the initial emphasis on psychological therapy applications,
particularly C.B.T. or cognitive behaviour therapy - the therapy established by the work of
Aaron T. Beck - and of Albert Ellis's R.E.T., Rational Emotive Therapy - at first sight one
might assume it an effective therapy. Also, that it is plausible to control thoughts and
distinguish those that are unwanted or troublesome. So convincing has been the
argument for CBT it has become the psychological therapy of choice in mainstream
medical fraternities. It has research to back up the unusually good curative rates and in
short treatment durations. (The time element is a clear attraction to funding agencies
such as the NHS and GP fundholders).

Now, I propose all is not well with CBT and that it's very scientific foundations are
levelled on quicksand. It is fundamentally flawed.

Generally speaking, an average person has between 80,000 to 200,000 thoughts per
day. Would it be naive to suggest we are going to spend every minute of every day
controlling each and everyone of these thoughts? If those thought blocks were to be
achieved the individual would die of stress and total exhaustion during the process!
Aaron T.Beck, the founder of CBT, showed most problematic thoughts to be automatic. I
suggest that if true, these automatic thoughts are by default unconscious processes
therefore not in our individual consciousnesses to access, let alone to locate and alter
'on-the-spot' within our hectic day-to-day schedules and increased stress in daily living.

CBT works on the premise of altering misconceptions and false beliefs through
thoughts . It's fundamental principle is in the belief of being able to correct our own false
perceptions, beliefs and values. This is done by identifying a thought and correcting the
weight assigned to it. In other words changing the thought through giving contradictory
evidence to it's existence - that it has no substance and shouldn't be in our mind. Using
conventional yet simple scientific explanations it can be seen to be a convincing formula
to its success.

What is not considered in the simple CBT formula is 'cause & effect' - the quantum
phenomena that paints a true picture. And how the CBT formula brushes under the
carpet some facts that dispute it's therapeutic claims. The truth is that CBT fails to
deliver on its promises.
I emphasize here that a 'cure' means not a temporary removal (or weakening) of impact
of a thought or series of linked thoughts, but should mean the removal or weakening
related to the original thought over a significant time-frame, without symptoms re-
introducing themselves in 'another form' through the expression of substitution.
Somewhat worryingly - and shortsightedly, substitution is not considered a factor when
compiling the success scores of CBT. Statisticians in favour of CBT would claim the
original condition 'cured' presenting those statistics alone to the authorities.

CBT! The Biggest Hoax of the Last Half-Century?

The fortunate subject who is regarded as cured by the medical establishment (NHS and
Psychiatry) can be left stunned and confused later on - through a new ailment that
seemingly bears no relation to the 'old cured condition'. As the new condition may not
bear any resemblance to the 'cured' one, they are not linked, and the cure statistic is
afforded to CBT .

This article demonstrates how quantum physics can provide firm scientific evidence that
claims about the effectiveness of CBT as a therapy are manufactured and fantasy. To
start the ball rolling let's propose that if a person was aware and knew what their key
behaviour determinant thoughts always were - the fundamental premise of CBT and
positive thinking - then it would demolish the predominant structure of the great Freudian
theory, in other words the Freudian terms and structures of regression, repression and
substitution rocks the very foundation of CBT theories. One of the two factual basis's is
wrong or fundamentally flawed.

In this paper I will now add scientific weight to this hypothesis employing simple
elementsof classical and quantum physics. As said, if 80% of the mind is subconscious
then it is not accessible by CBT - which purportsd to work on conscious thoughts of
misconceptions - such as the human inclination towards catastrophising - thoughts or
expressions of the subconscious, the other 80%, always win in a battle against the will of
the conscious mind. This means that the 20% that CBT could influence is still
unachievable - without altering the hidden persuasions of the subconscious that effect
the linked conscious key thoughts under analysis in therapy. As CBT has no narrative to
tackle any thoughts but the conscious ones it is becoming easy to see how as a therapy
it is doomed to fail from it's very conception.

EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE HYPOTHESIS

Many behaviours happen far too quickly to be initiated by consciousness. Max Velmans
(01) lists examples: analysis of sensory inputs and their emotional content, phonlogical
and semantic analysis of heard speech and preparation of one's own spoken words and
sentences, learning and formation of memories and choice, planning and execution of
voluntary acts. Consequently, subjective feeling of conscious control of those behaviours
cited is deemed illusory.

Jeffrey Gray (02) observed that in tennis "The speed of the ball after a serve is so great,
and the distance over which it has to travel so short, that the player who recieves the ball
must strike it back before he has had time consciously to see the ball leave the server's
racket. Conscious awareness comes too late to affect his stroke". Similarly, John
McRone (03) writes, "[for] tennis players....facing a fast serve..........even if awareness
were actually instant, it would still not be fast enough...."

Touch also involves temporal binding. If you touch your foot with your finger, then each
foot and finger sensation feeling happens simultaneously. Yet the sensory signal from
your foot requires significantly longer to reach the sensory cortex than does the finger.
How does the brain provide synchrony? Henry Stapp views the universe as a single
quantum wave function. Reduction of a portion of it within the brain is a conscious
moment. The multiple-worlds view suggests each superposition is amplified, leading to a
new universe. There is no collapse, but an infinity of realities (and conscious minds) is
required.

Like Stenger's, John Cramer's Transactional Interpretation relies on the fundamental

time-symmetry of the universe. Here the particles are believed to perform a kind of
handshake intermingling in the course of interacting. One sends out a w ave forward in
time, and another sends out one backward in time. In TIME REVERSIBILITY, the genius
Richard Feynman (1918-1988) developed quantum electrodynamics, his crowning
achievement. An electron, travelling from one location to another, can hit a photon and
be sent not only backwards in space but also in time. It can then hit another photn that
projects it forward in time again, but in a different direction in space. This means that it
can be in two places at once, ie. Conscious and Subconscious. The phenomenon of
multiple co-existing possibilities is known as quantum superposition. Multiple objects,
and that may include a person or thoughts, can be unified acting as a single coherent
object. If a component is perturbed, others feel it and react. This is called nonlocality. If
unified objects are spatially seperated they remain unified - therefore we cannot
seperate the conscious from the unconscious to recieve the desired therapeutic outcome
in it's entirety. This nonlocality is also known as quantum entanglement.

Are we living in the past but remembering, falsely, living in the here and now? Libet (04)
came to these conclusions: conscious perception requires brain activity for 500 ms to
achieve neuronal adequacy and information is referred up to 500 ms backward in time to
the primary evoked potential, 10 to 30 ms after peripheral stimulation, for near
immediate conscious perception. Hence we may now consider taking 'backward time
referral' more seriously.

Through this presentation paper, my aim has been for the reader to begin seeing that
smooth, real-time conscious experience is an edited construction - an illusion. How
quantum concepts can trigger us to probe the secrets of consciousness, free will and the
paranormal. Quantum theory is non-intuitive and defies common-sense? And how,
hypnotherapy - discarded by the medical profession - has the most proof of potential as
a psychological therapy. Hypnotherapy addresses the 80% subconscious controlling a
person's thoughts and internal programmes, the architects of most mind and body
disturbance.
Areas of psychic investigation can be seriously applied to "cutting-edge" quantum
concepts and a scientific foundation given to phenomena such as clairvoyancy,
telepathy, precognition, psychokinesis, and dermo-optics (the sensing of visual
information through tactile skin receptors). Quantum physics can add scientific
founations to acupuncture, bioenergetics and Kirlian effects.

Quantum physics is 'mainstream' subject of importance in U.K. and International

universities - and there is little resistance to it. The emergence of Professor Hawkings
has added a stamp and seal to quantum's public acceptance.Yet paranormal, psychic, &
clairvoyancy are essentially a by-product of applied quantum theory. This poses the
serious question of how one (e.g. clairvoyancy) can be dismissed whilst the other
(quantum physics) is readily accepted, and even celebrated - being 'cool' to study at
university, knowing both are identical?

Does the application of quantum as a mainstream science raise the therapy question?
Yes! For knowing, as we most certainly do, the factual basis for success in psychological
treatments, you may ask why quantum theories & its evidence are ignored by decision
makers, as they dismiss the most effective therapies such as hypnotherapy, and
promote the least effective such as CBT (CBT least effective in terms of all known
science & knowledge), rolling it out en masse to the U.K. unsuspecting public. If this
paper gives the reader concerns about how policy directors are selected and appointed
in order to deceive the masses, intentionally or otherwise, then this paper has delivered
it's promise.

THE END

REFERENCES

(01) Velmans, M. (1991), Behaviour and Brain Sciences

(02) Gray, J.A. (2004), Consciousness: Creeping up on the Hard Problem

(03) McRone, J. (1999), Going Inside: A Tour Round a Single Moment of Consciousness

(04) Libet, B. (2003), Consciousness and Cognition