Neuro-linguistic programming is ideal for the treatment of depression.

I am disappointed to see neurolinguistic programming again featuring in the medical press. NLP is not a treatment for depression or anxiety or anything else for that matter. Evidence also refutes its claim to be an aid to communication. Few articles on NLP actually explain what it supposedly does and fewer still comment on its origins. NLP originated when Richard Bandler, a student at Santa Cruz University, California was transcribing taped therapy sessions of the Gestalt therapist Frits Perls as a project for the psychiatrist Dr Robert Spitzer, who had originally commissioned Bandler to teach his son drums. Bandler believed he recognized particular word and sentence structures which facilitated the acceptance of Perls’ positive suggestions. Bandler took this revelation to one of his university teachers, Dr John Grinder, a linguist, and together they produced what they termed the ' Meta Model ', a model of what they believe to be influential word structures and how they work (one can think of it like a large multi-limbed protocol diagram). This they published as ' The Structure of Magic '. Much of it was very similar to and based on previous linguistic work by Grinder on transactional grammar which has since been superseded by the theories of Lakov, Chomsky and others. In the development they also modelled therapeutic sessions of the family therapist Virginia Satir. Perls died before the growth and popularisation of NLP and Satir was at best ambivalent about it in the years before her own death. In collaboration with others, including the sociologist Gregory Bateson, Bandler and Grinder developed NLP by attaching a hodgepodge of theories of psychology, personal development and communication. These are too numerous to list completely but examples are: -- -- The Milton Model. Although perceiving some success in the application of the ' Meta Model ' (the co originators, as they have now agreed to be called the – see later for further information) found it did not deal with all situations and as suggested by Bateson they modelled the language influencing techniques of the hypnotist Milton Ericsson. This allowed NLP more options of approach. As opposed to the “Meta Model” which used language specifically Ericsson used very vague language so as clients could put their own interpretations on anything he said. -- The Map/Territory Distinction. This is a concept originated by Alfred Korszybski, a 20th century Polish American scientific theorist and philosopher, in his large and opaque volume on the philosophy of science and thought published in 1921 entitled ' Science and Sanity '. This is now virtually forgotten and of no influence. In essence the Map/Territory Distinction simply says that things are not always what they seem. This is hardly an earth shattering insight! -- Representational Thought Systems and Predicates. NLP proposes that people think preferentially in seeing, hearing or feeling terms and that the words they use, termed predicates, indicate their preferred system of thought. It is further proposed that matching predicates can increase rapport. This is a nice idea but has never stood up to any scientific analysis or testing and critics counter propose that it can actually make one more likely to be distrusted. -- Eye Accessing Clues. This relates to ' Representational Systems ' and proposes that eye movements demonstrated momentarily before processing a thought indicate the representational system being used for that thought. Again there has never been any scientific evidence that this is true. -- Theories of Personal Development and Achievement. -- audaciously expressed in the early NLP text ' Frogs into Princess ' was the contention that anyone can do anything any other human can do once they learn how to via the modelling techniques of NLP. This so-called classic work was transcribed from an early seminar given by Bandler and Grinder to psychologists by their follower Steve Andreas aka John O Stevens. This principle remains central to NLP teaching but has been toned down to allow rational acceptance. Again there is nothing revelatory about watching and learning! Bandler was nothing if not outrageous and extreme. Bandler and Grinder and cohorts originally presented NLP to the psychological community in America. Due to its inherent deficiencies it failed to meet the potential promised. Now it is more often proposed as a method for communicating and developing empathy and influencing rather than as a primary treatment. Much like the similar fairytale, EMDR, when challenged about the inability of NLP theories to stand up to rigorous scientific analysis the so-called NLP Community will say that NLP is not a science and should not be judged by scientific criteria. Something frequently said by apologists for nonsense therapies. Historically emphasis shifted to the business and personal development fields, ripe for the taking in America and without requirement for rigorous analysis of results achieved. NLP as now developed had attached many amusing parlour tricks, just the ticket for the lucrative seminar circuit. Anyone who has attended a course will know what these are. Here the goose really did lay the golden egg but despite being promoted as ' New Technology of Achievement ' none of the advocates achieved anything except making money directly and indirectly from the promotion of NLP theories to others. NLP grew out of the New Age and drug sub culture of the time of its origin as documented by McClendon in ' NLP -- the Wild Days '. By the mid-1980s Richard Bandler was divorced from his wife and hopelessly addicted to alcohol and cocaine which he used prodigiously. In 1986 he was accused and stood trial for the murder of Corinne Christiansen, a prostitute who acted as his bookkeeper. (This information is only available on the Internet at www.geocities.com/Bandlertrial where there is a reprint of an explanatory Mother Jones Magazine article -- but how many NLPers will tell you this?). The popularity of NLP has waned in America where it is now seen as lacking credibility. Bandler has attempted unsuccessfully to sue Grinder and others for intellectual property rights related to what is termed NLP knowledge. The two masters of communication now appeared only to communicate via their legal teams! Both of the co originators and others have now developed new variants of NLP which they claim tell the whole truth, including the bits the original theories missed out and which are essential to understanding and development. Bandler now advocates ' Human Design Engineering ', Grinder has developed ' New Code NLP ', Tony Robbins has 'Neuro Associative Conditioning ', and Michael Hall promotes ' Neurosemantics ' to name but a few. Bandler and Grinder now spend an increasing amount of time in Britain. Others such as Paul McKenna have jumped on the bandwagon, or should I say mounted the gravy train! Ever mindful of the need for new markets the unsubstantiated theories of NLP are promoted with vigour and panache and defended perhaps with just a little of the wrath of scientology towards those who dare to shout “ the emperor has no clothes!” NLP is being proposed for use in medicine somewhat mirroring the popularisation of Mesmerism in 19th-century medicine. NLP is just as unscientific. It requires to be challenged. This is already happening in the fields of education and management, for example by the educationalist Donald Clark. NLP is not nearly so popular in France where Norbert Vogel has been active in challenging its unscientific assertions and in any case its promise of a quick fix and advancement and achievement without talent and years of hard work is contrary to the French way of thinking. The NLP practitioners and master practitioners in medicine have invested their time, their money and their credibility and will advocate it vigorously. Nevertheless NLP is completely without scientific basis. The principal psychologist of Sheffield Health Authority, David Heap looked at 70 papers on NLP and concluded that its theoretical underpinning was not serious science, and that there was no scientific evidence for the claim that NLP techniques improve rapport. Stephen G. Cody found that NLP therapists, using language matching, were actually rated as untrustworthy and ineffective (The stability and impact of the primary representational system in neurolinguistic programming: a critical examination). David Platt drawing from German NLP research found no evidence to support representational systems, predicates or eye accessing clues. NLP’s linguistic theories were debunked years ago. Beyerstein (Brain scams: neuromythologies of the new age -- International journal of mental health) accuses NLP of being a total con, new-age fakery to be classed alongside scientology and astrology.

 Thanks for your clarification made on NLP... Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} This is very interesting in the context of self-perception analysis common to many such programs... Actually treating depression using NLP is now in practice... Nice reading...

 http://www.theleaderworld.com

 Thank you "theleaderworld" you have an interesting web magazine.  There are unfortunately many treatments "in practice" without scientific basis.  I see that one of your contributors is an NLP master practitioner and runs a coaching website.  Here's a 14 point guide for such an enterprise gleaned from the NLP Masters themselves: --

Guide to Therapeutic and Personal Advancement Philosophy Wealth Creation.

1. -- keep your philosophy vague, make it all things to all men.

2. -- appropriate the ideas of others if they are useful, add some pseudoscience.  It provides mystique!

3. -- promise much but make inevitable failure to achieve everything you promise due to the followers' inability to fully comprehend and apply your miraculous techniques.

4. -- keep the most essential techniques which will fulfil the promise just around the corner as the next development.

5. -- get your “disciples” to record your words of wisdom, do not do it yourself.

6. -- create immunity for your theories from expected forms of criticism. “It's not science so it should not be judged as such!”

7. -- find a niche but be flexible, modify your theories for the market, emphasise the aspect most attractive to any particular group.

8. -- move to a new group of suckers once one group dries up!

9. -- if possible suppress any damaging information.

10. -- be selfish, allow as few gurus as possible, protect this position by lawsuits if necessary.

11. -- promote your own brand and protect it also with lawsuits if necessary.

12. -- don't forget the ritual and messianic aspects but modify according to target group needs and expectations. (NLP’s elegance is that includes just a little pinch of these!)

13. -- create stakeholders, treat them well, give them status, make them feel they have special knowledge.  They are the foot soldiers of your empire!

14. --make hay while the sun shines.  The vagaries of therapeutic fashion are fickle.  Your influence and income will eventually wane.