Should we give the instructions away for free? Your input needed

What are the benefits and costs of giving your work away for free? Sometimes it makes excellent business sense to do so (as well as being a community service). But would this be appropriate for RPT or our new technique?

These are the issues we consider today in response to this excellent comment from our reader Rob:

Dear Simon

I watch with interest at the latest developments in RPT.

One of your goals is to be available to anyone to use. I think that this is fundamental to any technique/technology/innovation spreading and developing. Any attempt to limit or control/own innovation can only stifle growth.

In the case of EFT, the basic technique was easy to learn and it was offered to the public for free. People could thus take it or leave it, but because of this availability new applications and uses developed quickly. It was to all intents and purposes “open source.” I really believe that this new way is the future, it speeds things up and I believe the more open source a thing is then the better. The only limitation on this is whereby potential harm can be caused by misuse of the technique.

But I note that the current RPT technique is not available for free and is only available via a practitioner. Whilst I do see some benefits of this this does significantly restrict the access for many people. If the technique is simple and can be learned by anyone then why is a practitioner needed. I appreciate that there might be subtleties to any technique but one could give the person the option to work with a professional at a later date.

Will the new technique be available to all or will people have to go through a practitioner?


Thanks Rob for bringing up this issue. I have discussed this in detail before on this blog, but I want to go over it again here as it is quite relevant to the question of how we launch our new technique. I do recommend that you, and anyone else interested in this subject, have a read of this article here. In particular see my comments right at the bottom of the page (final paragraphs of the final comment).

Freemium model – genius!

Let me say first that the EFT model you refer to is marketing genius! The founders of EFT pioneered the “freemium” model, which basically means you give your basic material away for free to establish credibility and then charge a premium for those who want more. It might only be 1% that are willing to pay for the premium, but that’s 1% of a much bigger market than you would have had if you didn’t give the free material away. So despite people thinking that you would lose money by giving stuff away for free, the opposite is the truth.

As a blogger and long-time follower of e-Commerce, I am a huge fan of the freemium model. As a result I did the same thing when I launched the first version of RPT back in February 2009. I put uncut demos online together with step-by-step instructions. I think it was a brilliant move as it enabled a huge launch for RPT, basically from nothing to having courses and teachers in 20 countries by the end of 2009. I don’t think we could have achieved that any other way.

Contrary to your comment “I note that the current RPT technique is not available for free;” I would point out that the 2009 and early 2010 step-by-step instructions and detailed demonstration videos are still online. It has always been possible to learn at least a taste of RPT for free. But yes (as you have seen) we have pulled back from this since 2010, and we don’t currently intend to teach the new technique for free.

I still believe in the freemium model. I still give plenty away (I would regard almost every page of this blog as giving material away). But I no longer give away the step-by-step instructions which I did in 2009.

There are a number of reasons why. These are just concerns, they are not fixed in stone. The marketing for the new technique is not fixed (frankly we don’t even have a good name yet), so anything is possible. I’m sharing my thoughts as I’d really value everyone’s feedback.

1) Protecting the public, and our reputation

When the RPT instructions were online in 2009, we started getting people emailing us telling us about side effects from “RPT sessions” with a non-practitioner who learned the technique on the internet. Even though this was not our legal responsibility, we still ended up helping these people (for free) to protect the good name of RPT.

We have never had this problem with people who have learned RPT from a qualified teacher, only people who watched a video, read instructions and tried to figure it out.

Of course I had plenty of disclaimers, but the inevitable will happen, and we feel responsible for it.

Put simply, RPT is not as simple as tapping techniques. There are more steps, and more need to feel into your “stuff.” It is a fact that when you start feeling into your stuff you can “activate” or “trigger” old trauma. That’s OK provided you finish what you started. A trained practitioner knows how to do this. But you can’t teach that in a short web video and instruction sheet. People need a course to do it properly.

2) Protecting the other RPT teachers

If I knew for sure it was safe, I’d have no personal problem with giving it away. As my regular readers know, I don’t do RPT for the money.  Actually I invest money into it rather than make money from it. RPT is my service to the community.  (I’m a lawyer, investor and strategic consultant. RPT is what I do to keep sane.)  So if it were just me, and if it were safe, I’d see no problems with giving it away.

However it’s not just me. Lots of our good students went on to become teachers.  It feels like it wouldn’t be fair to these people if I started giving all the info away. Put simply, it’s no longer my choice, because it’s not me that gets affected by it.

Of course the RPT teachers might decide to support the freemium model to help grow their own businesses.  I’m just saying it’s not just up to me as I don’t own RPT any more.

3) The relative lack of simplicity

When I look at why the freemium model worked for EFT but not for RPT, I think the key difference is simplicity. I have said our new technique is much simpler than RPT, but it’s still relative.  Relative to EFT it is not simple.  It takes many hours to learn and understand it – about 1 day of theory and 1 day of practice to get the basics.

EFT is wonderfully simple. Though studies have shown it’s a placebo, it still works for lots of people and it’s easy.

RPT is not as simple as “tap, tap, tap.” This simplicity of EFT makes it better than RPT for simple self-healing. I fully admit that; there is no competition here, we are different horses for different courses.

If you have a simple quick problem like a fear or anxiety about a particular situation that you are currently confronted with (like walking into a room with intimidating people), EFT is a great quick-fix. I highly doubt that it would clear the underlying issues, meaning you need to do the EFT again next time you are in the same situation. But in the short term, it will really help. So EFT has a huge advantage over RPT in speed and simplicity. It’s safe and gentle. As a result, it really is appropriate to share it freely using the freemium model.

4) The need to see your own deepest blocks (self-healing limitation)

RPT is not as simple as EFT because it is not intended as a quick intervention technique. It’s intended to totally change your personality, health and ultimately identity. It’s meant to get right to the core in a “bottom up” approach to healing. Not a quick-fix.

I’ve done my very best to make it simple, but it’s not tap-tap.

One of the things I love about EFT is that it works on an issue (e.g. “fear of X”) without really needing to dig too much into the origins of the issue. That means you can safely use it as a quick self-healing intervention.

RPT just doesn’t work like that. The new RPT method is based around getting to the core of extremely deep interwoven issues like secondary gain and sense of identity. These factors are usually hidden under many layers of ego.

What that means is that even with proper training on an RPT course, there are times when it’s hard to do the technique on yourself (but easy to do on others). Now I can, after the Level 2 training, give people confidence working on themselves. But no way can a step-by-step instruction sheet published on the internet teach someone how to do this.

Consider that you might have a problem that defines your identity, it’s interwoven with who you are. You try simple techniques like EFT but after a year you realize that there has been no permanent change in your sense of self, although the EFT does provide short-term relief of symptoms. At this point you decide that you are willing to re-examine and change your sense of self. OK great. Now let’s say that you found all the RPT materials for free, and you have step-by-step instructions. OK great. Now what?

Could you, even with step-by-step instructions, confront your egoistic attachments to your identity?

I could not, and I believe that you would be a man in a million if you could.

So, even if we gave RPT step-by-step instructions away, for free, you would have to seriously ask the question about whether it’s going to help or hinder people who have not done the proper training.

Conclusion: the freemium model

I’ve been bitterly honest about the weaknesses of RPT (new and old) in this article. I hope you can appreciate where I am coming from. I believe we have developed something revolutionary that will save many thousands of lives. But it isn’t a quick-fix panacea for all. It isn’t meant to replace every other technique out there (just some of them). It’s fine for there to be faster and simpler methods for the little stuff, as RPT is for those who are ready for big changes.

So with all of that said, I ask the question: “is it safe and appropriate to give step-by-step instructions away on the website?”

It doesn’t have to be for free (I think the free bit confuses the issue as people think this is about money, which it is not.)  What if you could buy the manual for $50 without doing the course? Would that be a good idea? I could do that when I publish my book later this year. But should I? Is it safe?

I’d really value you thoughts on all these issues. Please do comment below.



January 10, 2012 in RPT theory and teachings
Tagged , , , , , ,

31 Responses

  1. Helo again from Slovenia :)

    I don’t think it should be for free, ’cause you have put a lot of energy in all your work. So it should be paid somehow. And a lot of people just don’t worship things they get for free. That’s the way it is, unfortunately.
    But because the RPT changed so many times during it’s existence, it would be ok, to give all teh practicioners the opportunity to get the new informations in some other way, then going again to the coures. When I bougt your first CD it was meant to be instend of going to the Course . But then you’ve changed something and I still had to go that course otherwise I couldn’t go to Course 2. What bothered me on Course 1 was, that you said that in course 2 everything will be much” easier and quicker”. So why having course 1 if the course 2 is “better”? You could easly just teach that stuff from course 2.

    Hope you understand the point.



  2. hi Nena, lovely to hear from you and great work being the first to comment (sorry Shane!)

    Yes I will certainly be giving updates to past RPT graduates as we have done in the past. It wont be totally free as it’s a new technique, but it will be very low cost. The cost depends on whether it’s by our graduate forum ( using videos, or whether it’s a repeat of a course. Obviously the repeat of the course is better, but not everyone can travel and do it.

    About your comment on level 1 versus 2, I quite disagree because the Level 2 technique is based on the Level 1 technique. (This is true with both older RPT and the new method). The Level 1 technique is a way to clear emotional blocks. Level 2 is a different approach to healing (Key Developmental Events model) which means that instead of clearing symptoms one by one, you deal with the original trauma. What technique do we use to clear this trauma? The Level 1 technique! So how could you learn the Level 2 short cuts without knowing Level 1?

    Great to have you on the blog!

    Best wishes


    Nena Reply:

    Ok..let’s say it is necessary to learn it. (Well it is necessary for all of you who might think it isn’t .)But I did learn it from CD…so what’s the point?
    And it’s easy to learn in my opinion you could join both courses in one, cause it takes max. 3 hours to get the point of the technique. But that’s just my opinion. I just need a essence of it and then it’s all practice :) Maybe for people like me, you could think of some solution, how to get all the news in some other way then goinig to the course over and over again. :)

    Thanks for your understanding.




    Simon Rose Reply:

    Hi Nina

    Please avoid some confusion about different techniques. The DVD you refer to was the original RPT. It sounds like you learned it well from the DVD, most people needed the course.

    Anyway we are talking about a different technique now. It has nothing to do with reference points so it’s not RPT.

    Maybe you would learn it great from a DVD, that doesn’t mean that everyone could. But RPT graduates should learn it much more quickly than people who haven’t done RPT.

    Warm regards


    Nena Reply:

    Thx for the explanation. I get it. That’s why I said for people like me who already konw the older technique.
    How it is called now?



    Shane Marsh Reply:

    “hi Nena, lovely to hear from you and great work being the first to comment (sorry Shane!)”

    Looks like RSS isn’t as effective as my previous method :)


  3. Wow, great article! I don’t think I’ve ever seen you articulate the self-healing versus practitioner-facilitated healing issue as well as you have in this article. I kind of got it before but not to the extent that I do now. I totally get it now and it makes complete sense because of the nature of RPT compared to other modalities. I agree that to release the entire thing to the public for free would be inappropriate and potentially dangerous.




  4. I agree with Shane on all counts – very well articulated blog post, and you’ve got the balance just right: plenty of useful information available for free, but not to the extent where people can become ‘self trained practitioners’, which I agree is bad all round.

    My 2cents.



  5. EFT can be learned for free but people still go to trained practitioners who charge. That’s because not everyone is interested in spending the time and energy on healing themselves. They also want an expert. I could read a plumbing book but I’d get a plumber in if my boiler packed in.
    People who have trained properly and practised a lot can apply this wonderful method in a nuanced and probably deeper way than someone who just read the manual.
    When I first learned EFT I did it from the manual. The courses weren’t great but they certified me. The real learning came from actively watching hours of Gary Craig’s masterful work and many times more hours of exchange work with other practitioners, workshops and experience with clients. The results I then achieved, taking people to places they’d be unlikely to go by themselves, far exceeded those from merely learning the steps of the process.
    When I first looked at Simon’s site early in 2009 I became an immediate convert and used RPT in that original incarnation to great effect with a client the very next day. Rather hasty perhaps, but I was already an experienced practitioner and when you’re working with a person some things apply regardless of the modality so I wasn’t really starting from scratch. Since then I’ve done the excellent courses which gave me far more than a simple certification, I’ve taught Level 1 and Level 2 many times, I’ve done untold hours of exchange work with other teachers and practitioners and I’ve applied the evolving technique with oodles of clients. All that experience and investment of time, energy and money is reflected in my results.
    I am far from alone in this – any other experienced teacher and/or practitioner will tell you something similar.
    And that is what you pay for.
    You could put the whole lot on the net for free and most people would still want to entrust their deepest and most fragile selves to someone who knows what they are doing, and many will still want to do the courses to “learn properly”.
    That doesn’t answer the question of whether that should happen. That’s probably a moot point if there’s to be a book, which there most definitely should be.


  6. Hello Simon,

    Ah im blushing at you mentioning my name like this. I never meant to make a fuss.

    Thank you so much for taking the time to provide a thoughtful answer. It is appreciated.

    Im currently writing a more detailed reply but i would like to do it properly.

    You raise some important issues which i had not thought about.

    All my best



  7. Hi Simon,

    I am a newbie. I am studying(I won’t call it RPT) with Val Moore next week in Boise. I have studied and used many of the different energy psychology techniques on myself and others for the last twelve years. When I found out about RPT I digested everything on your website and felt that you come from a place of integrity and sincerity, even without meeting you.

    While I have had many successes with Robert Smith’s Faster EFT, TAT, BSFF, Z Point, something was different when I had some sessions with Val. Somehow it felt like the healing was deeper and addressed all of the reasons why healing stops or does not go to the core trauma.

    Anyway, I appreciate the insight of your writings and look forward to many more in the future.

    Be well,

    Jim Adcock


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Jim!
    Welcome to the [insert name here] team! :-) OK we’ll just keep calling it RPT till something better comes along.

    Congrats on being one of the lucky ones on Val’s course next weekend. You will love it. Please do report back here to let everyone know how it went.



  8. Hey!

    I don’t want to hi-jack the thread, but something’s been on my mind for a while, and it looks like it gets light shining on it today :)

    I believe we are many powerful students of this technique, and I think a lot of the people
    I met in courses and online could be very proficient practitioners of RPT.

    However, it looks like there are not that many RPT students actively giving paid sessions . I might be wrong, and there are many, but it looks to be just a few.

    What I have been thinking of, is kind of a structured swapsystem for RPT practitioners, so that we could all raise up a level.. or five. Like, Prac 1 with much experience and knowledge does a session for Prac 2 with less experience, who in turn gives sessions to Prac 3, 4 and 5, ending up after a while at Prac 2′s level… and so on.

    All of the sessions would obviously be paid for good reasons, but at a heavy discount, WHEN GEARED TOWARDS PULLING THAT PRAC UP TO THE LEVEL OF being able to give sessions to the general public.

    Kind of a ugly looking hierarchy metaphorically speaking, BUT, potentially a way to lift RPT rapidly….which is a very good thing.

    I think it is a great idea and of course many aspects could be discussed, but really the best way to build any kind of business is to invest in the people actively out there doing it.

    How could it be done practically do you think? :D


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Geir and welcome to the blog.
    Thanks for sharing your thoughts on how we could spread healings and also gain more experience.

    The thing is, I believe this is already happening, albeit not as formally as you are suggesting.

    The way it normally works is this: student does an RPT course. If they are already a practitioner of other modalities, they start applying RPT on day 1. If they are new to this field, they start practicing on family and friends. The more they practice the better they become. Many arrange regular “swaps” with other students from their class (I suggest this in every course). When they feel ready they might start charging for sessions.

    We have several forums at One is for teachers, one for graduates, and one where the general public can request healings. It is not well used, perhaps I need to advertise it more here? It could be a great place for new students to find people to practice on.

    I love hearing you ideas.



    Geir B Reply:

    Hey simon, it’s not exactly my first comment this… but i digress.

    What I’ve experience is a little different world from what you describe.

    While I have had swaps before and have ongoing swaps with two people now (through the forum actually), the situation looks somewhat akin to what happened when I went to learn massage therapy in a private school.

    Quick story about that, we were 60 students in the class, and the teachers encouraged us to form collective groups as they are called, to back eachother up, study together etc. In actual practice only two groups of 4-6 students were formed.

    When I studied French and Social Antrhopology in Uni however, it was different. Every student was put in a collective group and HAD to take part in the groups meetings, because sharing with others is so important when you are learning something new.

    Anyway, 30 % of the MT students failed their exams… I won’t research the numbers for my uni classes now but they were decidedly better.

    It was just obvious to me going to MT studies that it would be a whole lot better if people were either encouraged more strongly, or simply placed randomly in collective groups for more efficient learning.

    Also, from what I know from my country, most of the practicioners who have done the courses do not do paid RPT…. and many could, at least parttime.

    Remember, some people are too shy to even make contact for swaps, some might want the ‘perfect’ therapist to help them, etc.. I honestly think a well-organized swap system would GREATLY benefit the RPT field of practicioners.



    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Greir
    > it’s not exactly my first comment this

    You crack me up! Next you’ll be thinking I don’t know who you are!

    > I honestly think a well-organized swap system would GREATLY benefit the RPT field of practitioners.

    I *Totally* agree with you.

    We do have this in some places. The main problems is the need for a local organizer. When I taught in my home city, I organized the swaps. But since I travel to teach, I’m not there to do it.

    Many of our best practitioners and teachers are coming out of cities where a local promoter or teacher is organizing swaps. Moscow is an excellent example where Dmitry is organizing regular catch-ups and practice nights.

    Obviously this is something to be organized on a local level. If your RPT teacher did not organize practice nights, contact them to find out why. [This is "you" = anyone reading this, not just Greir.]

    Ultimately, whilst all of RPT will benefit from these swaps, it is still something for individuals to take responsibility for.

    I am really open to suggestions for what I can do to better support this from the top. I can’t book local venues, but I’m happy to use the Forum to promote local meet-ups.


  9. Next month I’ll ‘host’ my first swaps for my students. I’m hoping to make it a monthly event. And we’ll do it over Skype. I’ll pair people up, and they’ll Skype, and I’ll be there if I’m needed. (Skype can be 3 way).
    I’m really looking forward to it – the motivation behind teaching, for me, is to train brilliant practitioners who are really confident with RPT. I don’t feel that the 5 days I get with them on the courses is enough, so…
    I think that what Geir is suggesting is that it’s kind of mandatory for teachers to do this kind of thing, and I think it’s a good idea. Everyone benefits enormously, and it’s a piece of cake to organize if everyone uses Skype.


    Simon Rose Reply:

    Great idea Ben, and one for our next teacher conference call as I think we should all be doing that.


    Geir B Reply:

    Great! Exactly! I was going to reply more or less the same thing as Ben here.

    The most important for me to say however is that my teacher back in Norway IS having monthly events, which are quite successful, however I am personally not in Norway myself as I travel very extensively and have done so the last two years.

    Anyway, skype swaps is the perfect way to do swaps, because then you can work from the comfort of your own home, and it removes some issues around doing swaps. (Hey, wanna come back to my place and work on our issues a couple hours babe? ;) ) kidding.. but hey.. humans are interesting beings.

    Also, just had an amazing swap on skype today actually, and it was deeply transformative. If you haven’t done skypework before, i tell you it really works very well.


  10. Simon,
    I enjoy your articles and am seriously seeking out getting some training in RPT. However, I am questioning your statement in the Blog article entitled “Should we give our instructions away for free.” You made this statement: “EFT is wonderfully simple. Though studies have shown it’s a placebo, it still works for lots of people and it’s easy.” I am an EFT/Faster EFT practitioner and have been for 5 years. I would hardly call it a placebo because placebos by definition are ineffective, yet you say EFT still works. That seems contradictory. And can I ask what studies you are referring to? I don’t mean to sound challenging, but I need clarification on this if you would please.

    Thank you very much,


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Clay, thanks for visiting this blog. I really enjoy hearing from our readers.

    I’m sorry at your consternation, especially as it is caused by a misunderstanding of “placebo.” Let me take responsibility for your confusion as I should have been clearer. Not all readers take the time to question me and I always fear bad for those that didn’t.

    A placebo is effective. Often more effective than prescription medication. That is why the double-blind placebo trial is the gold standard in medical testing. If placebos were not effective then there would be no need for double blind trials. I really hope this makes sense because it’s vitally important.

    I have written about the placebo effect in more clarity on other pages on this blog. Here’s a link to past placebo effect articles:
    I will write more soon, you have inspired me.

    There is no real doubt that EFT is a placebo, it has been tested many times. I tend not to post links to research that is well documented. Perhaps I should? Anyway here’s the first one I found that demonstrated the placebo effect in relation to using EFT on fear:

    Waite WL, Holder MD (2003). “Assessment of the Emotional Freedom Technique: An Alternative Treatment for Fear”
    The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice 2

    More relevantly, the scientific studies suggested that EFT often DID work but not for the reason claimed. This is what I’ve been saying on this blog. It’s not that alternative therapies don’t work but that the magical thinking is just that, magical. EFT works because it incorporates some psychology, not because of unblocking meridians. Homeopathy works because of acknowledgment by the practitioner. Theta works because of some basic counseling principles borrowed from NLP (e.g. digging), not because an invisible Creator jumps in if you happen to be in the right brain wave state when you ask! All these techniques can help, but not for the claimed reasons and not justified at the price charged.

    I discussed this information about how techniques work but not for the reasons claimed in this article:

    My source for this claim about EFT working for the “wrong” reason:

    “A 2009 review found that the “small successes seen in [EFTand the Tapas acupressure technique] therapies are potentially attributable to well-known cognitive and behavioral techniques that are included with the energy manipulation.”

    The study was

    McCaslin DL (2009 Jun). “A review of efficacy claims in energy psychology”. Psychotherapy (Chicago) 46 (2): 249-56. PMID 22122622

    and the quote comes from

    A quick Google search will find plenty more studies.

    OK references aside, let’s get to the important part. I said that EFT does work. I am also a believer in homeopathy and acupuncture. In fact we are using both those techniques right now to heal Evette’s dog and frankly it’s working better than the medication did and with less side-effects. I also know for a fact (= proven in double blind placebo trials) that homeopathy, acupuncture and EFT are placebos. But who gives a f* right? I mean they work. So I honor you for the results you get with EFT. If it works for you, that’s really all that matters.

    Given that the double-blind placebo trial is the gold standard of medical testing, wouldn’t it be great if we could apply something similar to alternative healing? Wouldn’t it be great if it was compulsory to apply something like that to alternative techniques before people could charge lots of money for them?

    In designing the new RPT it’s important to me that what we are doing transcends the placebo effect, meaning it works not just because we want to believe it does. At the moment it’s hard to prove this, in fact double-blind studies are often impossible with alternative healing or counseling techniques. However you can track success rates. As a ballpark figure, studies show the placebo effect accounting for 30-40% success (max). That’s consistent with studies showing EFT, acupuncture etc having a success rate below 40%. So if the new RPT has a proven, documented success rate at over 80%, we can probably say it’s not a placebo.

    It’s not double-blind but it’s still a meaningful data. We can publish the success rates in the journal of psychology if appropriate academic controls are in place. We are currently looking at the right partners for this trial and had a volunteer from the prestigious Academy of Science in Moscow. My concern there is that Russian studies are often viewed with skepticism in the USA, so it may need to be an English speaking trial.

    I hope this has shed some light on any confusion.

    I look forward to hearing back from you with your thoughts and feedback.



    Geir Reply:

    I just wanted to put this up there for the others who go searching for more studies.

    Also, I always found it silly when the sceptics use the argument that EFT might work, but not for the reasons the therapists state.

    Personally I don’t know how electricity works but I still use the light switch, right?

    I don’t think we know fully how the human body heals, but we still put a bandage on a broken leg….


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Geir

    Thanks for that link. I have read it and found it to be consistent with what I said. It shows various studies to suggest that EFT helps, but of course zero studies to suggest that it works for the reason that EFT claims. I write a lot more about this on the Occam’s Razor page, so I’ll try not to repeat myself. See here:

    > Also, I always found it silly when the sceptics use the argument that
    > EFT might work, but not for the reasons the therapists state.

    Please explain why you find this silly. It’s fundamental. The point is that all healing techniques work (sometimes), but almost never for the claimed reason. Does EFT work? Yes? Does it work because of clearing invisible energy blockages? there is no evidence to support that. Occam’s razor says we choose the simplest explanation that is consistent with the evidence. In this case, the fact that loose psychological principles are incorporated into EFT (and a whole rash of other therapies) is a much more likely “magic ingredient” than the invisible energies.

    That Occam’s link again:

    Please tell me what part of this is silly, because to me it is CENTRAL to my purpose here on this blog, to show the difference between real healing and magical thinking.

    > Personally I don’t know how electricity works but I still use the light switch, right?

    Before electricity was safe for you to use, other people had to find out how it worked and to make sure it was safe. The end consumer need not bother themselves. For the same reason, a client of EFT does not need to know how it works. But you and I, the smart savvy investigators of healing, we need to know. We aren’t mere light switches.

    > I don’t think we know fully how the human body heals,
    > but we still put a bandage on a broken leg….

    We do know. We put a plaster cast on a broken leg because we know that immobilizing the bone facilitates cell repair. When I broke my collar bone there was no cast, so it took a very long time for the ends to join (as an ambitious corporate lawyer I kept working despite the cast… till I learned a lesson about healing!).

    We DO KNOW why we use the plaster cast. There is no magical thinking.

    Unless people in Norway believe that magical fairies live inside the plaster cast and do healings while we sleep, then I think it’s safe to say that this analogy isn’t fair. :-)

    Please forgive me if I sound at all harsh. I think of you as a friend. But this subject is so important to me. It almost hurts when I can’t communicate it well enough for people to “get it”.

    I have written a new article today for you and Clay, I hope you like it.


    Peter Reply:

    >We do know. We put a plaster cast on a broken leg because we know that immobilizing
    >the bone facilitates cell repair. When I broke my collar bone there was no cast, so it took a
    >very long time for the ends to join (as an ambitious corporate lawyer I kept working
    >despite the cast… till I learned a lesson about healing!).
    >We DO KNOW why we use the plaster cast. There is no magical thinking.
    Hi Simon,
    I fully agree with you but since I have studied this subject recently a futher point on that.
    We only think that immobilizing facilitates cell repair but that not exactly true. When we immobilize the bone 100% with a screw or something it doesn´t heal. Sure immobilizing is necessary but it only heal because the plaster cast doesn´t work 100% as we think. When they first used screws they discovered it. I found this very noteworthy :)


    Simon Rose Reply:

    it is interesting – apparently those small movements are necessary. I think it’s to do with stimulating circulation.

    Unfortunately in my own case of broken bones 12 years ago, I was doing a lot more than small movements. Luckily I have cleared that need to be a martyr!

    best wishes

  11. Also, I checked out that study you posted, and I copy a segment;

    The results of the present study indicate that EFT was effective in decreasing fear in a nonclinical population. However, EFT was no more effective than either a placebo or modeling control procedure. Participants who were instructed to tap on various locations of their arm reported similar reductions in fear as those participants who were instructed to tap on meridian points. The location of the points did not play a measurable role. Furthermore, participants who tapped on a doll also reported similar decreases in fear ratings. Overall, these findings suggest that certain components of EFT were effective, but not dependent on meridian points, as EFT supporters contend (Pulos, 1999). It is possible that systematic desensitization and distraction are mediators of EFT’s apparent effectiveness. ”

    What the researchers did was tap on different points than the ones in the EFT protocol, and got the similar results.

    Of interest is Gary Craig’s rebuttal of the study


    Simon Rose Reply:

    The best bit is the final paragraph where Gary says:

    “Please know that I am not wedded to the meridian theory. … I am open to the possibility that there may be some other explanation for EFT’s effectiveness…”

    Good on him for keeping an open mind. He’s smart and knows that there’s a big difference between WHETHER EFT works (yes it does) and WHY it work (psychology can explain it).

    Just a reminder again, that I am a personal user of homeopathy, acupuncture and of course a huge fan of yoga. I use them because they work. I’m not anti anything, but I’ve very pro-science and logical explanations.



    Geir Reply:

    Gary Craig says clearly why EFT is NOT explained by regular psychology in his rebuttal.
    (Flaw #6)

    His main argument though is that the whole study is bust, comparable to having amateurs doing a brain surgeon study… probably because if the study employed actual EFT therapists to do the sessions, the results would be “flawed due to lack of blindness”


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi, I agree with Gary, EFT is not explained by regular psychology. Nor is RPT.

    I was taking a fairly expansive view of psychology. For example McFetridge’s work (which inspired a lot of the old 2009 RPT) is a PhD in Psychology, but it is not “regular psychology.”

    warm regards

  12. I know, I know about the leg being immobilized, what I meant with ‘know FULLY how the human body heals’ was exactly how cell repair works.

    Unfortunately, after googling it and steering clear of all the offers to repair my cell phone, it seems we do! ( )

    Learn something about healing every day eh?

    Anyway I understand why the theory behind the healing technique is so important for you, as you are an investigator into how this works… unlike most people who just want to get better.

    It’s great work, I salute you, but gonna read the article you made for us now ;)


  13. I blog often and I truly thank you for your content. This great article has truly peaked
    my interest. I’m going to bookmark your site and keep checking for new details about once per week. I subscribed to your RSS feed as well.
    my website:Μεθοδος EFT


Leave a Reply


Using Gravatars in the comments - get your own and be recognized!

XHTML: These are some of the tags you can use: <a href=""> <b> <blockquote> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>