The response to this article, which was written by esteemed members of the field who have contributed to the foundational literature of this area of practice and study, seems consistent with the points of view of the original article, especially as it relates to some fascinating unanswered questions and their corresponding holes in the literature.

The respondents' conclusions regarding following the conventional guidelines make sense in light of the current literature; it is nevertheless hoped that an acknowledgment of the limitations of the literature will stoke excitement and enthusiasm, and serve as an invitation to the next generation of researchers.

In order to avoid the appearance of what physicist Richard Feynman once famously termed “Cargo cult science” (1974), psychophysiologically based therapeutics require rigorous and intellectually honest evaluation with an eye to real-world application. It is hoped that the conversation started by these...

You do not currently have access to this content.