The part of your view that I want to change is that your quoted study provides support for your overall view in any way.

Deciding that a specific treatment will be beneficial to a specific individual based on a single summary of a single study that did not involve that individual is among the worst sort of medical advice imaginable.

The concept of classical conditioning and gradual exposure to potentially triggering stimuli as treatment for trauma is a well established principle in cognitive behavioural therapy, which itself is well regarded and established form of therapeutic psychological treatment. The source I cite does indeed refer to a singular study, but the concept expressed in the part of the source I quoted is not based on the study, but the more broad and well established study of cognitive psychology.

It’s like suggesting that a cancer patient - who you don’t know and have never met - isn’t respecting your freedoms because they don’t give up standard care in favor of an all charcoal diet because you read that one paper once said that exposure to charcoal may be beneficial to some cancer patients in some scenarios.

I disagree with the premise behind your comparison. As I mention above, the text I quote from the article I use as a source is based on a well established and respected area of psychology and is not based on the findings of a single study as I think you may believe is the case.

​