The amount of progress in Caleb’s six years of therapy has been frustrating for everyone. But ultimately, says Alain Brunet, vice president of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies and director of the Traumatic Stress Laboratory at McGill University in Canada, “we have reason to be reasonably optimistic. Psychotherapy does work for typical PTSD.” 

In these sentences, a credibility claim is made to back up the effectiveness of psychotherapy for people with PTSD, despite it being a lengthy process. The authority figure cited is Alain Brunet, and mentions both of his job titles to gain credibility.

The VA tends to favor cognitive-behavioral therapy and exposure therapy—whereby traumatic events are hashed out and rehashed until they become, theoretically, less consuming. Some state VA offices also offer group therapy. For severe cases, the agency offers inpatient programs, one of which Caleb resided in for three months in 2010. 

This paragraph categorical claim, listing off the many therapeutic treatment methods the VA offers to patients suffering from PTSD. All of these treatments highlight the VA’s modern approach and portray them as catering to many different people.

The VA also endorses eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy (EMDR), which is based on the theory that memories of traumatic events are, in effect, improperly stored, and tries to refile them by discussing those memories while providing visual or auditory stimulus. 

The author uses a definition claim here to define and describe the process of EMDR, and how they help soldiers who suffer from PTSD. 

“There’s a fairly strong consensus around CBT and EMDR,” Brunet says. 

Here is another credibility claim, where Brunet is mentioned once again. This time, the quote is used to decipher which methods seem to be the most effective.

While veterans are waiting for those to work, they’re often prescribed complicated antidepressant-based pharmacological cocktails.

This shorter point is an illustrative claim, painting a picture of the strong medicines the veterans need to take during their treatment by comparing it to a cocktail. It reminds us of the conditions the veterans are in while they are receiving this intense treatment.

To stay up to date on the latest advances in PTSD treatment, the VA collaborates with outside entities through its Intramural Research Program. Currently, the agency is funding 130 PTSD-related studies, from testing whether hypertension drugs might help to examining the effectiveness of meditation therapy, or providing veterans with trauma-sensitive service dogs, like Caleb’s. 

When the author mentions the number of studies the VA funds, they are making a numerical claim. This assures the reader that the VA is taking a lot of data into account when developing their treatment methods.

The Mental Health Research Portfolio manager says the organization is “highly concerned and highly supportive” of PTSD research.

This sentence uses the MHRP as a source, making it an evaluative claim. Their authority asserts that the VA takes its research very seriously and takes very good care of its patients.

But a lot of FOV members and users are impatient with the progress. 

Takes into account the feelings of the patients and the worker, making it an evaluative claim. This claim gives us some scale of the length of the treatment.

Up until 2006, the VA was spending $9.9 million, just 2.5 percent of its medical and prosthetic research budget, on PTSD studies. In 2009, funding was upped to $24.5 million. 

The author uses a comparative claim here, comparing the VA’s annual funding of studies from 2006-2009. This increase shows us that they are taking them more seriously than in the past.

But studies take a long time, and any resulting new directives take even longer to be implemented.

Uses a causal claim to set up the relationship between the long winded process of conducting studies, and the restraining effects it has on developing new research methods.