| Abstract: | Replies to comments by McNally and Breslau (see record 2008-05553-016) on the current authors' article (see record 2007-07130-003). McNally and Breslau expressed skepticism about the validity of multiple, independent studies showing that thousands of persons who were not directly exposed to the 9/11 attacks nevertheless developed posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. They mistakenly asserted that these studies are all based on acute symptoms, whereas in fact several studies document symptoms at six months and beyond, post-9/11. Throughout their comment, they reframed the 9/11 experience of persons across the country as a virtual trauma. This is a strategy not usually seen in scientific discourse. The critical point of our review is that many people can develop concerns about safety and other issues following a terrorist attack, and these can be fueled by the media and other influences. It was not our claim that concerns about flying, being in tall buildings, or visiting public monuments after the attacks were necessarily pathological. However, it is difficult to understand why McNally and Breslau (2008) wanted to minimize this and other extraordinary ripple effects of the 9/11 attacks in the first place. Our aim was to develop a model that might be useful in trying to understand and reduce the economic and psychological costs of terrorism. Should we not, as mental health professionals, contribute our expertise toward alleviating this level of fear and its consequences? (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
