I read the article and drew the obvious conclusion -- a mental illness that can be effectively treated with a Website is virtual, not real.

Do you believe that some "phobia" exists? That so e people have life-altering fears to irrational degrees? Do you call those phobias "virtual" illness, or are they "real" illness?

Because current best treatment for phobia is a talkin therapy, which could be applied online.

> Do you believe that some "phobia" exists?

Do you have the required electron micrograph? How about a cell culture? How about anything about which different, similarly equipped observers can come to a consensus? In other words, how about some science?

> Because current best treatment for phobia is a talkin therapy, which could be applied online.

If you were a scientist, you would realize that anecdotes aren't evidence.

You reject phobia as a real illness?

How about anorexia nervosa? Is that real or is it "virtual"?

> You reject phobia as a real illness?

No, science rejects phobia as a real illness. Haven't you been keeping up with current events? The NIMH recently ruled that psychiatry (the treatment branch of psychology) is pseudoscience, and they will no longer accept research proposals based on the DSM, psychology's "bible", for the simple reason that it has no scientific content.

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-rats-of-n-i-m-h

And you already know this -- or you should. This means you're directing your questions to the wrong person. I didn't reject the scientific status of psychology, the NIMH did.