One of the clearer real-world tests of a treatment's effectiveness is comparing outcomes for the same patient across different approaches — and when years of one method produce little progress while a different method produces substantial, lasting change in a fraction of the time, that comparison carries real clinical weight, even as a single case. This doesn't prove one method is universally superior, but it does demonstrate that treatment approach itself can be a decisive variable, not just the severity of what a patient is working through.
The broader clinical lesson is that stalled progress in therapy isn't always a sign that a patient's trauma is simply too severe to resolve — sometimes it's a sign that the specific treatment modality isn't the right match for how that particular trauma is stored and needs to be processed.