From Dr Peter Davies,General Medical Practitioner, Halifax,UK The British Medical Journal is running a series of articles in its career focus section introducing NLP to the medical profession. You can find the first article at  http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7389/S83 Access is open and free to all. Interesting series of responses to the ideas of NLP so far. Some doctors say NLP is "pseudoscience" and "like a religion" Others are keen on it and Dr Lewis Walker has written a book on its use in medicine. Group members might like to visit the articles and add responses to the electronic responses board appropriately. Keep them short (300words max) and punchy and they may end up printed as letters to the editor. To answer NLPs critics does NLP have a coherent structure of knowledge? Is it worthwhile, new, and an advance? Or is it pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo, hocus pocus? Can we demonstrate our unique contribution to human development and human knowledge? I think we can but I am somewhat biased. Not that I necessarily see bias as a "bad thing". More an acceptance that I have my own point of view on life (my own map) and that my right to a map is as valid as anyone else's. Whether my map is better (in terms of accuracy or effectiveness, and maybe even morality) than someone elses's is of course debatable. The letter writers to the BMJ are going to be examining NLP's claims over map and territory over the forthcoming weeks. I think it's a debate that will be interesting for those of us who are NLP trained as we will see what representations people have of NLP, and what we need to do to correct their generalisations, deletions and distortions of NLP. Best wishes, Peter Davies.