NoBoxes

Interrogation, like medicine, is an art. Initial training in both disciplines provides skill sets that enable extrapolation into developing situations. There's a lot of science behind these arts that carry on from the initial training and make it difficult to draw a line.

A doctor learns anatomy, physiology, and psychology.
An interrogator learns psychology, physiology, and anatomy.

A doctor learns how to diagnose and treat illness and injury.
An interrogator learns how to assess and manage vulnerability.

Then, a doctor goes into practice and finds that one patient with a broken arm was totally incapacitated and ambulanced away while another patient who's arm was broken the same way got into a car and drove it to the ER himself [pain thresholds]. The doctor also finds that despite all of the indications, contraindications, precautions and warnings that accompany medications, patients may react very differently to that same medication [genetics]. Then there are people with full blown symptoms of a given disease while others will only ever be carriers [circumstantial]. To top it all off, the doctor encounters multiply afflicted patients who's combinations of illnesses and/or injuries (not to mention new diseases) were never actually covered in class! The doctor's training in methodology takes over and a treatment regimen is developed for the individual patient's needs even though the situation may never have been addressed (or even foreseen) in medical school.

Interrogators face similar challenges and have similar skill sets to deal with them. I have both medical and intelligence (incl. interrogation) training. For me, "training" and "figured out yourself" aren't separate; rather, they're consolidated in methodology.
The methodologies of the aforementioned disciplines are similar, why don't we cross-reference them just for kicks? We'll try it with this statement:

Even if the statement is true, it's still only a whopping 14 cases they're talking about. If a new medication was introduced and we gave it to 14 test subjects and it worked, should the FDA approve it for use by everyone?! What is the actual significance of 14 cases in the worldwide interrogation industry? People are always looking for a miracle whether it's the next wonder drug; or, a magic bullet. Isn't it comforting to know that our government has found us a magic bullet? I'm sure the politicians know how many of their constituents want (or need) that magic bullet to bite on.

Let's examine the "coerced interrogation" method of waterboarding. Any physician can tell you that the most important part of a physical examination is the History. It seems that waterboarding and its predecessor techniques have a rather long history. If any of it's incarnations are so very reliable, why haven't we and other societies incorporated it into our social mores and codified codes by now? 1.) Terrorists have been around for quite some time! 2.) What about a captured psychopath (who isn't talking) that has buried a living child (who will die of dehydration in a few days) in a box with an air pipe to the surface? 3.) Wouldn't it nice to know that we can account for all of a convicted serial killer's victims (especially if execution is imminent anyway)? Why isn't this technique being used by all military and police? Why haven't we heard of many more success stories (at least from other governments, some of which aren't bashful about torture). WHY HAVEN'T WE HEARD ABOUT AMERICAN CAPTIVES BEING SUBJECTED TO WATERBOARDING if it's everything that the cited article on "coerced interrogation" implies.

I realize that this has been an exercise in apples and oranges; but, you can get my drift about methodology.

BTW: Have you found a good oral surgeon yet who can subdue your gag reflex (just in case the aforementioned becomes popular)?