Deconstruction of the Runaway "MFR" Thread

[Bas Asselbergs]

Pia, glad you didn't leave the building! You say:
"I am fully aware that I cannot present you with the evidence you are wanting because no-one has done the foot work to get the evidence for MFR although I am still convinced it is there..... " You see, this is what I mean with the stronger evidence trumping the weak one. You have admitted there is no evidence for the reason why MFR does what it does - so it's only theory. Now, there is a slew of research and science supporting the notion that manual techniques affect the skin, neural system and the brain. Basically saying that the theory underpinning MFR effects is faulty.... NO criticism on effectiveness - no, the THEORETICAL underpinning of MFR is criticised. You point at the number of PTs using it, the good results - THAT is not in question right now at all.

You seem to think I want you to stop using effective techniques - that is NOT so. I just want to point out that you will not be LESS effective with what you DO, but rather more effective when you have sound understanding of what truely happens when we put our hands on.

"and NO, I do not think all the reports of progress are illusions and the effects of placebo. " Never said that. The research and science says the opposite. It just ISN'T the fascia that is at the core of the effectiveness.
And by embracing the label "MFR" you must realize that to the world you liaise yourself with the whole babble of memories in fascia etc.


Why are you debating then? No-one has said you were ineffective. No-one has said that hands-on is not effective - rather the opposite. No-one has said doing what's best for patients is wrong. Just that our explanations need to be as accurate as possible, and as far away from BS as possible. And IF there is a chance that what you do, is BETTER explained and allows you to distance yourself from the more crazy aspects of MFR -why not delve in to that?

[Barrett Dorko]

Is it possible that Barnes' students are more fearful of upsetting him than anything else? If they can no longer reasonably justify what they do with his theory and he finds out, well, what are the consequences?

Perhaps this is charisma's price.

Fortunately, I have none.

[Bas Asselbergs]

But man, you're funny!
And you may be right....there is that guru status to contend with, and upsetting the great kahoona can be scary...

[Diane]

"upsetting the great kahoona can be scary..." yes, perhaps especially to the "kahoona".. Part of the defensivness might be wanting to protect him from himself.
(I think it's spelled 'kahuna'.. )

Nice visual BTW Bernard.

[Jon Newman]

Pia, you state

Bernard, Jon, I guess we share an admiration for good old Albert even though we can seem to all find quotes that fit our view of the world....

I'm not sure what you are implying here but I don't find the quotes you posted outside of my view of the world. Nor do I find them inconsistent with the quote I posted.

[Pia]

Jon: 'You have me confused on what is and what isn't MFR.'

I am sorry if it confusing. In my mind it is real simple: if you release the fascia :teeth: you practice MFR. There are many different techniques in MFR as it has been explained in previous posts. MFR is taught by many people and not only by John Barnes but of course the original work has been done by him. I try to the best of my ability to teach MFR techniques to parents of my little patients and that is just as much MFR as what I learned in the seminars with John Barnes. I also teach the parents NDT techniques or infant massage or whatever I think is appropriate for the given patient. My therapist teaches me MFR techniques all the time....

Nari: 'Soft tissue manual therapy is as big an ocean as there could be. The boundaries seem endless. Anyone who leans on, picks up a handful, stretches, petrissages, pinches, kneads, or jumps on the skin and whatever layers there are beneath it, is performing manual therapy.... I think'

I think it is up to you to decide how you define that and what techniques you are comfortable with and what you find yields the results you wish to see.

Diane: Anyone who wants to learn manual therapy, soft tissue or hard, has to go learn from someone who can show them. That's all. And once shown, it's not hard to develop your own "style" once you've got the underlying principles, have worked out how hard you want to work. (Myself? Not hard. Smart.)

Yeahh, that is about right. Learn from someone who knows.... Develop your own style - sure we all do that and take what we find works from what we learn. Glad that you are proud that you do not have to work hard (smart?).

Diane: 'I've embraced and adopted the designation, "Dianesian." It feels real special to be the only person I know of who practices as one.'

You go....

Bernard: That's all my problem, Pia, you've got the answers but constanly refuse to share them.

?????? what am I refusing to share?????

Bas: You seem to think I want you to stop using effective techniques - that is NOT so. I just want to point out that you will not be LESS effective with what you DO, but rather more effective when you have sound understanding of what truely happens when we put our hands on.

So you are saying that MFR will be even more effective if I say for example “madam, I am now stretching your skin, your nerves, your muscles, your blood vessels (but not the fascia- )”. That is lost on me - sorry. But as I have said before I have an open mind so I will certainly try and maybe I can even talk my own therapist into that mantra and get to feel even better.:thumbs_up

And by embracing the label "MFR" you must realize that to the world you liaise yourself with the whole babble of memories in fascia etc.
And IF there is a chance that what you do, is BETTER explained and allows you to distance yourself from the more crazy aspects of MFR -why not delve in to that?

Why is it that you think there are aspects of MFR that are crazy and dangerous and BS and whatever else you put forth? I am not going to distance myself from any aspect of MFR - I have a tremendous amount of respect for MFR practitioners who are able to embrace all aspects of MFR - It is truly unique – I know it first hand. You should allow yourselves to try – it might change your lives too.

Barrett: Is it possible that Barnes' students are more fearful of upsetting him than anything else?

WOW, your imagination has run away with you. We are all puppets who will be put in timeout if the teacher gets mad?? - a bit on the paranoia side ehh.

[Tim]

Bernard: Thanks for the drawing. It is helpful.
Diane: Thanks for answering my questions. I think my questioning was a result of misinterpreting Barrett's statement in his Course Workbook on page 10: Adaptive Potential is "Primarily dependent on CNS 'plasticity' and secondarily on connective tissue length".
Barrett: Thanks for the hat.
Bas: I haven't laughed so hard in a long time. Yes, Barrett can be funny at times.

[Tim]

I don't think I have very many questions left. Here is one I can think of right now. Does the SC technique address adhesions and scar tissue?

[Luke Rickards]

but of course the original work has been done by him

It is truly unique

Really??

Pia, I think you will find that your history is off by around 100 years. Osteopaths have been using this technique (minus the spirit guides, light speed communication and traumatic memory chasing) for a very long time.

[Jon Newman]

Pia, this illustrates the problem I'm having understanding you. First you state:

In my mind it is real simple: if you release the fascia you practice MFR.

and then

So you are saying that MFR will be even more effective if I say for example “madam, I am now stretching your skin, your nerves, your muscles, your blood vessels (but not the fascia- )”. That is lost on me - sorry. But as I have said before I have an open mind so I will certainly try and maybe I can even talk my own therapist into that mantra and get to feel even better

Do you see here that if you accept Sebastian's and others' explanation for what is occurring AND stick with your definition of MFR that we cannot be suggesting that "MFR will be even more effective"? You are using MFR to mean at least two things. An explanation of what happens and a manual technique. One of them is lunacy, the other is worth further consideration. Good luck convincing people that John Barnes is the originator of touching people in order to make them feel better. You certainly can, and in fact must, give him credit for the explanation.

Knowing that the two things are indeed separate entities, which one is your true love?


Tim,

My understanding is no. At least not directly. I imagine that if someone begins moving an area where there is scarring (that they were not moving before) the adhesion/scar will respond to forces imposed upon them. Scars are certainly easy enough to detect. How do you go about detecting an adhesion?

[nari]

Pia

The fact that you consider the education of patients consists of saying a mantra of no sensible meaning is fairly revealing.
You misunderstood completely that sentence of Bas's which led you to believe we should chant mantras. Maybe you were being sarcastic, I'm not sure. I will leave that to Bas to reply....

How do you know MFR is truly unique? If you use it to the exclusion of everything else, then I guess you might consider it unique....


Nari

[bernard]

?????? what am I refusing to share?????

But the responses to these questions, Pia. You must know them, Pia, since john have them and share them through his seminars? =>

It has already happened.

[Bas Asselbergs]

Yes, Pia. By explaining to patients or their guardians what is happening under your hands, why it is happening under your hands and how THEY themselves can help change things, IS very therapeutic and very much in our STANDARDS of practice. It is called accurate education and is very effective in enhancing outcomes for patients. Now, if you want to just put your hands on and "release" MFR - not say anything about what you are doing - well, then you are not being an optimal therapist. So, if you put your hands on a patient and explain what you are doing in the Barnesian way - well, you're selling snake oil!
you say: "Why is it that you think there are aspects of MFR that are crazy and dangerous and BS and whatever else you put forth? I am not going to distance myself from any aspect of MFR -"

20,000 times faster than lightspeed? There is no such thing as disease? Piezoelectric release? Holding down a patient? These are only a few of the outrageous and plainly wrong (from a science and ethical point of view) parts of MFR. You say you embrace that? Well, then I have to throw in the towel: I think you are entitled of course to practice as you see fit, but with such atrocious disregard for science and such blind adherence to a "wonderful" technique (I NEVER criticized a technique - just its explanation - man I have to repeat myself...) and its guru - sorry, no respect at all. Were you even paying attention in school when scientific thinking and levels of evidence were discussed? Did they even teach it?
Folks, I'll try to keep my mouth shut about this - it is getting repetitious....
Bye, Pia.

[Barrett Dorko]

Bas,

It's amazing, isn't it? I'll stick with my contention that abandoning Barnes' theory and abandoning Barnes himself is seen as one and the same. This is the sort of thing that happens when you teach as he does - continually drawing connections between yourself and the insights, techniques and thoughts presented. Implying that you are a hero of some sort, even if only in a past life, (ha, ha) probably helps as well.

I don't call the Barnsians' attitude stupidity and there's no evidence that it's a consequence of ignorance given the information readily available and explained endlessly by you and many others here.

I think it's akin to a scotoma - a blind spot - and whether this sort of thing is created by being taught or tending to learn in a certain way or if it remains simply because it's the easy way out of actual study I can't say. Maybe it's all of this.

There is a cure though. And if this cure has a limitation it is this: it must be self-administered.

[bernard]

Great,

If found the Barne's Russians!

THE BREAKTHROUGHS OF DR. N.A. KOZYREV

but I failed to found the relation with fascia.