Myofascial Release; The Great Conversation

[nari]

I read Willis's essay some months ago and thought it was a good summary of what we're about in the health arena. To me, it just seemed to point out the obvious, and did not think anymore about it. Lots of other writers have also pointed out that research studies do not mean certainty and never have implied any certainty.

The EBP movement, unless interpreted appropriately, will result in automated zombie therapists; but it is the line between pseudoscience and science that will trip up many therapists. It's seen as a fine line at present, and probably always has been. Strict EBP means 'do as I say' and the PSPs imply: 'lie there and receive'...somewhere between the two is where physiotherapy seems to be at present.

The MFR thread shows how fine this line can be.


Nari


PS: PSPs = pseudoscience practitioners.

[Walt Fritz]

The Fuller Brush Man

Barrett,
I admire so much about you. Your ability to teach to students an entire treatment paradigm in one short day, even with the breaks you build in for MFR bashing. Your ability to face the impact of John Child and his opposition to your seminars as ungrounded in science. Your teeth gnashing that must ensue when you are lumped into the same camp as John Barnes. You willingness to put yourself on the edge of ethics violation, with the statements you've made attacking John Barnes and his practitioners. Your ability to see that you operate a cutting edge therapeutic modality that, despite your protestations to the contrary, lies at the border of the CAM that you seem to so despise.

Barrett, there is apparently so much about MFR that you will never understand, even if you were open to hearing it. This is evident by the fact that you never chose to attend on of John Barnes' seminars, as he had the open mind to do so for you. You continue to connect us with eliciting false memories, despite the fact that, though you have repeatedly been challenged, you have been unable to provide data that MFR practitioners have ever been accuded of this crime. I find it interesting that the other posters, here on SimpleSoma, have acknowledged the results that MFR achieves, but you have not commented on this. I'm thinking that thinkning about 50,000 seminar participants and the millions of satisfied patients sticks a bit in the craw. But, as you said, it's not about getting asked to parties. Well, our party is one of helping people, millions of them. You asked, innocently enough, why more MFR practitioners have not come on this site. Aside from the fact that apparently none of them see this site, I would go a bit further and say that the practitioners are quite busy, treating needy aptients. Placebo? We all deal with it. False memories? Tell that to a patient who is now painfree. Drama? It is this statement that seems to define you best. Patients are full of "drama". Denying the emotional past that a person brings to your table seems to be the focus of your Simple Contact.

There is no doubt that MFR has a powerful effect on the nervous system
and the brain. And that Unwinding (Barrett, you are not going to like this), is probably a variation of the ideomotor phenomenon. Why do I say this?
Because of the feedback we have had from many of your students that what you do is a very limited and inferior form of unwinding. SInce it does not
incorporate many of the important principles that we use in the MFR approach. The results you achieve will be very limited compared to what we do with MFR. So we have the same scientific underpinnings that you
cite, and much, much more that maybe has yet to be discovered scientifically does not make it any less valid.


By the way, your "Letter to John" was brilliant. Seems like you've got quite a bit of time on your hands to be able to write such eloquent prose. Fax it yourself, I'm sure he'll get the fax.

Walt

[Diane]

Hi Walt,
Did you have a chance to read the Willis article?
If you did, where would you put yourself?

[bernard]

Walt, Walt...:cry:

Your last post is only a personal attack against Barrett. I think that many posters said exactly the same, before. We agreed with results but theory behind MFR is a bullshit and pseudo-scientific.

It is not necessary that Barrett says there is results since it was clearly stated by others.

It is clearly stated that you refuse to reply to our askings. Your only arguments remains rage and angriness. I think that all of us were polite and will remain so.

Take the way of fierce discussion where facts and logic are the only available weapons or stay quiet if you haven't any response to give in place of little, so little words...

[Barrett Dorko]

Gee Walt that seemed kind of weak considering the time it took you to reply. I'm looking to see if there's anything new here and all I can come up with is this statement: "Patients are full of drama."

Are you sure? I would certainly agree that everyone is fighting a hard battle because that's the nature of life itself. My mother told me that this is why we should be kind to one another. But insisting subtley or otherwise that they emote while with me is, again, undoubtedly dangerous on several levels. Did you read that Memory Wars thing yet? I know you're busy "treating needy patients" at that party thing you mentioned, and, of course, getting much better results than I could given the fact that I confine my practice to physical therapy.

I had to hunt for your standard "You haven't attended one of John's courses" line but I see you got it in there.

I'm afraid you've forced me to go for the laugh again. (I just thought of this response yesterday) Yes, it's true that I haven't been to one of John's courses-but I haven't been to a seance either, and I have a pretty good idea of what goes on there.

Well, I thought it was funny anyway.

Oh yes, please invite the MFR chat line people here. I have it on good authority that they've recently been admonished to stop saying anything about one participate who is struggling horribly with the "memories" that come up in her sessions. The administrator said to remain quiet about this for reasons upon which she "couldn't elaborate."

Now, you were just kidding about that admiration thing, right? Sometimes it's hard to tell.

[Nick]

There is no doubt that MFR has a powerful effect on the nervous system
and the brain. And that Unwinding (Barrett, you are not going to like this), is probably a variation of the ideomotor phenomenon.

Walt

You're on to something here Walt. Keep digging.

"Because of the feedback we have had from many of your students that what you do is a very limited and inferior form of unwinding. SInce it does not
incorporate many of the important principles that we use in the MFR approach."

Oops, went off the rails here a bit. The other important principles being moving produced by fascia and lots of screaming?


"So we have the same scientific underpinnings that you
cite, and much, much more that maybe has yet to be discovered scientifically does not make it any less valid."

Maybe...except you've never cited them. That's what this discussion has been about. Are you sure about that validity statement? At the very least it makes those underpinnings somewhat questionable, does it not? Are we talking here of fascial communication that exceeds the speed of light? Tell us what much, much more really means and try to include some elements that do not violate physical law.

BTW, is there anyone who is not helped by MFR?

[bernard]

Well, SomaSimplers,
I must admit my defeat, I found the science behind the MFR.

Readings on the scientific basis of bodywork, energetic, and movement therapies

Many bodywork, movement, and energy therapists have found these articles an invaluable source of explanations of important phenomena taking place in their practices. The writings represent 15 years of research on scientific discoveries from around the world relating to all clinical approaches. The 21 articles have been published in various magazines and journals, and are now collected together in a single 480 page volume. The collection is extensively illustrated and contains hundreds of references to the relevant scientific literature.

Contents:

The connective tissue and myofascial systems
Structure and properties of ground substances
Bioelectromagnetic communications
The Natural Science of Healing. A biology of whole systems
How does the body maintain its shape?
A biophysical basis for acupuncture
How healing energy works
Matter, energy, and the living matrix
Sensing solitons in soft tissues
New evidence on the nature of healing energy. I. Communication in the living matrix

New evidence on the nature of healing energy. II. Coherence and healing energy
Somatic recall. Part I. Soft tissue memory
Somatic recall. Part II. Soft tissue holography
Biophysics of energy medicine
Physiological and emotional effects of acupuncture needle insertion
Approaching the toes (theories of everything)
Continuum in natural systems
Biomedical paradigms for complementary medicine
Whats in a handshake? A commentary on human energetics
The nuclear, cytoskeletal, and extracellular matrixes: A continuous communication network
Connective tissue energetics

I'm now, understanding why Barnes and Oschman are friends.

[Jon Newman]

Since Walt isn't forthcoming with some of those references, I'll see if I can help at least a bit. I believe the following is likely the source of at least some of the claims endorsed by the real (not a Sears poncho) John Barnes Myofascial Release. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

“Fascia not only binds and supports, it is a primary communication channel in the body. In ancient Chinese and Tibetan texts there are allusions to chi or qi (energy) moving through the fascia. In some ways, the myofascia may function as an independent nervous system. It has electrical, magnetic, and crystalline qualities. The crystalline structures may store memory as the brain does, only as a form of cellular tissue memory, which must be released before the tissue can become functional again.”

From Devin J. Starlanyl’s Fibromyalgia and Chronic Myofascial Pain: A survival Manual (2nd ed)

Note how the author moves from "In some ways," to "may function" to "may store memory" to "must be released"

It seems, according to the tortured logic MFR folks use to justify the work they do, that it is imperative to release these stored memories. Perhaps this is what leads them to pin people to plinth tables or perform unnecessary internal pelvic procedures. This might help answer a question some people may still be wondering: "So what's the big deal about the explanation anyway?"

Walt, are you practicing in a substandard way if you don't encourage the release of memories? It would seem so according to the literature that supports your work. Although that might just be hyperbole. I struggle with when I'm supposed to recognize that.

[Luke Rickards]

Nick,

Everyone is helped by MFR because fascial restrictions are the cause of ALL disease, remember? And it doesn't even matter that there is no such thing as disease. Even those with nothing wrong are helped because releasing fascial restrictions and stuck memories can prevent all diseases in the first place. Such is the nature of the New Paradigm of Medicine. In fact, there isn't a person on the planet who shouldn't have a regular release from their friendly neighbourhood MFR healer.

MFR - It's my lifestyle! :angel:

[Diane]

Such is the nature of the New Paradigm of Medicine

It really sounds more like the old paradigm of chiropractic, only everything bad or "diseased" in that paradigm stemed from spinal bones out of place pressing on nerves, cutting off "innate intelligence", which was spiritual essence. The chiro founding fathers threw in a lot of religion, which present day chiropractors have yet to deconstruct - they're having a hard time doing so because of how religion sells, especially in certain parts of the US! So the will is lacking. Furthermore, getting the "Big Idea" and then selling it, has always been the prime directive. All that trying to get to the bottom of what ideas mean, that's just a waste of time... so many people to unsubluxate/bend to the model/make money from, so little time.

The only differences I see with this MFR model is that it is a more recent version (albeit borrowed and dusted off from osteopathy and still stemming from that same religious era); although the obsession with finding a tissue to blame has moved to fascia, the obsession is no less "religious" in quality. They even have all the so-called science (Bernard's post #457) gathered into one ..um, bible. Convenient I'm sure.

[Barrett Dorko]

I had five different requests for information regarding MFR theory today from my class in Lancing. People wanted to know how my work differed. I told everyone to visit this thread and showed them specifically where to find it with the Power Point thing I do.

It only took about a minute and I was so glad not to have to spend all that time bashing Barnes. In fact, class ended two hours early.

I had no idea.

[Luke Rickards]

The only difference I see with this MFR model is that (chiropractic) it is a more recent version

Exactly.

[Scott]

I have been absent from this discussion since last friday, and I see much of the same stuff going on. From what I see, Walt has been doing a great job of fielding your statements and explaining the JFB MFR approach IMHO! The last time I posted here, my point was that there are HUGE gaps in science, and similarly there are gaps in the scientific rationale of exactly how this MFR approach works, things that I do not understand / may never, but I will continue seeking!
I also (like others) appreciate the folks who are open minded and questioning the how and why, this is intellectual discussion, and potentially beneficial to all.

Streaming quotes from Diane’s article link by james Willis:
(good reading matter - thank you for this)

"I will argue that professions such as medicine require something which goes beyond rigid, classical science; and that for at least the foreseeable future they will continue to require the mysterious qualities of individual human minds. And that in order to do the job that is required of them, these minds must be freed from rigid constraints, and illusory goals.

Finally, if we are going to marry the mechanism of medical practice with its mystery, which we must if we do not want to be forced to choose between them, I will suggest that general practice may have a role to play in the search for a new scientific theory. One which finds some accommodation between the Classical and Romantic philosophies which diverged in Ancient Greece.

Iain Chalmers, director of the UK Cochrane Centre, the largest assembler and repository of amalgamated medical research evidence:
I was therefore delighted to hear him say, right at the start of our discussion, "I regard uncertainty as one of the most important characteristics of a scientific theory".
when you think you have found the answer, the truth, the final solution, you are not merely wrong; you are confronting the most dangerous thing you can possibly encounter. (my emphasis)

on a side note...

I am astonished to see you Bernard, a moderator (I believe?!) to be using curse words on a professional forum - "bullshit" (bolded) no less. Hmmm More on manners in my next post.
Diane I wanted to draw a quick reference to your post # 396. I thought it was very well written, and demonstrates some very respectable mentorship, much similar to my own. I can relate.

For those who wonder whether or why Barnes has not become involved with this discussion, it may help to see it this way: he has met resistance and questioning over 20+ years FAR greater than yours here on SS, without blinking an eye, and staying the course, continuing to do what he does, helping people in exponentially increasing numbers. His success, as far as I can tell is tremendous, do you really feel like, err - Eddy Maillot from Moscow, Idaho that this affects his momentum? THAT is why you do not see him here! It is like a row boat bumping up against an oil tanker.

I have done some homework over the weekend and today, some of it reading the material that you folks posted, thanks, but also a lot of Barrett's personal writings, and I am DISGUSTED, in fact so much so that I am going to start a fresh post about it!

[Diane]

Scott,
So you think Walt's doing a great job, eh?

Re: Bernard; Bernard is not only moderator, he is the administrator and founder of SomaSimple. He is also French, speaking/writing English as a second language. I think he has the right to say whatever he likes on his own board. You however are a guest, so don't be telling the host how to host.

About the Willis article I posted.. I found it when I googled "anti-science pseudoscience". I am quite satisfied that Barnes version of hands-on rationale is the twoheaded sea monster and good to steer clear of. I think all the whoopdedoo over outcome measuring going on in PT right now is the whirlpool. The rest of us have to be science saavy, (avoiding Barnes' ideas) but not all get sucked into the fundamentalist whirlpool, and somehow steer a course between the two much like Willis plotted in his medical career.

Too bad you feel so disgusted.. Barrett is a very good writer and educator, or he wouldn't have been invited to join this board. He certainly hasn't steered anybody wrong lately re: theory, unlike Barnes and Walt.

[Scott]

Ethics violations by your "leader"

So, as I was saying, DISGUSTED by the completely unprofessional conduct of Mr Barrett Dorko..............

For all those who care only of the why and how of MFR - this post is irrelevant. This relates to the statements that Walt made in his opening post about "quit the negativity towards MFR and Barnes" - this is how the thread started, so please don't tell me I am off the point.

Dorko himself lead me to this material, and I tried to engage him in discussion of the ethics and manners of it by private e mail. He was very friendly as we e mailed back and forth over his poetry, but, after further reading, when I expressed my astonishment over how negative, inflammatory, disparaging I found his statements towards another physical therapist - ANY physical therapist - but in this case Barnes, so distasteful and pathetically small - well Barrett surprisingly :teeth: wanted nothing to do with me. I didn't know the man, but this reading made me think of him as being very small minded!

So anyway - who cares about MY opinion! Huh, no-one, I get that.

So I connected with some old friends this weekend, who could pass a neutral opinion on the matter. A medical malpractice attorney in NY (one of the best according to his adversaries) educated me about "libel" - a word I wasn't all that familiar with. Well it turns out that the lawsuit brought against Dorko could potentially not have to waste a whole lot of time proving "slanderous" statements, or even defamation of character, but a "libel" lawsuit might just squish him into further insignificance. He wasn't really that concerned with the ethics violations of principle 11, but someone else was.........

The Director of General Counsel for the APTA, Mr Jack Bennett seemed to concur that this was a rather serious ethics violation by one PT against another (WHOEVER) was concerned, and wanted more specifics especially names.

Since I am merely an observer, I of course declined to provide these. I wouldn't want to get Dorko in trouble, as alarmed as I am at his "Bad manners". But I assure you all, Barnes most likely has a better attoney than my New York friend and no doubt he has a thick file on Dorko's misdoings, or rather missaying/ writings, whatever over many years! I think you had better HOPE Barnes doesn't tune into this!

When someone goes so low as to call another person a criminal - this is not only unethical, but now can be a significant legal problem with serious economic repercussions for such a lie.

Then there was the matter of Dottie:

On your own Soma Simple website you publish an Honor Code - the HON seal: "Health On the Net" code of conduct. Let me bring to your attention...

Principle 3- Confidentiality:

"Confidentiality of data relating to individual patients and visitors to a medical/health Web site, including their identity, is respected by this Web site. The Web site owners undertake to honour or exceed the legal requirements of medical/health information privacy that apply in the country and state where the Web site and mirror sites are located."

Remember this when picking out patients like poor Dottie..... whom I still assume ... since Dorko avoided answering, that no-one got her permission to post her blog and critique it on your forum SomaSimple?

I wrote this to Dorko last week in private, but he avoided comment:
Perhaps some of you might like to "look inside" at what he has done and said, REGARDLESS of MFR / Barnes, I am talking about professionalism and ethics here.

Let me quote you from the APTA Code of Ethics, principle 11.3
Disparagement
"Physical Therapists shall not disparage colleagues and other health care professionals. See also section 9 and 2.4a"

Dictionary.com defines disparage as "To speak of in a slighting or disrespectful way; belittle."

Having articles on your website such as "Not in Kansas Anymore", "No More Mr Nice Guy" etc are not only very poor taste for a PT professional/writer/educator but possibly a violation of ethics. And then you went ahead and tore into Carol Davis...a PT Director at the University of Miami ......... mmm, OK, let me stop there.

Interestingly - in another thread on your forum, named "Inappropriate or not" there has been mention by several posters - Nari, Luke Bernard about avoiding a "nasty or awkward" situation regarding mailigning another therapist. Seems others are conscious about this, I know I certainly try to be

Then there is the whole thing about you posting the patient's blog on the forum. Is this in tandem with ethics principle 1.1B ?
A PT shall be guided by concern for physical, psychological and socioeconomic welfare of all patients / clients.

I think not, but then again, that's just my opinion. Dorko, when you took Dottie's blog out of context (she only meant for patients to visit her site to help them) and by you, Dorko, putting it out there to the world in a purposely distorted form is hurtful and disrespectful to another human being. Dorko speaks from no experience, makes false accusations, and then distorts her experience to the world for his own petty purposes. While never mentioning that she had a very powerful and incredible result with MFR treatments.

This not only a serious violation of the APTA ethics code, but also a violation of your own honor code posted above.

Dorko has manipulated people for years, and he is manipulating the people in this forum. All of you take a step back and take a look at this behavior. Is this really something you wish to be associated with? If somebody made dishonest statements about you repeatedly in public for years , how would you feel?

Is it not bias, which is unscientific, to only look for the negative instead of being open to the possibility of something new?

MFR is an important, valid, and effective therapy that does no harm and has helped millions of people, and obviously it would be helpful for the scientific side of healthcare to help us better understand the mechanism of why MFR works so well consistently.... this is a work in progress, some of you have helped with this, here.

As therapists, is it not our responsibility to act and speak with integrity, honesty, and honor? There are many ways of helping people. Let us all continue to improve our skills, learn from each other and move to higher ground. I have nothing else to say except that I wish you well.