Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Myofascial Release; The Great Conversation

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Walt,

    It is my opinion that "unwinding" is an instance of ideomotion. Ideomotion is not "unwinding" however because unwinding purports the presence and fixing of something that is biologically implausible. For a more objective example, dowsing is an instance ideomotion but ideomotion is not dowsing for dowsing also has claims that are paranormal.


    Walt, we all have our filters. I think the difference is what our filters are. I disagree with your comment about bias in the sense that a bias implies an unfair way of sifting information. If anyone has been unfair, please point it out.

    What core concepts do I need to understand in order to accept the workings of MFR?
    "I did a small amount of web-based research, and what I found is disturbing"--Bob Morris

    Comment


    • #32
      Good point Jon, all cows are animals but not all animals are cows.

      Walt:
      Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
      You're welcome.

      There seems to be two distinct directions that this interchange has taken. One, from you and many others, is an inquiry into the workings of Myofascial Release, seemingly made from a neutral and inquisitve base. Others have chosen to insert their biases.
      Walt, I have a h-u-g-e bias. It is thick and wide and deep.

      One of the primary requsts from readers centers around a scientific rationale for Myofascial Release that explains every and all aspect of the work, with an assumption that if it is not "provable", then it should be discarded.
      Hmmnn.. I would beg to differ. I think rather the name should be scrapped as misleading.

      Proving that emotions lie stored in the body, not the brain, mis a slippery slope of emerging awareness and research, based on years of observation by many sources.
      ??

      I would direct you to James Oschman's book, "Energy Medicine in Therapeutics and Human Performance" for a much more thoughtful and substantiated treatise on these issues.
      I've looked through that book, and would place it squarely on the "avoid" list. Others who have taken this book as a core sustaining feature include George Roth, DC ND, of "Quantum Touch" fame. I can't make sense out of what he says. Note, I didn't say "I refuse to understand what he says", I said, "I can't make sense out what he says." Same with Barnes logic. He would seem not to base his thinking on any.

      No, I am not operating out of a cult mentality, no more than followers of anyone on this site is.
      Good to hear!

      I have seen wonderful things happen to patients over the years, patients who have not been helped by physical therapy, medication, and surgeries, as I'm sure you have as well via your work.
      Yes, we all have. That isn't the point.

      If you are sharp enough, you can find an explanation within your literature to explain these results,
      Which literature would that be? PT literature or English literature or science literature or pain science literature... ?

      but I feel that you will agree that all most of us in this esoteric therapy community rely on the results we achieve as important.
      I think results are important but don't feel being esoteric or being thought of in general as being esoteric is in the slightest.

      As to me sticking around and being up to the challenge of intellectual discourse, count me in.
      Good for you!

      But, and here is the big but, must not we hold everyone to the same challenge.
      Please feel free to point out any examples of any thing, any time, that seems unbalanced. I swear we will do everything to be fair, to hold each individaul to the same level of exacting scutiny. Please also be aware that under Barrett's thinking there is nothing but solid bedrock. That's my own opinion, and others would agree, I think. As for what's between you two interpersonally, well, you guys will have to work that part out.

      Barrett initially stated that he had been waiting for years to engage an MFR therapist in discussion and challenged me to hold open all parts of the MFR that I practice open to discussion. So I must turn the tables. Whel Barrett cites voluminous readings and references for "Simple Contact", I can find NO literature that supports, or even mentions Simple Contact> Shouldn't this be given equal scrutiny? I'm not trying to deflect any uncertainties about the foundations of what I practice, but, WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?
      There is plenty of evidence in the neuroscience literature. His 'technique' for encouraging nnconscious movement might not be well referenced, but non-conscious movement is, a wealth of tough actual neuroscience and pain science supports it, and supports the approach. All of the same science could support your work too, as it does my work, but not when it's called a name that makes no sense.

      By the way, in the thread you directed me toward (yes, I did read it), further up the page you quote:

      Claxton continues:

      Quote:
      Gendlin called this hazy shadow which they were attending to and allowing slowly to come to fruition, a felt sense, and it was quite different both from a string of thoughts and from the experience of a particular emotion or feeling. It seemed to be the inner ground out of which thoughts, images and feelings would emerge if they were given time and unpremeditated attention.

      How about this? Does this not sound like ideomotor movement?

      Simple contact must be good stuff, if that is what you are referring to. This sounds like the exact description of the unwinding state in Myofascial Release!
      First of all, don't get Simple Contact mixed up with ideomotor movement. They are two classes of things that are related. Second, don't compare unwinding with simple contact. That's like comparing kangaroos with kumquats.

      Would this state, that you quoted and describe, be able to be explained by hard research? Doubtful.
      Well, stick around. You'll see that lots of what we unearth here has to do with uncovering the brain underpinnings of both categories, SC on the one hand and ideomotion on the other.

      We both operate from an ill-defined space, and this is where growth occurs. Reasearch emerges from original thought. It is within this mindset that MFR can operate.
      .. well, that's where it can lurk maybe. When the light finally hits it I wonder what it will do?

      Surely, it can simply be physical application of techniques, much like any other type of work. But when you connect with the person on the table, in the way you reference, that is when the beauty of our work, yours and mine, come through. Let us both continue the work that we do, accept when there is not an acceptable explanation for it, and keep helping people.
      I doubt our work, yours and mine Walt, would look much different to a disinterested observer. However, what's going on inside our heads seems to be radically different. I'm not satisfied operating from a belief system. I propose that MFR is a belief system. I look for any/ all shreads of reality I can find (not Oschman) in the neuroscience and pain literature to enlighten me,(like those links Ian posted), only then I go off and broadcast it.

      I'm not shutting off any and all questions, not in the least. But, let us set the same standards for all on this site.
      As I said before, the same standards will apply to all. Hope you have got some bedrock somewhere.. so far, in probing around, I haven't noticed any very solid ground yet..
      Diane
      www.dermoneuromodulation.com
      SensibleSolutionsPhysiotherapy
      HumanAntiGravitySuit blog
      Neurotonics PT Teamblog
      Canadian Physiotherapy Pain Science Division (Archived newsletters, paincasts)
      Canadian Physiotherapy Association Pain Science Division Facebook page
      @PainPhysiosCan
      WCPT PhysiotherapyPainNetwork on Facebook
      @WCPTPTPN
      Neuroscience and Pain Science for Manual PTs Facebook page

      @dfjpt
      SomaSimple on Facebook
      @somasimple

      "Rene Descartes was very very smart, but as it turned out, he was wrong." ~Lorimer Moseley

      “Comment is free, but the facts are sacred.” ~Charles Prestwich Scott, nephew of founder and editor (1872-1929) of The Guardian , in a 1921 Centenary editorial

      “If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you, but if you really make them think, they'll hate you." ~Don Marquis

      "In times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists" ~Roland Barth

      "Doubt is not a pleasant mental state, but certainty is a ridiculous one."~Voltaire

      Comment


      • #33
        Walt,

        We all follow the teachings of some 'gurus' to some extent. Some of them have been some way off the mark- eg Kendall and muscle focus of years ago, and Sahrmann for a similar reason; but things are changing, and their focal ideas change too.

        We follow what appeals to us, and which fits modern neurophysiology research. Ideomotion sits comfortably with the understanding of how the brain organises its organism (body) - or as far as we understand its working - but I think you operate very much as a peripheralist and the brain 'follows' whatever happens to the periphery. Correct me if that is incorrect...

        Most of us here, however, understand that the brain is the sole driver and grand interpreter, and whatever we do or not do to the 'body' may or may NOT be tolerated by the brain's perception of what it wants for the organism.

        If I tweak someone's ankle beyond the current limits of a certain 'ankle' condition, the CNS will object...and rightly so. I become a threat to the organism; and pain is the result. If there is a whole load of emotional baggage within the organism's brain, the pain will be worse.
        Now I could send off some nice touchy-feely-soft-tissue-work messages and the brain then thinks :OK, danger's past' and reduces the pain output.
        I could also just talk education with the patient, and exactly the same message will be sent upwards.
        I could also massage with some weird aroma-inducted stuff - the same thing can happen.

        What counts, is what lasts. With Simple Contact, the patient has control and can continue, fairly easily, with that control/maintenance/whatever.

        No dependency on health professionals required.

        As you have not answered my previous questions...can you say the same applies for MFR?

        Nari

        Comment


        • #34
          Jumping in

          Let me first introduce myself. My name is Dave Vollmers and I'm an Occupational Therapist with a background in orthopedics specializing in the shoulder and hand. I also have my own practice where I utilized MFR 95% of the time and also work with many counclors to help with patients as they heal. My background in anatomy and the human body I think warrents mentioning because in reading many of these posts it appears that there is probably not a single person that has had my experiance and this is where people are reliying on research (most of which - to me - is skewed and misinformed about the human body). I worked on the spinal research team at the Medical College of Wisconsin for over 3 years with many awesome orthopedists and surgeons (one of which being Dr. Ahn who created pedical screwing as a fusion technique). In my years at MCW I was responsible for harvesting fresh human cadavers (don't make the mistake of thinking they were emblamed which is why I think most research is flawed) approximately 3-5 days post mortim. To my credit I've harvested over 300 human cadavers.

          I am not a researcher because personally most of the research that I've read (and helped write) boils down to personal bias of the data. So many times I have read an author's abstract, method & conclusion to find that I can't come up with the same conclusions when I've looked over their data. Most of this research was in the field of OT or PT. Please don't feel this is an attack on research but to me experience and self experimentation is the best way to understand the human body and how it reacts to life experiances.

          That being said I've read a lot of the posts regarding MFR on the forum and have a few things to add.

          1. During the discussion on how emotion plays a role in trauma and how MFR therapists help people to heal utilizing these emotions. The one thing I've noticed is that it doesn't seem clear that as MFR therapists we are not trying to interpet the emotions that come out but only reflecting these emotions back on the patient for them to figure out. In the case of the blog quote of the person having Tina on top of her and asking her to fight I think there were details that were left out. When treating patients we only put in enough pressure for the body to respond, that is to say we place our hands onto the patient and allow our hands/body to sink in until there is slight resistance. Sometimes there is very little pressure and others it seems that we need the weight of 3 people on one spot inorder to reach that barrier. I think it is the same difference any manipulatory therapist feels when they try to manipulate a joint - sometimes you mearly have to think pressure and the patient is screaming in pain and other times you brace your foot against the treatment table and pull only to have the patient respond by saying you can pull harder. In the quote that was used the patient is only focusing on the moment just prior to an emotional release. It is very possible that up until that time when Tina would put pressure into her system the patient would push back because her body desired more pressure. Therefore at the moment just prior to the emotional release the pressure she felt or the pressure her body "asked" for may have been enough that required Tina to get onto the table (trust me I've had Tina sit on me and she is a very light woman so if she needed to create a good amount of pressure she probably needed to hang onto the table). Once the emotion presented itself as a need to fight and get away Tina just projected it back to the patient. This is not a counceling method because we aren't judging the emotion that came up nor are we advising the patient what to do with the emotion we are mearly reflecting it back to the patient. Once the emotion played itself out Tina let the patient know she was safe (gee if you have kids I'm pretty sure you've done the same with the exception we are not trying to take on their emotion or take it away - only identifying it and reflecting it back to the patient). As therapsits all of us have had patients that needed to be shown that they have the ability to do something even if they can't imagine the movement consciously and that is exactly what Tina was doing when she told the patient she was safe.
          2. I hope that the previous comment is enough to help people understand that it isn't us or our intention that drives these emotions or even encourages them. As therapists, John tries to teaches us to listen to the person's body to help them. We call this the fascial voice and every therapist that remotely cares for their patients listens to this "voice". It is the body language of the patient that tells us where to touch and how much pressure to use. For example if I'm working on a patient's leg and notice a red area on the shoulder I'm going to work on the shoulder next and then follow the patient's body on where to go after that. Sometimes the voice is more of a physical act (we call it unwinding). This is when the patient begins to move without our initiation of movement. John teaches that unwinding is movement the body uses to help with releaseing itself regardless of it's current position in space and therefore a person may unwind off the table head first inorder to obtain a stretch in the thoracic region.

          I've only covered a couple of things and I would like to post some more but for now I have patients to see and therefore must go. Thank you Walt for invinting me and I hope that this discussion proves to be a learning experiance all the way around.

          Comment


          • #35
            Dave, what exactly is entailed with the harvest of cadavers and what did you see in these dead people.

            Once the emotion presented itself as a need to fight and get away Tina just projected it back to the patient.
            Do you suppose that need to fight and get away arose because she was being pinned down? I mean if you create the emotion then you didn't really release anything right?

            You state

            It is very possible that up until that time when Tina would put pressure into her system the patient would push back because her body desired more pressure.
            Isn't it just as equally possible that she wanted Tina to ease up? I remember some cops accidently killing someone by sitting on the perpetrators chest. He began to fight harder and harder. They mistook it for his resisting arrest. If they only knew he wanted more pressure they probably wouldn't feel as guilty as they probably do.

            Now before I get accused of being unfair, realize I'm using an outrageous example to illustrate that your filter is working just as hard as anyone's.
            "I did a small amount of web-based research, and what I found is disturbing"--Bob Morris

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Jon Newman
              Dave, what exactly is entailed with the harvest of cadavers and what did you see in these dead people.
              Jon, most medical professionals have disceted cadavers that have been embalmed for a minimum period of 6 months - at that point the embalming fluid has actually caused many soft tissues to either become hard or desinegrate. So when you have the honor of disceting into a fresh cadaver all of these soft tissues, along with the body's natural fluids, are present and display their natural tensile strengths. For example the fascial system under the scapula is pretty thick in a fresh cadaver and will dull a number 10 scaple blade 1/2 way through (normally I used the same blade to appreciate the skin, muscle and tendons along the spine from C3 - S5 and from the body of both L and R ribs. This is a large area to cut into and the blade was usually still pretty sharp. However after about 3 inches of cutting into the fascial system under the scapuala the blade was a dull as a butter knife. Contrary to an embalmed body where I was able to appreciate the whole shoulder complex including scapula, rotator cuff and continue to appreicate the entire spine. What this shows is that research into the strength/resilancy of the fascial system (when done on embalmed cadavers which usually the case) is inherently flawed.



              Do you suppose that need to fight and get away arose because she was being pinned down? I mean if you create the emotion then you didn't really release anything right?

              Only if the pressure was placed prior to the emotion arising. John teaches to be gentle and wait for the body to respond, not to put hard pressure in and look for a response you want. This would be forcing your intention and your plan on a patient which would never work and then validate your next comment. What usually happens is that as you place gentle pressure into the system the patient may ask for more pressure either by pushing back (at that point you only match thier resistance not over power them - that way if the patient is actually trying to push you away they will back off and the therapist is left pushing air and neither gets hurt) or literly asking for more pressure. If you don't do the technique correctly and you force your intention then you would be correct in that the therapist created the emotion and not the patient.



              Isn't it just as equally possible that she wanted Tina to ease up? I remember some cops accidently killing someone by sitting on the perpetrators chest. He began to fight harder and harder. They mistook it for his resisting arrest. If they only knew he wanted more pressure they probably wouldn't feel as guilty as they probably do.


              You have a point but as I stated above in MFR we only match the pressure the patient is giving us back when they ask for more pressure. To start we are only sinking into a "barrier" or a place where we feel minimal resistance. This "barrier" is way before the place where a patient might feel a stretch or that someone is applying to much pressure. The other thing that hasn't been said is that each patient that comes in for treatment is told that if the pressure or technique is too much for them or not what they want all they have to say is "halt" and we take our hands off the patient (providing it's safe). Finally because I personally know Tina I know that she is the type of person that if she is unsure what the patient wants she will ask them to give them an opportunity to stop the therapy.


              Hope this clears up some stuff.

              Dave
              Last edited by bernard; 04-01-2006, 07:09 AM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Dave

                Thanks for your posts..

                Two points: (there are others but these will do for now)

                Re the barrier....why is a 'barrier' a place of minimal resistance? Why use the term out of its true meaning?

                And,
                .."all they have to say is 'halt' and we take our hands of the patient (provided it's safe).."
                Under what conditions would it be unsafe?? Where are these people in the room?

                Whether fresh off the ground or embalmed, cadavers are never a good way to understand how the body works. They are fine for anatomy rote learning, and not much else.


                Nari

                Comment


                • #38
                  Dave, I have to say that it's all a little "Your lips say no but your eyes say yes, yes, yes" for me. If the patient pushes back but doesn't say anything in particular or anything at all, isn't it necessarily the therapist that interprets what that means and thus what happens next is the therapist's intent. This does not bar the therapist from being right of course but it wouldn't be accurate to state that something the therapist does to someone is because the patient asked for it if they didn't actually ask for it.

                  I still don't have a good appreciation for what you learned from dead people that leads you to believe memories are stored in fascia.
                  "I did a small amount of web-based research, and what I found is disturbing"--Bob Morris

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Hi Dave,

                    As was mentioned previously, I don't think anyone here is questioning the tensile strength or resiliancy of fascia. Perhaps you have more ready access the studies showing that memories and trauma are stored in the fascia. If so, can you please post them.

                    I understand what you are saying about research, however there does come a point when enough people agree on the data that an idea can start to become accepted. Subjective evidence can play a part but the problem with such "experience and self experimentation" is that the human brain is often too eager to create meaning out whatever information it has at the time. This can produce some very, very wacky perceptions at times (read anything by VS Ramachandran for more on this). For example, the cop Jon mentioned pooled the information available to him and came up with the mistaken interpretation that the person was resisting his arrest. Likewise Tina came up with an interpretation that somehow the patient's body was asking her pin it to the table. It appears that this conclusion was generated in the context of a belief system that is independant of what we know about the functioning of the human organism. If it was not, then we would like to see/understand the accepted knowledge that might validate such a conclusion.

                    Regards,
                    Luke
                    Luke Rickards
                    Osteopath

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Hi Dave,
                      Welcome to SS and to our rollicking little conversation!
                      I have a big interest in anatomical minutiae and am very interested in learning more about your experience. I agree that much that is potentially useful to know about gets burned off with preservation. Even in unembalmed cadavers, dead is really still, compared to alive organisms, isn't it?
                      I have a question or two about what you observed.
                      1. First, did you see/dissect/ examine skin ligaments, how they lie in there, which directions? and if so..
                      2. Did you examine any of the skin ligaments that are mini neural conduits?
                      3. Did you examine anyting about the skin layer itself or did you dive straight through it (slice it off) to get to the fascia?
                      4. If you did examine the microanatomy of the skin, as in under a microscope, were you able to observe/examine/appreciate all the innervation it carries?
                      Thank you.
                      Diane
                      Last edited by Diane; 04-01-2006, 06:42 AM.
                      Diane
                      www.dermoneuromodulation.com
                      SensibleSolutionsPhysiotherapy
                      HumanAntiGravitySuit blog
                      Neurotonics PT Teamblog
                      Canadian Physiotherapy Pain Science Division (Archived newsletters, paincasts)
                      Canadian Physiotherapy Association Pain Science Division Facebook page
                      @PainPhysiosCan
                      WCPT PhysiotherapyPainNetwork on Facebook
                      @WCPTPTPN
                      Neuroscience and Pain Science for Manual PTs Facebook page

                      @dfjpt
                      SomaSimple on Facebook
                      @somasimple

                      "Rene Descartes was very very smart, but as it turned out, he was wrong." ~Lorimer Moseley

                      “Comment is free, but the facts are sacred.” ~Charles Prestwich Scott, nephew of founder and editor (1872-1929) of The Guardian , in a 1921 Centenary editorial

                      “If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you, but if you really make them think, they'll hate you." ~Don Marquis

                      "In times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists" ~Roland Barth

                      "Doubt is not a pleasant mental state, but certainty is a ridiculous one."~Voltaire

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Luke -

                        you wrote: "however there does come a point when enough people agree on the data that an idea can start to become accepted." The questions that come to mind with this statement are:
                        1. As my mom has said "If everyone jumps off a bridge, does that make it right?" More plainly if you can convience alot of people (weather it be through skewed research or just via case studies) that a hypothesis is correct does that mean it is correct? Case in point the studies on phonophoresis as a viable modality to get cortizone into the structures under the skin only proves a depth of absorption of 1 mm and yet millions of therapists swear that it's the best modality for tendonitis.
                        2. John Barnes has taught over 50,000 therapists his technique and thousands utilize it everyday with exceptional responses/results. Does this not, in itself, show merit for the prinicpals he teaches.

                        Just a friendly question and not meant to taunt.

                        Dave

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Hello All!

                          As I stated in one of my first posts, I think that Barrett performs and teaches good work. Along that line, someone, a while back, posted some research items on ideomotor action (or similar) to explain Simple Contact. I ask if someone has access to these citations if they could please re-post them for we newcomers. Thanks in advance.


                          Diane,

                          "I've looked through that book, and would place it squarely on the "avoid list" (by the way, how do I get those quote boxes like you use?). As for Oschman's well researched work, dismissing it out of hand, as you have done, merely proves the point that any research or writings can be dismissed if you, yourself do not agree with them or feel they are invalid. Like cited an article negating the validity of Upledger/cranial osteopathy. While I do not disagree with many of the concepts presented, again, these PhD's opinions, backed up by the research that validates their opinion, a very telling statement was made at the end of this citation: "A clinical encounter can be an empty experiential slate upon which both patients and practitioners may paint a picture of clinical success, even when the method is ineffective. Most maladies improve without treatment, placebo effects and regression to the mean may lead to improvements not directly caused by the treatment, and subjective validation may lead to imagined improvements where none exists". If we are to post citations and trust research, do we pick and choose which parts of the research to believe? These "trusted" researchers just invalidated all that we work for, as " most maladies improve without treatment". I hope that we all do not feel this is true, as we see the opposite in our treatment room every day.

                          To all of you, there is obviously no evidence that you will accept that states that emotions lie within the cells or the tissues. If what we do on a daily basis, helping people to recover from longstanding pain disorders when all else has failed, seems untrustable or beyond belief, then step aside so we can continue. As I stated in the forward of John Barnes book, Healiing Ancient Wounds":

                          "Being a master is not about higher learning. Being a master is about learning a lesson, learning each lesson, as if it were being taught for the very first time. Every time the master interacts with his student, the lesson is new and the outcome is unique.

                          Being a Master is not about teaching. Being a master is about guiding the student toward knowledge through example, thought, and empowerment. The master takes the student where self-discovery is the next and only logical step.

                          This paraphrasing of a traditional eastern way of thought comes from Gary Zukav's book, The Dancing Wu Li Masters". In it, Zukav defines the master as one who "teaches essence. When the essence is percieved, he teaches what is necessary to expand the perception." By learing the fundamental nature of a problem, the student is able to make the logical step toward understanding. John F. barnes, PT, has the ability to teach essence."


                          Those of you familiar with Barrett's writing will no doubt refer to his brutal "review" of this book. So be it. John teaches the essence that many of us find wholly valuable in what we do. Decide for yourselves; do you want to find out what you are capable of? I must point out what Barrett stated in a previous post, that he was going to ask his audience over the next few days what is really taught in a Barnes seminar. As I stated previously, I have instructed at over 50 of John's seminars, and have never heard him defame another practitioner or teacher in his seminars. Why would a person, with only one day to spread the good news about his work during his seminar, spend precious time demeaning someone else and their work when they could be spending that time teaching more of all of the good things that they can teach?

                          Barrett, just one thought on your comments, (more to follow as well),
                          You stated that you only posted the blog link to the patient treated at John's clinic only twice, but you failed to mention how much time you spent dragging the process down:

                          (http://www.somasimple.com/forums/sho...ght=myofascial) commenting on her difficult but successful journey out of pain.

                          Here are a few things you had to say, in addition to the 2 posts:

                          "The practices clearly described in the blog-all done within the past month-are a regular part of Barnes' approach. His apologists tell me that they simply "don't go into that part of it" and state that MFR "unwinding" is identical to the ideomotor correction I describe. Can you appreciate why that sets my teeth on edge?

                          I got kicked off the "MFR chat" recently, a place where they occassionally talk to each other about what an awful person I am and how I must have been abused in order to get that way. I wonder who they'd like me to blame?"

                          "I'm glad you can finally see why I have been the way you've known me for several years. I guess it took this woman's blog to do it though numerous descriptions of this work have been a part of the public record for years. I hear story after story from one PT after another, but almost always in hushed tones."

                          "At every course I teach I get the same questions: “Isn’t this what Barnes teaches? Isn’t this “unwinding”? Aren’t you just getting “releases”? How is this different?”

                          "In response I can feel my spine stiffen and my breath shorten. I know my eyes clearly display the fury that has grown in me year after year as I hear about what goes on at the MFR courses and in the clinics. If the blog linked here does not reflect a typical experience anyone working in those places or attending the courses has, someone personally familiar with the courses or clinics should say so. After 32 years in this business I am somewhat proprietary about my profession and I am sensitive to the way it is practiced. For that I make no apologies.

                          I grow especially angry when people lump me in with this sort of practice and will not apologize for that either. Nor do I suppose I need to explain that anger.

                          This is not all I have to say, but at this point I will give anyone wishing to defend and explain what was done to this woman time to reply. We all know you’re out there reading this."

                          So much for only "2 posts".

                          Have you seen the entry on Wikipedia.com on Myofascial Release? Have you Barrett? I know this seems to be directly cut and pasted from Art Riggs' website. Barrett, (I am assuming that you did not post this link on Riggs' site or Wikipedia.com), do you condone this? Why don't you promote your own work with as much energy as you put into TRYING to drag Myofascial Release and John Barnes down? If your work is as good as you say it is, why is Jon Child's, of the American Physical therapy Association, trying to discredit you? Being lumped together with John should prove to you that you have made it! The establishment wants to bring you down. This is the success I spoke about in an earlier post. You must be somebody if they want to keep people away from your seminars! And, the success that I wished upon you was to flurish when open minded PT's see that you must being teaching something worthwhile.


                          Walt

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Walt, Dave,

                            Help me understand something. The patients you help improve. So at a minimum, some element of your therapeutic interaction is helping. Much of the improvement can likely be explained, plausibly, by our current understanding of pain physiology. Here's the part you can help me with. Why should I abandon these reasons and adopt a theory that seems to defy neurophysiology and may lead me to do more than is necessary and increase the risk of unintended consequences?

                            In the attempt to widen the sieve of my brain, let's pretend for a moment that the fascia indeed can store an emotion. What aspect of a stored emotion is irritating? Is the emotion rubbing on free nerve endings? Do you think that that can really happen? Once the emotion is released, where does it go that it is no longer painful?
                            "I did a small amount of web-based research, and what I found is disturbing"--Bob Morris

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Jon -

                              You wrote: I still don't have a good appreciation for what you learned from dead people that leads you to believe memories are stored in fascia.

                              I apoligize if you thought that the compairson between embalmed and unembalmed cadavers was a discusion regarding the knowledge that memories are stored in the fascia. I think that Diane or another neuroanatomist would be a better person to answer your question because what you are really questioning is how does the body stores memory in the tissue. My knowledge of cellular biology is very, very weak and I wouldn't want to insult other's knowledge by trying to explain this topic that way. therefore let me utilize straight observation of the human condition and break it down this way
                              1. The fascial system is a 3-D web of connective tissue that everything goes through,in or around. This is the point of discecting fresh cadavers - an embalmed cadaver has a fascial system that is, for lack of a better term, destroyed by the nature of the the embalming fluid and the only part of it that is left is the areas of fascia that are pretty thick in nature such as the superficial layer benieth the skin or the area between the hemisphers of the brain. If you have the pleasure of discecting a fresh cadaver you would notice that the fascial system is found between each cell, spindel, fiber and bundle of a muscle and therefore it is what makes up the shape and form of a muscle (which is why some people will say there is no such thing as a true muscle). Because of it's direct connection to the muscles I can then ask you to try and understand motor memory or the ability of the body to remember tasks and then perform them repeatitively. For example if it wasn't for motor memory Barrette would not be able to juggle and ultimately perform new moves because his muscles would have to learn the task everytime he juggled. Also I wouldn't be able to type without looking at the keyboard because my muscles would have to learn how to perform these coordinated movments each time I attempted to type.

                              2. Secondly every trauma that a person endures has an emotion attached to it, don't believe me please come up with one. Everything that has happened in your life from skinning you knee where the emotion of fear of getting in trouble for something that was associated with it or the fear of seeing blood come out of your skin to the fear of death or fear of outcome that people have related to a surgery. Even the emotion associated with a breakup/divorce can be stored. How else can you explain a person that was assulted or abused has an adverse physical reaction (vommiting/nausea) everytime they see a person that reminds them of their attacker. Or the panic/nausea and sometimes paralizing of the muscles a person experiances everytime a large truck comes up along side of them while they are driving after they had a car accident with a large truck that side swiped them.

                              3. If that is difficult to understand than lets make it even more simple. Emotion can be related to or a least grouped with stress. Think of how many people grind their teeth at night or tighten up their shoulders because of stress. This prolonged posture or abuse to the TMJ causes physical pain and malfunction. Yes you can argue that this emotion isn't stored in the body, however than explain why is it that although the stress/emotion has been removed (i.e. you quite the job that had the boss who made advances at you or downright attacted you) and yet another stressor/emotion comes by and your body reacts the same exact way? Sounds like a memory to me.

                              I hope this is the type of discussion you were looking for.

                              Dave

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Walt, Dave..

                                There have been some questions asked by jon, Luke, myself and others.

                                Answers seem to have been delayed; and these questions have not been reasonably answered in the few references and stories related.
                                At the start of the discussion, you welcomed questions.

                                Has that changed? If so, would we be wrong assuming that the answers are not known?

                                Nari

                                Comment

                                Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                                Auto-Saved
                                x
                                Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                                x
                                x
                                Working...
                                X