Deconstruction of "Z-Health Performance Solutions"

[Craig Liebenson]

Diane,

"Keats,

1. Please accept my apologies. It appears I had the wrong take on you. Welcome back.

2. I have an astronomically high index of suspicion about any treatment system designed by a chiropractor. They seem to pull most of their ideas out of clouds or something. They would love to insist the body/nervous system works as they say it does instead of the way it really does, i.e., arbitrarily and according to its own individual trajectory most of the time. They'll take one tiny treatment idea (usually not original) then squeeze it to mush, expand it up into a multi-level system which they try to become rich from. All packageing/no content.

3. Every chiro with a system is only trying to sell it.

4. Chiro systems all contradict each other.

3. I confess, I saw that Cobbs is a chiro and thought, I'm not going to get sucked anywhere near this thread or near Keats.
__________________"

Diane

Do you believe chiropractors are worse than other health care professionals when it comes to scientific honesty?
I prefer to blast all those - regardless of profession - who are not outcome-based or patient-centered. People who prescribe care that is debunked (i.e. prolonged bed rest for LBP, routine imagining & premature surgery, overtreatment w/ opiates or manual therapy). But, to blast a profession seems against the general high-standards of this Forum.

Sincerely,
Craig

[Diane]

Let me guess - you've had chiro training, right?

Diane

Do you believe chiropractors are worse than other health care professionals when it comes to scientific honesty?

Busted.
Generally speaking, yes. I do. As a general rule. Chiro has always seemed to me to be a business training selling a product called manual care, instead of a profession which includes manual therapists, many of whom use a business model. To be sure, many in my profession see no problem with that idea. I always have.

I prefer to blast all those - regardless of profession - who are not outcome-based or patient-centered.

Perhaps you are a bit different then. There are lots of chiros on this board who seem just fine.

People who prescribe care that is debunked (i.e. prolonged bed rest for LBP, routine imagining & premature surgery, overtreatment w/ opiates or manual therapy). But, to blast a profession seems against the general high-standards of this Forum.

We blast whatever we think needs blasting. But we do not attack individuals or let individuals be attacked by others. If you're someone who separates who he is, does, and thinks, apart from each other, this will become evident. If you're someone who has conflated himself into /wants to waste time being defensive about something like the profession called chiro, largely indefensible IMO, then you would be wasting our time too.
So far, I did not get that impression. Although (apparently) wedded to mesodermalist ideas, so far, you've been a perfect gentleman and you are certainly welcome here. We (I at least) would like to expose you to:

1. pain science, neuroscience

2. the idea that nothing and nobody, even magic-handed and magic-thinking chiropractors, or osteopaths, or acupuncturists, or (insert name of human primate social grooming profession) can "change" someone's body from outside it, because a little something called a nervous system is in control, and must be dealt with one way or another

3. the idea that manual therapies for sure, perhaps all the therapies, are shot through and through with hubris and operator models, that in fact perhaps the only way the entire field will advance, given the context of advanced neuro and pain science, is if somehow the manual therapies can evolve some interactor models, change their thinking somehow, or at least admit that all the mesodermalist treatment concepts are provisional, as-if ideas, not reality-based. Oh, and stop imagining that its ever possible to wed biomechanics to pareiodolic value-judgments about "posture" or "asymmetry" or "weakness" etc. (Don't even let get me started on "weakness" or "muscle-testing"...)

If any of this deconstruction interests you, we'd love to have you. Many brains make lighter work. If you are going to be here only to try (and fail) to defend the (so-called) profession known as chiro, then I don't think you'd be a good fit. Although you'd still be welcome regardless, unless you should begin attacking or being otherwise annoying. :angel:

[Keats Snideman]

Its been a while since I"ve frequented this forum and its great to see someone like Dr. Craig Liebenson here! As a chiroptactor, he is as "evidence-based" as I've seen and has done some really great work in his textbooks and writings to promote an active, "patient-centered" approach to rehabilitation.


Keats

[Craig Liebenson]

2. the idea that nothing and nobody, even magic-handed and magic-thinking chiropractors, or osteopaths, or acupuncturists, or (insert name of human primate social grooming profession) can "change" someone's body from outside it, because a little something called a nervous system is in control, and must be dealt with one way or another

Sweet. The notion that there is a wisdom of the body to heal itself seem forgotten when manual therapists expect manual therapy to "fix" or "cure" musculoskeletal pain (MP). Patients should attribute to themselves rather than another as they learn to cope w/ MP & un-learn guarded motor programs. The peripheralist mentality makes the bodies hardware (i.e. pain generators - jt, muscle, etc.) the target of therapy rather than the bodies software (CNS).

One's profession does not matter as much as one's approach. One's ability to provide somatic education would seem to distiguish appropriate rehab vs inappropriate. Who can provide safe, fear - dispelling reactivation advice to people w/ MP? The profession does not matter it is the orientation & skill that does.

[Diane]

The peripheralist mentality makes the bodies hardware (i.e. pain generators - jt, muscle, etc.) the target of therapy rather than the bodies software (CNS).

Actually that whole statement is a peripheralist statement.
It is not "muscle" or "joint, etc." that generates "pain." Even when actual pathology such as advanced rheumatoid arthritis or something is ravaging tissue, all you'll get is nociception.
It's the brain that generates "pain," projects it to the cognitive/evaluative bits and to the "virtual" bodies, and the PNS.
Nociception never shuts off. It has something called "maintained discharge", sending weak signaling even in the absense of stimuli - a drippy faucet sort of thing, into the dorsal horn. The dorsal horn is sort of a catch basin with a sponge in the bottom, metaphorically speaking, to dampen the signal. Nociception is neither sufficient nor necessary to generate "pain." Pain can also occur in the complete absence of input, e.g., phantom limb. It can be tough to take that on board but it's what the neuromatrix model is all about.

[Ken Jakalski]

If a coach or trainer tells me he or she has a new protocol or training device that will increase an athlete’s speed, I can look to three things that might be changing as a result of those protocols or devices: metabolic energy expenditure, sprinting endurance, and sprinting mechanics. All these are measurable. If I see no change in any of these, I have to question whether these protocols can be linked to the observed improvements.

If I look at the Z-Health, and consider that even eye movements may be dictated by imbalances and weaknesses, then shouldn’t the corrective protocol reveal that something relative to the eye movements has now changed as a result of my interventions?

Can any system based on muscular movement or joint positioning be suggested as the means of pain correction if there is no way to assess if the protocol has resulted in changes in the way those muscles or joints are moving after the interventions?

I guess what I’m asking is if movement therapies don’t make changes in movement, might this be a good reason to believe what Diane has stated, that joints don't "rule" the system but that the nervous system itself does?

[wunger122]

I have used the Z-Health system (r and i phase) for four years. Are the mobility movements extraordinary? No.. But taken as a system, I have found, for me at least, the best thing I have ever done. I have practiced feldenkrais and hana somatics, both intelligent movement approaches, however the Z-Health, for whatever reason, works immediately. I have never taken a course, just used the dvd's.
I have practiced Judo for 35 years and Z-Health keeps me going and yes I still see chiros, physios and osteopaths.
From an unbiased source,
Wayne Unger
Victoria BC

[Craig Liebenson]

Actually that whole statement is a peripheralist statement.

Diane,
I beg to differ. The peripheralist wants the patient to attribute to their skills. The health care professional who wants the patient to learn how to manage pain on their own by enhanced coping skills & improved non-protective motor skills is the one who focuses on the mind.

"Patients should attribute to themselves rather than another as they learn to cope w/ MP & un-learn guarded motor programs. "

[Diane]

Alluding to structural tissues as pain generators is what made your statement peripheralist. I stand by my statement. I will add, though, that you may be part way there.

[Craig Liebenson]

we do not attack individuals or let individuals be attacked by others. ......If you are going to be here only to try (and fail) to defend the (so-called) profession known as chiro, then I don't think you'd be a good fit. Although you'd still be welcome regardless, unless you should begin attacking or being otherwise annoying. :angel:

I prefer to attack ideas & constructs rather than professions. If you wish to attack a profession it is your website & you are free to do as you wish.

I have never concerned myself w/ labels or letters after people's names. I seek knowledge and those that are willing to share. Knowledge begets knowledge. What I care about is helping our patients suffer less and participate more without being dependent on us.

[Diane]

I prefer to attack ideas & constructs rather than professions. If you wish to attack a profession it is your website & you are free to do as you wish.

I have never concerned myself w/ labels or letters after people's names. I seek knowledge and those that are willing to share. Knowledge begets knowledge. What I care about is helping our patients suffer less and participate more without being dependent on us.

Then we agree. :angel::thumbs_up
On nearly everything, no less.

The website exists mainly to discuss/critique anything, including but not restricted to any "name" that might have become attached to a product or that may have become recognized as a "brand."

Not real "persons."

We don't recognize professions as persons.

[Barrett Dorko]

With 236 posts this thread is huge.

I would love to see everyone here read through it. It seems to have brought out the best in some and the worst in others. Several of the posters endure and several others have disappeared.

Perhaps it will serve as a template for what can be done with thoughtful questioning and rational approaches to care in every community committed to seeing others in hopes of helping them - and that should include all of us here.

[Ken Jakalski]

Hi Keats!

I remember you from your posts over at Supertraining!

You noted the following about Cobb's approach:

It gets a little more dicey when he puts forth the idea that there are corresponing joints in the body. For instance, Cobb states that a right ankle problem is correlated with a left wrist problem. A right knee problem is related to dysfunction in the left elbow; right hip with left shoulder, etc... I guess he bases this theory on the human gait cycle. It kind of makes sense but sounds a little too simplistic.

I'm sorry if I keep returning the the paralympian sprinters on these kinds of issues, but watching these guys run and jump on my track back in '97 became my 'epiphany' moment on issues relative to imbalances and asymmetries during high speed running.

Volpentest was born without lower arms and feet. In fact, when you look closely at his prosthetics, you'll see that one limb is actually longer than the other. Nevertheless, he was able to run 22.94 for 200 meters, a time faster than that run by the majority of able bodied high school sprinters I've ever coached over the past thirty-six years.

I suppose that, if you don't have a left wrist, you don't have a right ankle problem. But what about single below the knee amputees like Marlon Shirley, the paralympic world champion for 100 meters? Maybe his explanation would suggest some other means of neurological compensation.

My take is that these kinds of peformances should compel us to at least reconsider our theories on the "human gait cycle."

[atx4]

I've read through this entire thread. Very interesting and very educational. It's a nice thread for someone who wants to hone their bullshit detection skills

[atx4]

Now they've put up a reference library on their site...

http://www.zhealth.net/reference-lib...reference-list