Deconstruction of "Z-Health Performance Solutions"

[EricM]

And, to add to Jon's last post, with respect to,

Anecdotally, I have done the demo repeated in over 50 people now and 45 of them responded positively.

What went wrong with the 5 that did not respond?

[christophb]

I did not believe any of it until I had a session my myself and spent the whole next day with Dr. Cobb watching sessions. Drop me a note here if you are interested want would like to donate and our of your time.

For some reason this statement made me want to reference this on manual magic. Soma-folk are more interested in how the trick works vs. being amazed and entertained by effectiveness.

Mike, I've seen the same glut med-strength response in patient's that have performed ideomotion. No cuboid distraction. A few co-workers claim to see the same with traction of L5-S1, others with "multifidi re-education." So, what's the mechanism and is it even relevant to someone with pain.

Chris

[Diane]

To add to Jon and Eric and Chris's posts,

I did not believe any of it until I had a session my myself and spent the whole next day watching sessions

What does belief have to do with anything? If it's a good system, it should be explainable in ordinary science-based language, without need for "belief"...

[toddhargrove]

Jon wrote:

“For example, I'd love to read, like Jason, why Courtney thinks she had hammer toes (that is, what led to her having hammer toes), what she did about them (describe the exercise(s) beyond "Last month I had been doing a lot of joint mobility"), and if possible describe the proposed causal chain that led to the "no hammer toes" condition.”

Jon, I think that’s a good question and I’d like to hear Courtney’s answer. I’d also like to ask the same question back to the soma simple people. Lets assume that you witnessed Courtney’s toes straighten out a very short while after doing some joint mobility drills. What are the possible mechanisms for this happening? I’m not saying that we should accept Courtney’s anecdote as a basis to make scientific conclusions about anything. I’m just saying lets use her experience as a thought experiment to get explanations from each camp on what are the possible explanations for such a thing happening. For example, could this be a placebo? Inadvertent neural gliding from the joint mobility drills? Proprioceptive enhancement? I’m not asking this as a challenge to either side, I’m just trying to get a good list of possible mechanisms for this happening. Thanks.

[Jon Newman]

Hi Todd,

You first.

[Diane]

todd, ????
I'd say it's up to the asserters to defend their system with something that makes sense beyond whatever joint afferents they think they know about, it is not up to SS to provide them or anyone with explanations... They're here trying to convince the world they've got this great thing, but so far they haven't managed to convince anyone. The onus is on them, NOT us.

[toddhargrove]

Diane wrote:

“I'd say it's up to the asserters to defend their system with something that makes sense beyond whatever joint afferents they think they know about, it is not up to SS to provide them or anyone with explanations... They're here trying to convince the world they've got this great thing, but so far they haven't managed to convince anyone. The onus is on them, NOT us.”

Diane,
I am not here to defend or attack Z . I’m just here to provide what little I know about it so others can learn, and to ask some questions so I can learn. I’m certainly not implying that the soma crowd has a burden to disprove Z, or to do anything at all. To me this isn’t a trial with burdens of proof (I quit the law because I didn’t like them). I was just asking for your thoughts to help me interpret Courtney’s experience. If you don’t want to share them, that’s fine. Anyone else?

[Jon Newman]

Hi Todd,

Actually neither of us are in a position to interpret her results at this point because we don't know what it is she has done to manage the condition. I'll be happy to give an interpretation if it is different than the one Courtney gives.

Also, it doesn't have to be the hammer toe example. I've seen plenty of amazing claims in this thread alone not to mention searching around on the internet. I'm uninterested in this being personal.

[toddhargrove]

Jon,

Fair enough.

[GeoffNeupert]

Possible Harper's Index entry

I'd like to issue a challenge. Since this thread is dedicated to and understood to be about zhealth let's see if it's possible to explain empirical observations without actually stating "zhealth" or it's derivatives as if that is somehow helpful or furthers understanding.

Jon,

Since the internet doesn't indicate "tone," I'll assume you're not being sarcastic, so I'll venture a few observations.

When having my clients actively (they do it, I don't) mobilize the following bones in their feet: navicular, cuboid, middle cunneiform, their gaits improve--become more efficient: faster, feet closer together. (They perform all these drills standing.) If they practice these drills on their own routinely, the gait stays that way. Likewise, when I have clients actively mobilize their lateral talo-calcaneal joints, their heel strikes usually become quieter. Again, if they practice these drills routinely on their own, their heel strikes stay quiet.

Also, when clients actively mobilize their T-spines, their posture improves (although this also happens with the foot work).

I cannot state definitively that their gaits increased by x speed or their posture improved by y inches. I have never measured the change. Is this close to what you're looking for?

I guess after reading all of these posts with the many questions contained therein, some real, some sarcastic, I've realized that I've stopped asking "why?" in many cases especially with regard to the system I'm not supposed to name in this response. Perhaps it's intellectual laziness. Perhaps it's busy-ness. Whatever the case, my "experience" was good enough for me at that time to seek to know further. Perhaps it was circumstancial: I was training 60 sessions per week and trying to move a business forward--I was just tired and the answers at the time were acceptable to me.

Mr. Dorko commented earlier on one of my statements:

"Geoff says, "I won't be able to answer them on a "deep science" level in most cases, but my experience in the field more than makes up for my lack of knowledge, that is, if you accept that anecdotal evidence is the beginning of the scientific method." This comment contains just about everything that's wrong with "alternative" approaches. "Experience" can never make up for ignorance and anecdotal evidence is not the beginning of the scientific method."

I disagree on his evaluation (of course I would). Experience doesn't make up for ignorance, true, but ignorance of what? Current scientific literature? If my "experience" tells me high-carb diets do exactly the opposite of what the "science" says they "should" do, do I disregard my experience in favor of the science? We know how that little nightmare turned out (can you say 70% of the US is overweight?). Anecdotal evidence is nothing more than observation and that is the beginning of the scientific method (Observation -> Question -> Hypothesis -> Prediction ->Experimentation...etc.)

Experience is a form of knowledge. To discount that is arrogance in favor of your strengths. For example, you can be well versed about movement on an intellectual level, but if you have a pot-belly and a double chin, slumped shoulders, and a forward head carriage, I can guarantee you that you don't know a lot about movement on the experiential level.

And as far as that comment summing up what's wrong with the "alternative" approaches: Alternative approaches exist because traditional ones fail. What's the number one criteria? Performance.

So for me personally, I no longer need to know "why" everything is what it is and why everything happens in order to use something as long as I can measure in some way that it works, whether that measurement is subjective, as in, "according to the wall at the back of my studio, he looks taller after performing x," to objective, "Congratulations, you've lost 5% bodyfat in 5 weeks." For me, it's all about the performance. Can I make a change in performance: feel better, move better, hit the ball farther, etc...

If that makes me lazy, so be it...I'll be lazy for now--I have other fish to fry.

[EricM]

Geoff, sounds like you have a serious case of Cognitive Dissonance. Better get that checked out!

[Jon Newman]

Hi Geoff,

Since the internet doesn't indicate "tone," I'll assume you're not being sarcastic..

You're correct.

[GeoffNeupert]

Geoff, sounds like you have a serious case of Cognitive Dissonance. Better get that checked out!

That's pretty funny. Except I'm perfectly comfortable admitting that I don't know all the science about what I believe and what I experience (uh-oh--there's that "touchy-feely" word again...). I have no problem learning about what I don't know, either. Thanks for the "help."

[EricM]

Geoff, although I came into this thread late after being away all weekend, I'd be happy to try and help answer some of the 'why's,' but I'm going to need some help to do that. And believe me, I'm all for the experience too.

Let's start with the following passage describing what you do.

When having my clients actively (they do it, I don't) mobilize the following bones in their feet: navicular, cuboid, middle cunneiform, their gaits improve--become more efficient: faster, feet closer together. (They perform all these drills standing.) If they practice these drills on their own routinely, the gait stays that way. Likewise, when I have clients actively mobilize their lateral talo-calcaneal joints, their heel strikes usually become quieter. Again, if they practice these drills routinely on their own, their heel strikes stay quiet.

Specifically how does the client mobilize these joints by themselves? What grade of mobilization are we talking about? How many times? Is there any reference given to whether these mobilizations are in physiological or accessory joint motions? Lots of references to drills, but without some description of the drill(s) themselves, there's not much anyone can comment on.

What criteria is used to determine which joint needs to be mobilized? Are they all mobilized as a matter of routine?

How do we know that a faster gait with the feet closer together is more efficient? How is efficiency of gait being measured?

[BB]

Hi Geoff,

No one here will claim to know everything. If anyone ever tells you that, you can safely assume immediately that they are lying.

That said, of course you don't need to know everything before you use it. But, when you KNOWINGLY pass on explanations that are not supported this impacts the way your athletes interact with the world when they leave your place. In other words, it affects your outcomes. Maybe not today and maybe not tomorrow, but at some point they are going to be confronted with a situation in which what they learned from you will be brought to bear relevance once again. If they've got an inaccurate explanatory model to work from (such as mis-alignment causes pain for example), this will impact the way they interact with the world and themselves.

Again, of course we can't know everything. But we can also ignore what we do know and when that become the case, the word to describe it is much uglier than ignorance.

Cognitive dissonance is a very good thing. We should all hope to notice it occurring and use it appropriately. That means, when your belief system is no longer supported, it gets scrapped or revamped so that it is again supported, until it is not. Then the process re-starts. I know that it continues for me thanks mostly to this place.

Oh, and Todd:
Here is my general explanation. I'd like to hear one from the supporters before going specific as well.