elect_eng
- 372
- 2
zoobyshoe said:Since he ‘knew’ that applied kinesiology works, and the best scientific method shows that it does not work, then, in his mind, there must be something wrong with the scientific method."
The relevance of this example to this thread doesn't make logical sense to me. Or, maybe I should say, I don't know what conclusion to draw from it. Kinesiology is a general method of diagnosis based on muscle strength. I've seen it in action on myself and it does work and it makes sense that it should work. If my physical therapist pushes on my right arm and it is weak, then pushes on my left arm and it is strong, he concludes that I have a muscle/tendon/ligament problem in the right arm area. He probes further and finds muscle spasms or some other injury. Then he treats it and I get better. It's a very simple a direct technique.
This example confuses me. I would not expect the presence of different sugars (or even artificial sugars) on my tongue to affect my muscle strength. If someone did the test on me, I would be so convinced that it would not work that the placebo effect would have the opposite affect and I would disprove the idea even if it were true; - hence, the importance of a double blind test is clear.
All this example is showing is that a very specific belief which is a small part of a larger diagnostic method was wrong. We can find misconceptions in any school of thought. Personally, I can't imagine that any collective group should have thought that test would be the "best" example to demonstrate kinesiology. It sounds like a bunch of quacks got together on this one.
Personally, I would never go to a chiropractor who classified himself as an "alternative healer". I want someone who embraces the scientific method, and is knowledgeable about all treatment options; and most importantly someone who is honest. I would expect anyone who comes to this forum to have a similar view. My chiropractor went to an Ivy league school and then to medical school. He has a very scientific approach to his profession. He directs people to other medical professionals unless he knows his methods are the right treatment for the problem.
In any profession, you need to separate the wheat from the chaff. This is not always easy, but is actually easier with chiropractors that with traditional medical doctors. It's natural to approach a chiropractor with a bit of skepticism and be on your guard, but we often go to the traditional doctor with full confidence that the person knows what he is doing and is ethical. That's a very dangerous attitude, and I won't even try to quote one of the many examples of ethical misconduct, since we have all heard the horror stories.
Last edited: