Thread: Vantage points
View Single Post
Old 01-08-2013, 12:21 PM   #261
Mert Gambito
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 202
Re: Vantage points

Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Dual opposing spirals is not explained by anatomy trains, and fascia and meridian theory alone will not offer much help. No PT, Doc, Acupuncture therapist or otherwise I have met can do it based on ANY prior knowledge of the human anatomy. It is however fairly simple to lay out, you can feel it in others who move this way well and you can feel yourself doing certain portions.

It is the end product of training to use the entire body organized in a different way. Very hard to understand in the body at first takes time.
The above statements, for those who are just starting or planning to undertake IP/IS training, really need to be taken at face value.

Again, in the introductory portion of the ILC training model in which meridians are discussed, the primary purpose of that is to simply allow students to understand which portions of the body are "yin" and which are "yang" -- so for much of the introductory training, a student is asked to think of, and operate his/her body as just two integrated, complementary parts/halves. From ILC's public website:

David Sorokod wrote:
Perhaps the following is the most relevant to the current discussion. The source is the FAQ for Fascia Research Group (Division of Neurophysiology, of Ulm University, Germany) website at . . . It is nice to see a scientific conclusion on the subject.
Hunter Lonsberry wrote:
Dr. Schliep also stated that it was his opinon that Akuzawa sensei and others like him likely have some sort of "hyper conditioning" of the fascia
Dan Harden wrote:
There are many different "final word" studies on fascia that have occurred recently, and some of them directly contradict each other.
Keith Larman wrote:
I've posted before that the whole fascia thing could turn out to be a red herring of sorts.
David, it's really too early, by the scientific community's own characterizations of the state of fascia research, to say that it has reached definitive conclusions -- and even if they were to do so, those initial conclusions would not address the topic of IP/IS per se:
  • The Fascia Research Congress holds what it calls "international conferences dedicated to the newly emerging field of 'Fascia Studies.'"
  • The Fascia Research Group, from whose FAQ you quoted above, acknowledges, in the Q&A that follows what you quoted, that it hasn't yet published its findings on active contractile properties in a peer-reviewed journal, and concedes: "we suppose that the extra time taken by us for the further substantiation of our reports will contribute to making these findings more acceptable to the wider scientific community."
But really, this is all literally academic, given that incontrovertible first-hand proof of the physiological changes, regardless of what science eventually determines they are -- separate from IP, as well as in function to demonstrate IP -- can readily be had when training with a vetted IP/IS instructor.

  Reply With Quote