By Greg Mack

Medical and Exercise practitioners working with the human body are diverse in both training and perspective. Each has a particular set of role responsibilities in addressing the expressed needs of a client or patient. Those responsibilities are executed using a methodology and a set of tools to assess the client’s system and work to improve it. The methods and strategies chosen are based on a philosophical perspective of what the human body is and how it works. That perspective is termed Body-View. Body-view is a philosophical construct that each practitioner holds within their minds – consciously or subconsciously – which informs their interpretation and understanding of each client’s circumstance.

Body-view (n.) –

“An overarching perspective through which and from which an individual interprets, understands, and interacts with the human body”. Greg Mack, 2010

It is a subset of a Worldview (n.) – a comprehensive conception or image of the universe and of humanity’s relation to it. Dictionary.com 2017

The suffix “-ism” is used to denote that the root word now reflects an overarching ideology and perspective through which empirical experience is filtered. When an individual presents themselves to a practitioner and subjectively reports their somatic experience (typically sensations that they don’t like or want) and outlines a health history, that practitioner, knowingly or unknowingly, employs their Body-View to interpret, understand, and execute strategies and tactics to address the individual’s issues.

Here is a listing of common body views and their descriptions:

Posturism

The belief that one’s posture, specifically their standing posture, is related to multiple facets of health, where deviation from an ideal posture causes a myriad of unwanted sensations. Strategies are employed to improve posture, with the expectation of enhancing health and reducing unwanted sensations and/or disease.

Fabricism

The belief that the human body is constituted by fabric or a material substance like Cloth, Play-Doh© or Silly Putty©, such that when an individual reports a sensation that they don’t like in a specified location on the body, strategies are employed e.g., rubbing, stretching, compressing, vibrating, or otherwise deforming the local bodily tissues to release, loosen, or relax those tissues.
I suggest that this body-view has its roots in Materialism.

Materialism

“Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds matter to be the fundamental substance in nature, and all things, including mental states and consciousness, are the result of material interactions. According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are by-products or epiphenomena of material processes (such as the biochemistry of the human brain and nervous system), without which they cannot exist.”                                                                                                                            Wikipedia

Functionalism

The belief that the human body possesses a particular set of innate physical functions/actions (e.g., walking, standing, running, pushing, pulling, squatting, carrying), and that all treatments and exercises that the body performs should mimic, or take on, one or more of these categories of movement. Functional training is a type of treatment and/or exercise that mimics the movements and challenges of everyday life. It purports that it trains your muscles, joints, and nervous system to work together as a unit, rather than isolating them into separate exercises. This belief also holds that as many muscles and joints as possible should be incorporated into the treatment and/or exercise. This belief decries the notion of selectorized machines or exercises that attempt to isolate a particular muscle/joint as unnatural and non-functional.

I believe that this body-view has its roots in wholism.

Wholism (aka Holism)

“Wholism is the idea that various systems (e.g., physical, biological, social) should be viewed as wholes, not merely as a collection of parts.”             Wikipedia

Energyism

The belief that the human body is an energy field, or as a physical entity generates an energy field, and that any disease, dysfunction, or unwanted sensation is the result of a disruption in the energy field and/or its flow throughout the body. This belief holds that every living thing pulses with the flow of a life force that pervades the universe. According to this body-view, the universal energy field, all matter and psychological processes — thoughts, emotions, beliefs, and attitudes — are composed of energy. When applied to the human body, every atom, molecule, cell, tissue, and body system is composed of energy that, when superimposed on each other, creates what is known as the human energy field. Thus, strategies are deployed that generate undefined subtle forces that can be directed by the practitioner to an individual to produce measurable biological effects and remove unwanted sensations and disease. 

I believe that this body-view has its roots in Vitalism and Quantum Physics.

Vitalism

“Vitalism is a belief that starts from the premise that ‘living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things.” Wikipedia

Quantum Mechanics

“A fundamental theory in physics that provides a description of the physical properties of nature at the scale of atoms and subatomic particles. It is the foundation of all quantum physics including quantum chemistry, quantum field theory, quantum technology, and quantum information science.” Wikipedia  

Localism

The belief that disease, dysfunction, and unwanted sensations in the human body are exclusively local in nature and effect, therefore, only local solutions should be presented. (e.g., cortisone shots, direct pressure, thermal modalities, ultrasound, analgesic creams, etc.)

I believe that this body-view has its roots in Physical Reductionism and Isolationism.

Physical Reductionism

“A doctrine stating that everything in the world can be reduced down to its fundamental physical, or material, basis.” https://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/redphys-body.html

Isolationism

The circumstance of being physically separated from and not involved in other objects.

Mechanicalism

“The character of being mechanical; mechanical action or procedure; specifically, in philosophy, the mechanical interpretation of the universe.” https://www.wordnik.com/

The belief that disease, dysfunction, and unwanted sensations in the human body are due to strictly mechanical reasons.

Scientism

“A practitioner with this belief “sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.” https://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/sciism-body.html

The belief that…

…all methods employed in order to address an individual’s circumstance must only be informed by information created by scientific processes and published research.

…human behavior, culture, and social institutions, could only become known and understood by the scientific methods used to find laws as reliable and predictable as Classical and Quantum Mechanics.

…only scientific methodologies can identify, fix, and predict the human traits of ignorance, superstition, tradition, and poverty that persist in the population.

Each of the body views listed previously has significant implications for how a practitioner interprets what they observe and chooses methods to address client issues.

Here are examples of each in modern practice:

Posturism

Posturology

Rolfing

Yoga-based Embodied Posture

Egosque Posture Therapy

Fabricism

Holistic Posture Therapy

Foam Rolling – Myofacial Release

Deep Tissue Massage

Active Release Therapy

Passive and Active Stretching

Functionalism

Cross Fit

Standing on an unstable surface and exercising

ACE Specialist IFT Model – Functional Training 2.0

Functional Movement Screen

Energyism

Reiki

Chakras

Healing Crystals

PEMF (Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy)

Earthing

Localism

Cortizone Shot

Trigger Point Release

Surgical Removal of Tissue

Thermal Therapies (Ice and Heat)

Mechanicalism

Clinical Kinesiology Manual Muscle Testing

Chiropractic and Osteopathic Manipulations

Corrective Exercise

Scientism

Human consciousness is empirical, and it has been shown that neurological activity is associated with it. Scientism concludes that the only explanation for the presence of consciousness is the neurological activity created in the human nervous system, and that the display of this activity by scientific instruments is the only scientific process that can explain it.

Followers of Scientism view humans primarily in terms of biochemistry, with little to no regard for the broader context of individual and collective human experience, social structure, tradition, and culture.

Implications

The adage “if you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail” comes to mind. Additionally, each of these body views is plagued with biases, fallacies, and potentials.

It is accepted that the body-view of a practitioner, and the methods they employ, may consist of a mixture of a few of these body-views. However, this paper contends that one of the views is predominant over the others.

Followers of Scientism view humans primarily in terms of biochemistry, with little to no regard for the broader context of individual and collective human experience, social structure, tradition, and culture.

Here is a summary of the benefits and pitfalls of a practitioner holding tightly to one of these body-views:

Posturism

“The term ‘posture’ means the position of the body in space. It indicates the position of the body in space and has the purpose of maintaining the body in balance, during the dynamic movements and the stasis. Several factors contribute to the posture, including neurophysiological, biomechanical and psychoemotive factors, linked to the evolution of the species.”

Carini F, Mazzola M, Fici C, Palmeri S, Messina M, Damiani P, Tomasello G. Posture and posturology, anatomical and physiological profiles: overview and current state of art. Acta Biomed. 2017 Apr 28;88(1):11-16. doi: 10.23750/abm.v88i1.5309. PMID: 28467328; PMCID: PMC6166197.

Lying supine, sitting recumbently, and standing upright are all examples (but not the only) static postures.

“Postural balance control has been defined as the ability of a subject to maintain the center of pressure (CoP) within the base of support to prevent falling.” Winter et al., 1996

In Posturism, the standing posture is given special status. This special status is based on several factors, but the balance over the feet and the spatial relationship of the body to the cardinal planes (plumb line) is fundamental. This is referred to as the perception of verticality.

“Perception of verticality is required for normal daily function, yet the typical human detection error range has not been well characterized. Vertical misperception has been correlated with poor postural control and functionality in patients after stroke and after vestibular disorders.”

Conceição LB, Baggio JAO, Mazin SC, Edwards DJ, Santos TEG. Normative data for human postural vertical: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018 Sep 28;13(9):e0204122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204122. PMID: 30265701; PMCID: PMC6161851.

As a mechanical system, the body has many degrees of freedom and inertia in a gravity field. Inertia needs to be efficiently managed so that an individual can assume, maintain, and change bodily posture, such as standing, with minimal energy expenditure. A diverse and integrated set of mechanisms accomplishes this.

“Maintenance of vertical posture is based on the integration of sensory and motor systems that provide information to the Central Nervous System (CNS) to construct and update an internal model of verticality.”

Conceição LB, Baggio JAO, Mazin SC, Edwards DJ, Santos TEG. Normative data for human postural vertical: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018 Sep 28;13(9):e0204122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204122. PMID: 30265701; PMCID: PMC6161851.

The primary claim of a posturist is that by observing an individual in standing posture, referenced against the cardinal planes and a vertical plum line, particular dysfunctions of certain aspects of the array of control mechanisms e.g., integumentary, vestibular, visual, joint, skeletal muscle, etc., (that all converge to create a and maintain a standing posture) can be precisely identified.

https://www.posturopole.fr/posturology/

Standing upright in a gravity field is an immensely complicated process requiring real-time communication and ongoing adjustments by many of the body’s subsystems. There is simply no way to reliably identify the specific reason someone has assumed a particular posture.

Standing posture has been recognized as a possible indicator of unseen disease and dysfunction. In 1952, Henry and Florence Kendall published the book Posture and Pain. They were trying to establish a relationship between posture and individuals’ subjective reports of pain.

“If postural faults were simply an aesthetic problem the concern about them might be limited to concern about appearance. However, it must be recognized that postural faults which persist may cause discomfort, pain, or deformity. The range of effect form discomfort to incapacitating disability is related to the severity of the fault and its persistence.”

Hansson, K. G., Posture and Pain. Henry O. Kendall, Florence P. Kendall, and Dorothy A. Boynton. Baltimore, The Williams and Wilkins Co., 1952. $7.00. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery 38(2):p 472-473, April 1956.

However, the problem in the visual observation of standing posture as a primary indicator of disease and dysfunction is that there are too many interacting variables to consider. It assumes that posture is an indicator of a problem, not necessarily the reason for a stated problem. And it could be neither. Posturism is subject to representative bias and categorization bias.

“The specific etiology of postural instability is difficult to identify because it is a heterogeneous disorder, and there is much ground left to uncover regarding knowledge of the pathogenesis of the disease.”

“Postural instability has a limited diagnostic specificity, given that it can result from a variety of issues in afferent pathways, efferent pathways, musculoskeletal function, and central processing.”

Appeadu MK, Gupta V. Postural Instability. [Updated 2022 Jul 25]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jan- . Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK560906/

“As it stands (or rather, sits), the exact effects of posture remain a question for future research.”

“The Problem with Perfect Posture” in SA Mind 27, 2, 15 (March 2016) doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0316-15b

“Posture is almost certainly associated with pain and morbidity, but this is likely to be a much weaker association than previously thought. There is also a strong argument that this association is more attributed to sedentary behaviour, which inherently involves sustained postures.”

Smythe A, Jivanjee M. The straight and narrow of posture: Current clinical concepts. Aust J Gen Pract. 2021 Nov;50(11):807-810. doi: 10.31128/AJGP-07-21-6083. PMID: 34713281.

Fabricism

The term “fabric” means a cloth or other material produced by weaving or knitting fibers. The Fabricist believes that manipulating the body with their hands, fingers, or some tool (e.g., electric vibration, foam roller) is necessary to change the body’s material continuum in some way and thus any associated unwanted sensations. Manipulating a fabric is generally done by applying various directions of force, e.g., compression, tension, and/or shear, to change its appearance, shape, or quality. In practice, a variety of techniques and tools are applied to the body through the skin to alter the body’s internal “fabric” and, consequently, its shape, quality, or length, such as its tendons, ligaments, muscle fibers, myo-fascial adhesions, and scar tissues.

Physically interacting with the body will stimulate numerous sensory receptors and can induce changes in hormones. This can alter sympathetic and parasympathetic tone, causing the individual receiving the physical stimulus to experience relaxation, invigoration, or other positive feelings.

However, there are two significant problems with this body-view:

Any of the various body tissues can be deformed acutely and permanently, let alone that they should be deformed permanently, termed a sprain, which is an injury to the body tissue.

The claim that a practitioner can feel (detect) with their tactile sense – scar tissue, tissue restrictions, or myofascial adhesions that lie deep in the body’s concrescent and contiguous material continuum is dubious. There are so many different types of materials (skin, blood vessels, nerve, connective tissue, ligaments, tendons, etc.) entangled and overlapping each other that distinguishing them with the finger tips or hands through the skin lacks the precision necessary to make a specific and definitive claim. Let alone know that the tissue targeted even changed in the manner intended by a given technique or process.

“In the case of Ligaments will tear when stretched more than 6% of their normal length. Tendons are not even supposed to be able to lengthen. Even when stretched ligaments and tendons do not tear, loose joints and/or a decrease in the joint’s stability can occur (thus vastly increasing your risk of injury).”

https://web.mit.edu/tkd/stretch/stretching_3.html#:~:text=Ligaments.

In the case of scar tissue…

“Now here’s the thing, scar tissue can be a problem; unfortunately, there is no real evidence to suggest that you are breaking up scar tissue. Additionally, you don’t have the time to see a physio as much as you would need to in a week to “break up” scar tissue. Improving the mobility and pliability of the scar and the surrounding tissue is not exactly skilled work and is something a good physio should be doing. Ya know? Getting you as an active partner in your own healthcare. However, I am not entirely sure you’d want to break up scar tissue anyway. You see when you have an injury or surgery that scar tissue is your body healing and repairing tissue. It’s part of what is holding you together and let’s be honest, you more than likely want to keep things supported and intact.”

https://polarisptphx.com/blog-posts/2021/11/17/youre-not- breaking-up-scar-tissue

In the case of adhesions…

“Diagnosis of adhesions

It is very difficult to diagnose the chronic pain of adhesions correctly. Diagnostic tests such as blood tests, x-ray procedures, CT scans, MRIs and ultrasound will not diagnose adhesions. Hysterosalpingography (an x-ray that views the inside of the uterus and fallopian tubes) may help diagnose adhesions inside the uterus or fallopian tubes.

According to your symptoms, your doctor will order the appropriate diagnostic tests to rule out other medical conditions that may have similar symptoms.

If the results of these tests are normal or negative for abnormal pathology, a diagnostic laparoscopy may be appropriate. This is the only test that can confirm the presence of adhesions. If adhesions are found, your doctor can usually release them during the same surgery.

Treatment of adhesions

Adhesions can be treated either with open or laparoscopic (keyhole) surgery, known as adhesiolysis. The adhesions are cut by scalpel or electrical current.”

https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/adhesions

In the case of fascia…

“The fascial treatment fallacy.
Fascia is laid out everywhere in the body… we can even use some sharp scissors to dissect it in such a way to create lines of fascia that show how muscles that follow a limb or the trunk are connected. We can even give these lines names and call them trains. I think this stuff is really neat. But then we go and suggest that we can actually influence that line with our hands or some tool. Without a doubt I would support the idea that strength training tensions this connective tissue and we would expect adaptations in the fascia. Super, nothing new there. But then we might get in trouble with what we say we can and should do with manual therapy.”

https://www.greglehman.ca/blog/2012/10/26/fascia-science-stretching- the-relevance-of-the-gluteus-maximus-and-latissimus-dorsi-sling

Functionalism

Helping an individual move through their daily life with ease and pain-free is to be lauded. Walking, pushing, carrying, and stairclimbing are essential physical capabilities for an individual to navigate their environment successfully. Treatments and/or exercises that enhance the ability to perform these physical tasks are vital for human health and agency.

However, a functionalist makes unnecessary claims regarding the value of how so-called “functional exercises” are constructed and performed while demonizing others as non-functional. Functionalism purports that exercises attempting to isolate or emphasize a single joint or a small subset of muscles (e.g., seated elbow flexion on a machine, seated knee extension on a machine) are not functional and do not support the body’s natural way of moving. The functionalist will remove critical tools from the table that could be quite useful for individuals seeking to enhance their bodily capabilities in the face of diverse challenges. An exercise that emphasizes increased strength and endurance of the elbow flexors (e.g., seated dumbbell curls) could certainly transfer to improved carrying ability. Just handing a sack of potatoes to someone and telling them to walk around with it might not be effective.

“First, and probably most obviously, there are very few of us who are significantly challenged by the activities of daily life, and even fewer of us getting injured while doing them. When was the last time you lost your balance putting milk into the refrigerator, or found it taxing to mop the floor? Better yet, have you pulled your hamstring while you were pushing your shopping cart around the grocery store? I didn’t think so! The point of exercise is that it’s different than the activities of daily life, and that’s why it works. Exercise places stresses on your body greater than what it’s used to handling, and by way of that mechanism, it makes changes.

The second (and even bigger) problem is that even if training for the movements of daily life was important (and it is for some small segment of the population), functional training exercises don’t accomplish this goal. If you’ve ever observed a “functional” training session, it comes to resemble more of a circus act than an actual exercise session. Typically, “functional” training exercises involve some aspect of instability, such as standing on a half-ball (called a BOSU) or a wobble board, and then performing some type of weight lifting exercise. Proponents claim this improves stability and core strength (this is another buzzword, which I won’t get started on now, but it’s just as bad as “functional training”).”

Functional Training – Not So Functional

“What’s funny about the term is that it’s a paradox. The cult that promotes ‘functional strength’ or ‘functional patterns’ doesn’t actually train in a way that translates to real world environments. Building functional strength means it transfers from the weight room to the real world. So yeah, your basic compound movements will actually build functional strength.

Ditch the wobbly surfaces, plant your feet on the ground, and move some weights around. That’s functional.”

Paul Carter – Strength and Bodybuilding Coach

Energyism

The term energy has both formal and informal uses. The formal use in physics and engineering reflects the ability of a system or object to do work. Einstein’s famous equation, E = mc^2, shows that mass and energy are equivalent. Informally, it refers to a dynamic quality or the amount of effort involved in an activity. The Earth is known to have an electromagnetic field emanating from it, referred to as the Schumann resonance, which vibrates at a frequency of 7.83 hertz. The human body is a mass made up of molecules that possess and transfer energy. The body can do work. Molecules vibrate and create an energy field.

“Abstract

The human energy field (HEF) as a phenomenon of interest across disciplines has gained increased attention over the 20th and 21st centuries. However, a concern has arisen that there is a lack of evidence to support the concept of the HEF as a phenomenon of interest to professional nurses and nursing practice. Using Chinn and Kramer’s method of creating conceptual meaning, a concept analysis was conducted for the purpose of developing a conceptual definition of HEF. A systematic review of the literature using the CINAHL database yielded a total of 81 articles and text sources that were determined to be relevant to the concept analysis. The HEF is defined as a luminous field of energy that comprises a person, extends beyond the physical body, and is in a continuous mutual process with the environmental energy field. It is a vital energy that is a continuous whole and is recognized by its unique pattern; it is dynamic, creative, nonlinear, unpredictable, and flows in lower and higher frequencies. The balanced HEF is characterized by flow, rhythm, symmetry, and gentle vibration.”

Shields D, Fuller A, Resnicoff M, Butcher HK, Frisch N. Human Energy Field: A Concept Analysis. J Holist Nurs. 2017 Dec;35(4):352-368. doi: 10.1177/0898010116678709. Epub 2016 Nov 23. PMID: 27881613.

There is plenty of research showing the importance of the Earth’s electromagnetic field in protecting human health. This field blocks dangerous radiation that would otherwise make human life impossible.

“Enveloping our planet and protecting us from the fury of the Sun is a giant bubble of magnetism called the magnetosphere. It deflects most of the solar material sweeping towards us from our star at 1 million miles per hour or more. Without the magnetosphere, the relentless action of these solar particles could strip the Earth of its protective layers, which shield us from the Sun’s ultraviolet radiation. It’s clear that this magnetic bubble was key to helping Earth develop into a habitable planet.”

Earth’s Magnetosphere

Does the Earth’s magnetic field affect human health?

The Earth’s magnetic field does not directly affect human health. Humans evolved to live on this planet.”

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/does-earths-magnetic-field0affect-human-health

Being in direct physical contact with the earth – called earthing – (nothing in between your feet and the grass) has been shown to affect human health:

“Abstract

Multi-disciplinary research has revealed that electrically conductive contact of the human body with the surface of the Earth (grounding or earthing) produces intriguing effects on physiology and health. Such effects relate to inflammation, immune responses, wound healing, and prevention and treatment of chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The purpose of this report is two-fold: to 1) inform researchers about what appears to be a new perspective to the study of inflammation, and 2) alert researchers that the length of time and degree (resistance to ground) of grounding of experimental animals is an important but usually overlooked factor that can influence outcomes of studies of inflammation, wound healing, and tumorigenesis. Specifically, grounding an organism produces measurable differences in the concentrations of white blood cells, cytokines, and other molecules involved in the inflammatory response. We present several hypotheses to explain observed effects, based on current research results and our understanding of the electronic aspects of cell and tissue physiology, cell biology, biophysics, and biochemistry. An experimental injury to muscles, known as delayed onset muscle soreness, has been used to monitor the immune response under grounded versus ungrounded conditions. Grounding reduces pain and alters the numbers of circulating neutrophils and lymphocytes, and also affects various circulating chemical factors related to inflammation.”

Oschman JL, Chevalier G, Brown R. The effects of grounding (earthing) on inflammation, the immune response, wound healing, and prevention and treatment of chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. J Inflamm Res. 2015 Mar 24;8:83-96. doi: 10.2147/JIR.S69656. PMID: 25848315; PMCID: PMC4378297.

So, there is evidence that interacting with the earth’s electromagnetic field, with other human’s energy fields, and with devices that produce electromagnetic fields can affect human cellular function. Whether these energy field interactions and the cellular effects observed can effectively treat or cure disease is another matter. When energy practitioners extend the permissions granted by human physiology’s interaction with energy fields to claim cures for various maladies and diseases, problems arise. I would contend that more effective and proven approaches already exist to address significant health issues.

“There is real energy all around us, potential and kinetic energy scientists can measure, harness, and manipulate. But because of energy’s slippery nature—it’s a mathematical property of stuff, not a glowing orb — and because of our intuitions and wishful thinking, it’s a concept that lends itself well to pseudoscience. Trying to manipulate this non-scientific, mystical energy turns out to be, well, a waste of energy.”

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/psuedoscience/energy-wasnt-there

Matter/Energy Equivalence and Quantum Rationalizations

A deepity is a vague idea that is either true but trivial, or profound but bullshit, depending on the needs of the moment. Energy medicine leans heavily on one of the most classic of all deepities: that we are “made of energy,” or (even more broadly) that “everything is energy.”

The prosaic interpretation of this is certainly true — an undeniable fact of physics — but it’s also irrelevant to human affairs, unless you work at a particle accelerator or a nuclear power plant.

The profound implication is that a concept from advanced physics is somehow useful in medicine and therapy. So profound! If true! But of course, it’s actually utter nonsense.

But, if we are made of matter, therefore we must be made of energy? Technically, in one sense, yes. But not in many other senses! It just has no practical implications in our world. 

We are only “energetic beings” in the poetical sense that we are crackling bonfires of neurological & chemical activity. We are only “energetic beings” in the poetical sense that we are crackling bonfires of neurological and chemical activity.”

https://www.painscience.com/articles/therapeutic-touch.php

“Reviews of the scientific literature on energy healing have concluded that there is no evidence supporting clinical efficacy.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_medicine

Localism

Often, when an individual points to a location on the body where an unwanted sensation is occurring, it is due to some issue with that part of the body. E.g., poison ivy itching, a paper cut.

Generally, Localists responding to an individual localizing a physical sensation to a particular part of the body will assume that the sensation is due to something wrong in that area, especially if the reason is not apparent. The localist will make up any number of casual reasons for the sensation that cannot be confirmed or rejected. This leads to cortisone shots administered to that local spot, rubbing the area, applying ointments, and stretching the tissues of that area, among other treatments. They will continue acting in that area for extended periods, wasting time and resources chasing a local solution. This is termed the local sensation; it must be a local problem; therefore, apply only local solutions.

It is accepted that sometimes, when a sensation is localized, the problem may lie there; however, the localist typically starts, continues, and ends their interventions, completely focused on the local area and not seeking non-local reasons or influences. One unfortunate outcome of this body-view is that if local solutions do not remedy the problem, then the practitioner and individual are left believing that it cannot be resolved.

Mechanicalism

“Interpreting and explaining the phenomena of the universe by referring to causally determined material forces; mechanistic.”

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/mechanicalism

The mechanicalist will attribute bodily issues to strictly mechanical reasons. This will focus the practitioner on seeking issues with the mechanical parts of the body (synovial joints, the bones, etc.) any intervention is created and promulgated via a strictly mechanical process. E.g., surgical removal of the tear portion of a meniscus, fusing joints, removal of muscle tissue, etc.)

It is accepted that sometimes the problem presented by an individual is strictly mechanical (e.g., meniscus tear, cartilage wear, muscle strain. However, many issues are not mechanical and could be chemically or emotionally derived.

Scientism

Generally, believers in Scientism reject all truth claims that are not the result of one of the various methods employed by scientific investigation (of which there are many) and some objective measurement. Suppose a published, peer-reviewed research paper has not been completed, and repeated, on any hypothesis, or there is no specific measurement with units. In that case, any claim of truth outside of this is erroneous and should be rejected until it is subjected to some scientific process. However, science has some problems; it is not the end-all be-all of truth claims, and it is operated by human beings, who repeatedly prove to be plagued by various emotional and psychological fallibilities…

“For the philosopher Thomas Kuhn (d. 1996), scientific hypotheses are shaped and restricted by the worldview, or paradigm, within which scientists operate.

Most scientists are as blind to the paradigm as fish to water, and quite unable to see it, let alone see beyond it. In fact, most of the clinical medical students I teach at Oxford, and who already have a science degree, don’t even know what the word ‘paradigm’ means. Plato thought that leaders ought to receive philosophical training, but these are the people who will lead us out of the next pandemic. When data emerges that conflicts with the paradigm, it is usually discarded, dismissed, or disregarded.

But nothing lasts forever: After much resistance and burning at the stake (whether literal or metaphorical), the paradigm gradually weakens and is overturned. Examples of such ‘paradigm shifts’ include the transition from Aristotelian mechanics to classical mechanics, the transition from miasma theory to the germ theory of disease, and the transition from clinical judgement to evidence-based medicine.” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201903/the-problems-science

“Scientists operate in a highly competitive environment where they are forced to spend most of their time seeking research funding by endless grant writing, the vast majority of which are unfunded. To be competitive for this limited pool, researchers put the most positive spin on their work, and publish their most positive results. Even if the study veers off-track from what was originally planned, the resulting manuscript rarely reads that way. And these pressures often result in data analysis falling into an error-prone spectrum from more innocently emphasizing positive results to ignoring negative or contrary data to outright fabrication. Detailed examples of this are given by author Stuart Ritchie in his book Science Fictions: How Fraud, Bias, Negligence, and Hype Undermine the Search for Truth. Not only does Ritchie explain how science gets distorted by pressures for recognition and funding by well- meaning scientists, he gets into gory details about some of the most prolific fraudsters. Another excellent resource that covers scientific errors and research malfeasance is the website Retraction Watch. The sheer numbers of retracted papers, many by the same scientists, highlight the importance of documenting and attacking scientific fraud.”

https://stemplet74.substack.com/p/the-problem-with-science-is-scientists

“The inability to reproduce and replicate results is a major problem plaguing research. Recently, Nature published the results of a survey that attempted to understand researchers’ views on reproducibility and reported that a majority of participants believed the “crisis of reproducibility” is real. Inherent problems in studies also hinder replication, such as inadequate data and complicated study design. However, major stakeholders of science are in general skeptical about pursuing replication studies. Most journals prefer publishing original and groundbreaking results because replication studies lack novelty. Researchers and funding bodies are reluctant to invest their resources in replication studies on similar grounds. This is a major loss to academia since results of most experiments are never validated and tested.”

https://www.editage.com/insights/7-major-problems-science-is-facing-a- survey-overview

There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.”

https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

“It is strange to live in a world that depends so deeply on science and yet is full of people who revel in science denialism. Over the last 15 years of being a scientist who writes about science in a variety of forums, I have watched as voices that call established science a hoax or a lie rise in prominence. In response, much of my writing has been a strident defense of science, its methods, its value, and its authority in critical issues facing humanity, like climate change and pandemics. But vigorously defending science does not mean defending scientism. Today, I want to highlight the distinction between them and why it is important.

What is scientism?

Ask Google to define scientism and you will get “excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques.” Wikipedia calls it “the view that science is the best or only objective means by which society should determine normative and epistemological values” and goes on to say that it’s “an unwarranted application of science in situations considered not amenable to application of the scientific method…”

In yesterday’s post, Marcelo discussed how people like Francis Bacon established methods back in the 16th and 17th centuries that would go on to become formalized as “scientific practice.” This way of asking nature questions and getting back answers turned out to powerful beyond anyone’s wildest dreams. This success is a story I don’t need to recount because every one of us who lives without fear of famine or having a small cut turn deadly already lives its reality.

But as the method’s success was being worked out, a philosophical perspective about the nature of the world also emerged. This philosophy attached itself to science and got to bask in the reflected glory. In this philosophy, the meaning of the word “objective” shifted in an important way. That shift represents one way scientism begins.

Changing the meaning of objectivity

“In scientific practice, ‘objective’ simply means that two people do an experiment and get the same result. The experiment is a kind of recipe for asking nature a question. Since anyone, anywhere, and at any time can carry forward the recipe and repeat the experiment, if everyone gets the same result, then that result is said to be objectively true. It becomes a collectively established fact about our shared experience of the world.”

In the philosophy that would come to underpin scientism, ‘objective’ came to mean something more like ‘the world without us.’ In this view, science was a means of gaining access to a perfectly objective world that had nothing to do with humans. It gave us a ‘God’s eye view’ or a ‘perspective-less perspective.’ Science, according to this philosophy, revealed to us the “real world,” which was the world independent of us. Therefore, its truths were ‘deeper’ than others, and all aspects of our experience must, eventually, reduce down to the truths that science reveals. This is scientism.

The folly of scientism

Now I am a passionate scientist who is passionate about science, but I also think scientism is a huge mistake. The most important reason it is a mistake is because it is confused about what it’s defending. Without doubt, science is unique, powerful, and wonderful. It should be celebrated, and it needs to be protected. Scientism, on the other hand, is just metaphysics, and there are lots and lots of metaphysical beliefs.”

https://bigthink.com/13-8/science-vs-scientism/

It is accepted that science methodologies and research findings are powerful to inform humans about their reality and identify what works, what doesn’t work, how things work, and why things work. However, the drive to establish high external and internal validity, with exclusion and inclusion criteria in order to generalize research findings to the largest possible portion of populations, creates an unnatural and sterile environment that does not exist in the real world and fails to account for the unique individual human level circumstances and issues.

An intuitive way around this dilemma is to treat the individual patient as a study subject and objectively and empirically determine the best course of therapy. Such single subject or ‘n-of-1’ trials have great precedent in educational and behavioral settings, but have not been used to an appreciable degree within the medical and clinical communities; in fact, many such trials have been disparaged as ‘only anecdotal’. There are many reasons for this, not the least of which is cost, but n- of-1 studies are a promising way to advance individualized medicine and a method for gaining insights into comparative treatment effectiveness among a wide variety of patients.

Lillie EO, Patay B, Diamant J, Issell B, Topol EJ, Schork NJ. The n-of-1 clinical trial: the ultimate strategy for individualizing medicine? Per Med. 2011, Mar;8(2):161-173. doi: 10.2217/pme.11.7. PMID: 21695041; PMCID: PMC3118090.

Scientism places too much emphasis on research and measurement, neglecting the nuances of the human experience, such as emotional state, culture, values, preferences, social constructs, and traditions, all of which need to be considered in decision-making regarding one’s health. These non-measurables may strongly influence individual experience and response to medical treatment and/or exercise dosing. It also ignores the limitations of the scientific process and the fallibility of humans conducting scientific experiments and research. It is excessively rigid in its interpretation and application of the findings resulting from scientific endeavors.

I propose a novel body-view:

“The human body is an open, finite thermodynamic system, made up of a non-homogenous material continuum, with an intrinsic network control system, excited to life by spiritual force, that primarily uses inhibition and negative feedback loops to govern its configurational capabilities and maintain homeostasis as a bio-motor system.”

Mack G., The Muscle System Specialist: A Philosophy of Body and Methodology of Exercise, 2017

Bio-Motor Configurationalism

“This body-view posits that bio motor control output is the expression of the living human system and its complete 4-dimensional configuration consisting of its neurological, chemical, and material arrangement at a specific point in time, at the moment of a produced output, and an observed output. Any specifically observed bio-motor function under conditions at any point in time is a completely unique configuration of all its parts. As conditions are dynamic, so is the configuration moment to moment. Even observed motor outputs that appear exact duplicates of previous outputs are the result of new and unique configurations – unique combinations of individual component behavior that aggregate to an observed event. This speaks to the concept of variability: the more combinations of configurations possible—degrees of freedom—the more robust and capable the system is of producing unique outputs to meet dynamic conditions. This encapsulates the concept of neuroplasticity and the system’s ability to adopt new configurations, and prune others, via new connectivity.”

Mack G., The Muscle System Specialist: A Philosophy of Body and Methodology of Exercise, 2017

The benefit of this body view is that it is broader in scope and does not bias a practitioner to a singular perspective. The overarching notion is that the human body, and everything within it, exists to support movement and maintain position in an environment (broadly termed Motor Control). The ability to move and sustain various positions in space is critical to an individual’s survival and agency. It is both holistic and reductionistic in its perspective.

This body-view sees the body more as an information-processing system. This information is electrical, mechanical, chemical, thermal, etc., all of which converge to produce or maintain health or disease. Sensations, and the individual judgment of those sensations as good or bad, painful or pleasurable, are final conclusions of the central nervous system. This conclusion is based on the totality of the information flowing within the system, including both excessive and missing information. It accepts the possibility that disease and unwanted sensations could be local or non-local in origin. It does not seek to make specific claims about why a disease occurs or an unwanted sensation exists. It informs methods and techniques that serve to improve the ability of an individual to control their body, which in turn, since the motor control system directly influences the sensory and other subsystems, may change the information being generated and transferred within the body, such that disease and unwanted sensations abate, regardless of any change in detectable organic disease. This body view does not necessarily rule out any methods (tools) unless those tools are ineffective at addressing a particular issue or are outside a professional scope of practice. Its primary methodology is based on exercise defined as follows:

Exercise (n.) – a specific bodily or mental exertion, or the removal thereof, especially for the sake of training or improvement of health. Force (demand/stimulus) applied, or removed, over some time interval to, and/or from within, a sensory-motor control system, resulting in a sensory-motor solution/response, with the intention of making/maintaining a desired/specific physiological change/state.

An exercise is perhaps a prototypically defined construct for which it is challenging to specify any one set of characteristics, each of which is by itself necessary, and all of which are jointly sufficient for an individual performing a physical action with a designated purpose (or not) to be labeled “an exercise”. An “exercise” is not a classical concept with a clearly delineated set of necessary defining features.