Communicating with Innate: Binary biofeedback Part 2

Using biofeedback devices in rather powerful ways

Binary biofeedback devices have been a part of healthcare since time immemorial. They are a quick, reproducible method of obtaining accurate information about the body and body/mind.

What are they? You don’t find these devices in a store (or even online). They are autonomic physiological reactions to stress. We can use them to obtain information about patients.

Examples of binary biofeedback devices are AK (applied kinesiology), manual muscle testing (MMT), the short leg reflex, the occipital drop (OD), the still point (CranioSacral Therapy) and even a “gut” feeling, among others.

In order to use them the practitioner employs the three Cs:

The three Cs: Challenge, Check, and Correct

1.      Challenge: First we challenge or “ask” the body or mind/body a question. Challenging may be done in many ways (see below). Practitioners typically ask for the location of stress, subluxations, blockages, interferences, imbalances, disharmony etc.

2.      Check: Now we check to see if the challenge caused a biofeedback reaction. In AK a muscle reaction is checked for, in CranioSacral therapy practitioners feel for a “still point”, in Koren Specific Technique (KST) we check for an occipital drop or OD. The next thing done is:

3.      Correct: The practitioner makes a correctionto release the stress, subluxations, blockages, interferences, imbalances, disharmony, etc. that the biofeedback located. The correction can be done in various ways depending on how the practitioner practices.

Thousands of doctors are using the OD (or similar biofeedback devices) in this manner.

Physical, verbal, mental

A fascinating clinical discovery (actually a re-discovery) was that the binary biofeedback device could, in addition to responding to a physical challenge, also respond to a verbal or mental challenge.

The OD (or any biofeedback device) responds even if the practitioner does not physically touch a patient’s body; the practitioner can verbally, mentally or visually ask/challenge and the patient’s body will respond with a “yes” (an OD) or a “no” (no OD) or a strong or weak muscle or a short leg reaction and numerous other ways as well.

VanRumpt’s disaster

Although ancient, this non-physical response was re-discovered by Richard VanRumpt, DC who developed Directional Non-Force Technique (DNFT). Dr. VanRumpt first checked the patient using a mental challenge and then performed a physical challenge. The physical and mental challenges had 100% reliability.

Dr. VanRumpt announced his finding at a major DNFT conference. It was a bold statement announcing that the practitioner didn’t have to physically challenge a body part to elicit a short leg reflex – the mere thought of the challenge could elicit a reaction.

Perhaps it was the time (it was in the ‘60s). Perhaps it was the (then) more medically repressive healing environment, perhaps it was fear of medical attack or perhaps it was the mechanistic model that dominated healthcare.

Whatever the reason, VanRumpt’s revelation was a business and professional disaster. He was ridiculed and rejected by many of his followers who could not accept this “innate to innate communication,” as he termed it.

Hesitant

I must admit that when I re-discovered this phenomenon I was initially hesitant to openly teach it. How would my students relate to it? Would they walk out and never return as happened to VanRumpt?

I felt obliged to impart to the students everything I knew. Honesty required it; it felt unethical to withhold valuable and useful information.

I continue to teach KST that way. In the spirit of empirical philosophy (of which chiropractic belongs) we humbly respect the wisdom the body reveals.

Following the body (or the bODy as we say in KST) is a non-linear, non-intellectual approach. We in chiropractic discuss the wisdom of the body as if it were an abstract philosophical concept. But it is more than that; it is real and it is powerful – why not use it in day-to-day clinical practice?

Therefore, no matter how out-of-the-box a discovery initially appears if it works and is helpful it is taught. But the next discovery really shocked me.

In part 3 we’ll see an unusual way to obtain this information.

This post was written by Tedd Koren, DC

Tedd Koren, D.C. is the developer of Koren Specific Technique. For information, go to www.korenspecifictechnique.com. Dr. Koren also writes patient education materials for Koren Publications. Go to www.korenpublications.com

One thought on “Communicating with Innate: Binary biofeedback Part 2

Leave a Reply