Are we helping?

Many years ago I was providing a demo of Equine Rolfing, to a number of people, one of which was a reporter for the Boulder Newspaper. During the demo the horse released some manure and me being the smart aleck I am said "Oh, he's having an emotional release". This made it into the article the reporter wrote, which didn't bode well for my reputation. But I can imagine that in some bizarre way their are people who would read this article and think that when this happens during one of their horses sessions that the horse is releasing held emotions.

I am continually asking myself how I know that what I think is helpful is actually helping.

With structural work we are not looking for simple reflexive indicators from the client that our input is having the desired effect. We look for structural changes to indicate that we are on the correct path.

But these structural changes can not be whimsical--as I would suggest measures such as yawning, licking lips...are--they have to be orderly and have a predictable effect on how the body is used. In other words, if we are releasing a shoulder so the thorax can rise--this is something we want for people, horses and dogs--than we should see the effect of this on the arms and legs in humans, the front and rear legs in quadrupeds.

Our system of working has to follow a scientific criteria of : Observable, Measurable and Repeatable.

Observable -- of course we have to be able to observe the change. If we can't somehow "see" it, than we can't really know that it occurred. This "seeing" could be very precise, I flip a light switch and a light comes on. To more inferred, I leave out cheese and mice come and eat it leaving mouse droppings behind. One problem with observation is that it's prone to some corruption from our desire to "see" things that are not connected to the causal agent as connected, i.e. yawning as an indicator of tension release in the musculoskeletal system from our intervention.

Measurable -- we should be able to measure our observable change. I personally think that releasing the axial skeleton from the upper appendicular skeleton--what I call releasing the shoulders--is paramount to freeing the legs to move (front and rear). Unfortunately, "releasing" while observable and measurable. It is not precisely correlated to the change. I would love to be able to say " if you see a x inch change in the shoulder of a horse towards vertical this will increase their stride length by y inches.

Repeatable -- our observations and measures should be repeatable over a large population. If we say we have a particular intervention that has a resultant change associated with it, then this change should be repeatable over a large population. This is why I stay away from what people call "moves" or "techniques" as any thing other than potential tools to a more global structural change.

If you observe a change or response from your clients to some intervention make sure that you can measure and repeat it before you attribute it to something. Otherwise you risk the possibility of looking very foolish.

Re_thinking old Ideas

Recently I've been engaged in a new exercise routine: CrossFit. This routine doesn't map well with the normal health club with their use of machines--in CrossFit machines are evil--or to any other "routine" for fitness.
Since CrossFit doesn't map well with what most Rolfers would consider appropriate exercise I've been re-thinking some of these Rolfing myths as I gain more benefit from the CrossFit. For instance most Rolfers don't think that weight lifting, using free weights, is good for us. Yet when we use free weights to exercise we have to learn to balance the weight or get injured. The learning to balance weight is as important, in my mind, as the lifting of the weight. Learning to balance free weights--groceries, bags of grain, dog food, hay...--requires that we use more of our joint surface which "wakes" up the musculature.
Squatting is a big component of CrossFit, yet this is almost completely missing from our western culture of overly tight hip flexors. We bend from the hips to pick something up and strain our back in doing so. Recently my son--the one who got me involved with CrossFit 2 years after he started--and I were repairing fence on our place. We had to replace a wooden post that the horses--part beaver--had eaten down to almost nothing. I tried to pull the post out of the ground and it broke, I couldn't get it to budge. When I told my son to go get the tractor and a chain to pull it out with he asked if he could try. He squatted over the post and used his legs--that same move that is used in deadlifting--and pulled the post out. Proper mechanics!
As I use the mechanics of the squat to get myself out of chairs, lift hay, do anything with weight I started to notice that my knees don't hurt. This got me thinking about how many myths we have about body mechanics and especially conformation and how these thoughts may not be working since we continue to see injuries or should I say breakdowns in bodies that utilize these mechanics.
Through CrossFit I have come into contact with Pose running. (you can Google it) One of the concepts in Pose running is that the point of contact of the runners foot with the ground shouldn't be the heel but the ball of the foot. How many people where very expensive running shoes and still break down? Try 83% of all runners!
Think about the implications for the horse. We normally shoe, trim our horses so the land heel first. Toe first is a fault--I always suspect heel pain in horses that land this way--flat footed is barely acceptable but may actually represent the equine equivalent of the "ball" of the foot. (Let's not go all anthropromorphic with this!)
What do you think?