Dear Alophysio:

I have read your email on D Lee et al.

I will address one issue.

First, the overall impression is that nothing is established except bias of I like the stork test, so I use the stork test.

I the articles The evolution of myths...... the statement is made "it is impossible to know exactly which muscles were responsible for the increase in stiffness and compression." page 5. and on page 9 "Therefore, it is still not possible to be totally evidenced based in clinical practice..."
I do not find percentages of the supposed "closures" of closure problems, just hype.

And under the titleThe future it was even more incriminating!!!!

With expressions like " this working group recognized the need for more research... before any controlled trials of clinical outcomes can be done." Sound conclusive to you??? " We need to develope more diagnostic tests..." How conclusive is that?

I am saying that I know the APAS or the innominate bone position test with hip ABD or the PSIS with hip ABD both the percentages of occurances of the abnormal movements and the muscles defined by the occurances. There are no percentages for the "form closure" to "force closure" to "neurological" to "emotional" model. Where are the percentages of occurance? Is this just another smoke and mirrors?

Give me the same percentages I have given you of 90% asymmetrical pelvic angles: 60%; 20%; 20% and maybe I will have something to go on more than hype: I want facts.

Best regards,

Neuromuscular.