should we treat key trigger points centrally or peripherally that is the question?

have you ever wondered about the way one should treat trigger points.

i will try to confuse the therapist even more about the issue of trigger point therapy.

first i would like to discuss western acupuncture priniciples. trigger points in western acupuncture are clasified into active or latent TP's and secondary or satellite TP's. the principle is treat the active and the rest will go away treat the latent and it may come back to haunt you. active trigger points are usually more central; referred to as key trigger points, so it pretty musch is a centrally mediated process working central points to resolve periphal points.

eastern acupuncture is the opposite to some degree yang and yin channels have reverse polarities and flow oppositely. the above may be true for yang deficiencies but is reversed for yin deficiencies the eight extraordinary points on the wrist and ankles can be used as an example which when treated as the primary active trigger points are used to resolve the central trigger points. this could be thought of as a peripherally mediated process.

on the other hand, dry needling treats the triggerpoints directly relying on identifying the active trigger point that casuses satellite or secondary trigger points.

so the question remains do you treat trigger points centrally or peripherally for better treatment . or do you directly treat the trigger point that causes refferal?