Archive for the ‘Miscellany’ Category

The False God of Symmetry

Friday, September 16th, 2011

Recently I met a young personal trainer and bodybuilder, clearly bright and very much into his art and its contemporary science. In his attempts to bring his body to the peak of balance, he told me how careful he was to work equally with his right and left, exercising both sides the same, one for one. He had extended this to his daily life, alternating the hands with which he brushed his teeth, which leg he put into his trousers first, and even – forgive me, but it shows the depth of his dedication – wiping his ass alternately.

I wonder how this is going to work out for him. For one thing, is it possible to so equalize one’s life? Does he, for instance, have an English car that he drives on alternate days, so that his shifting alternates with his steering? And even English cars have the accelerator under your right foot with the brake to the left, as with American cars. Like it or not, the world is made for right handed and right-footed people, and equality is probably as elusive in the somatic world as it is in the cultural. Though this guy is making a good stab at it.

I suspect that for this young man, it is his ‘Year of the…’, as I call it. For bodyworkers, it often manifests as a particular area of the body. “Tom, it’s the feet, it’s all in the feet, if only we got the feet right, everything would fall in the place, you should just teach the feet.” I smile indulgently down at them from the great height of my age: been there. I had my year of the feet, my year of the neck, my year of breathing (actually, that was at least three years, each a number of years apart, as I got into breathing at greater and greater depth).

But we all have these temporary but valuable enthusiasms. I too had my year of trying to balance right and left, or at least a long Engllish summer. My Rolfer® colleague and I went out on Primrose Hill looking over the London Zoo each evening after work for the endless twilight, throwing a Frisbee for hours exclusively with our left hand (we are both right handed). I certainly got better at throwing and catching with my non-dominant hand, but it was always a relief to return to the immediate skill and connection I have with my right hand.

I am strongly right handed, even though I am left-eyed. Likely there are native differences in the degree of such lateralization, my daughter is much more ambidextrous than either of her parents.

But lateralization is interesting in itself. If we look at the three major whole-body systems, our fibrous body (the musculo-skeletal system if you must, but that term is fascia-dissing) is actually the most anatomically symmetrical, each muscle and bone pattern is repeated right and left. The neural body – the nervous system taken as a whole – is anatomically symmetrical, but functionally lateralized, such that 10% or so are left-handed, south-pawed (and gauche and sinister as well). Set against the 90% of us who are right handed. The brain is clearly lateralized as the split-brain experiments and the reports of Oliver Sachs have so clearly shown us.

But the third whole body system – the vascular – is the most lateralized anatomically, in other words, the organ system. Nearly everyone has his stomach, heart and aorta on the left, and the liver, a larger lung and the ascending colon on the right. There are people who are reversed, a mirror image, all the same organs but right and left reversed – it is called situs inversus. Because not everyone is autopsied, we don’t really know how prevalent this is – estimates range from 1:10,000 to 1:25000. But either of these figures is far lower than the 90-10 ratio of lateralization in the nervous system alluded to above.

Early embryological twisting throws a lasso loop in the large intestine and swerves the liver right and the stomach and heart left, putting one half of the vagus nerve in front and the other half into the rear. This is a… – nay, this is the underlying asymmetry of the body, unavoidable, even desirable. You have to hang 27 feet of gut tube from 3 feet of spine, so some asymmetry is inevitable.

This organic asymmetry definitely accounts for the difference between the two domes of the diaphragm, and may account for the right hip anterior / left hip posterior anomaly seen in so many of our clients, and as yet unexplained (at least, to my satisfaction).

Often what I am going for in my clients who are unbalanced is not visual symmetry but a good functional marriage between their left and right sides.

So go, my friend, balance that neuro-muscular system for all you’re worth; it certainly looks good on you. But please understand that from the point of view of the ancient organic system beneath the muscles, your entire neuro-muscular chassis is just a convenient vehicle – a jet pack, so to speak – designed to get better food and better sex for this very asymmetrical tube who invented both your hands – whichever one is next – to wipe its nether end.

Geoffrey Rush in ‘The King’s Speech’

Tuesday, February 15th, 2011

The awards are coming thick and heavy, so it needs no help from me, but all therapists should see the movie “The King’s Speech”.

I am a sucker for historical dramas, and British royalty and Winston Churchill only add to the attraction. But it is not the performance of Colin Firth as the hapless and reluctant Bertie turned King George VI, or even the always-brilliant and unstoppable Michael Gambon as his father George V, that powers this review.

Geoffrey Rush (also see: Quills) is not only superb as the speech therapist Lionel Logue, but the movie contains a number of lessons for all therapists, and especially those who might enjoy the custom of a celebrity client or two – the sports champion, the rock star, the super-rich, what have you.

Lionel portrayed is no angel or archetype, but the living, breathing, limited person we all are. A bounder from ‘the colonies’ (Australia in this case), a lover of Shakespeare on a pilgrimage to the land of the Mother Tongue, a ham, a loving parent, both in love with and scared of his wife, basing his therapy more on his experience than his credentials, and thrust suddenly into terra incognita of dealing with royalty in a very particularly intimate and difficult way.

I urge you to watch his rubber face, his adherence to his principles in the face of disconcerting opposition, and his ability to apologize when he cannot. And the je ne sais quoi instinct to see the moment of breakthrough and seize it. The real story (I happened to see a BBC special while I was in England) is more complicated and a little less uplifting and definitive than the script, but the movie deserves to be seen, weighed, and absorbed on its own terms.

Two thumbs up!

Whitewash

Friday, January 21st, 2011

Recently, I visited Greece, taking my daughter Mistral along to introduce her to this land of great heart. While there, we made a series of short video blogs. Stay tuned – in subsequent blogs Tom will be sharing with you a tour of the ancient healing center at Epidaurus, a place of pilgrimage and deep connection for Tom.

But this one first, from the island of Hydra:

Body Language

Wednesday, January 12th, 2011

It has been a great lift for my heart that the Anatomy Trains info and map has been so widely accepted into various forms of movement education like PIlates, yoga, and personal training. But being grounded in manual therapy, we have had to scramble to meet the demand – on both a practical and an intellectual level – for more training for these movement masters. The old saw – but like most clichés it has some truth – is that ‘Bodyworkers cannot move and movement teachers cannot touch’. The Body Language course is designed as an initial bridge between the two, and also as a grounding in ‘real’ biomechanics, since standard Western anatomy and the biomechanics of movement only intersect randomly.

So here we go into the second iteration of Body Language. We learned a lot the first time, and our second crew promises to teach us just as much – such a talented and varied group. If God lets me keep working for a while yet, I want to see more and more cross-pollination between the land of body rollers, hands-on therapists, movement training, and flat out performance ‘arts’ – be they athletic or artistic or martial or all three.

The start of this course coincides with a major storm. Bad luck for getting everybody in one place at one time, but a good omen overall, say I, just back from the land of Olympus, where the gods interfere with so many human activities. Blow, ye winds, we shall fly in the face of you, somatic alienation, scientific isolation, and the ‘lore’ that keeps us enthralled. We are moving.

One Plus One Makes Three

Wednesday, November 10th, 2010

Along with the Tensegrity You Tube I FB’d yesterday, this wonderful lecture on the basics of tensegrity in the body is worth a read:

8th International Congress of the F.M. Alexander Technique 10 – 16 August 2008 in Lugano, Switzerland

Lecture by Doris Dietschy, Basel, Switzerland

One Plus One Makes Three

(Buckminster Fuller’s principles of complementary forces as a way to understand our ability to balance and move)

I want to talk today of the synergetic quality opposing forces may show when they meet in a intercomplementary situation. Synergy means that a system as a whole (the human body for instance) functions in a new quality very different from what could be predicted from studying all the single parts involved.

I do not talk to you as a physicist, but as person who spent more than half of her professional life in the architectural world. Working later as an Alexander Teacher meant to get into contact with a new aspect, but again one of architecture. My eyes, my fascinations and my feelings continue to be those of a designer.

The person who spent a lifetime to explore the principles and conditions of synergy was the American ingenious engineer, inventor, artist and philosopher Buckminster Fuller, (P 1),who lived from 1895 – 1983. With his structural models he made the invisible forces involved experienceable and useable, and if we Alexander teachers ever heard about him, it is thanks to the structural system called „Tensegrity“ (P 2), to the Tensegrity models or even to Tensegrity toys. Tensegrity is Buckminster Fuller’s abbreviation for „tensional integrity“ on which the system is based. He himself applied it mainly for architectural constructions (P 3) and with them he found his first acknowledgement. Later biologists and physicians began to apply the models and principles to their work and so did people interested in body functions like us, with the result, that Tensegrity might even be misunderstood as a new theory in natural science or a new therapy. It is not. It is a structural reality and Fuller’s name for his demonstrations of basic principles, to be discovered everywhere in the universe, including our living bodies.

For me his most important contribution is that he developed ways to really show how principles of energy and synergy work. He showed that they do so in the macrocosm, in the scale of our daily world, as well as in the microworld. Fuller was deeply convinced that with the help of his models he could speak to the senses directly and encourage new ways of comprehending which he called “embodiments of mind.“

To demonstrate for instance why he calls the triangle (P 4) the “minimum flex-cornered polygon … that holds its shape“ Fuller uses three tubes strung on a dacron string. Pulling the loose ends slowly closer and closer together he obtains in the end a triangle. Its stabilitiy is not dependent on any fixed angles or corners but uniquely on the intercomplementarity of two forces: one, that of the pipes which push out against each other so that each pipe always stabilizes the opposite angle built by the two other pipes. The other force is that of the through (1) running string which continuously pulls. The result is synergy pure: an absolutely stable triangle, with new qualities not predictable by the qualities of its components. In the tetrahedron, the polygon built of 4 triangles, Fuller finds “the minimum structural system of the univers“. (P 5) We find it in the microworld of molecules, cells, viruses, etc as well. The various Tensegrity models (P 6) are elaborations of the same principles, demonstrating that stability can be gained without fixing the solid parts to each other and hence maintaining flexibility throughout the whole structures.

The human body as a whole can be understood as one Tensegrity system (T 7), a stable- flexible structure. Within that system the heavy bones push outwards, away from each other. Connective tissue (as the name says), muscles and skin constitute the complementary force of inwardly directed tension throughout the whole body. Looking into this one whole Tensegrity body you can detect smaller partial Tensegrity systems, such as, for instance, the pelvis (P 8) with its bony parts tending to move apart and outwards. The strong short muscles, tendons, fascia and ligaments draw it together to a very stable yet still flexible structure. To look at the spine (P 9) from a Tensegrity point of view reveals a combination of all principles: Vertrebae with their inner tetrahedron like texture are resistent to pressure and take on the role of struts. All intervertebral discs are complete Tensegritysystems by themselves: under pressure their liquid kernel pushes out to the elastic hull which tends back in. They function like shockabsorbers between the vertebrae. Again, connective tissue and muscles around and all along the spine complement in such a way that the whole spine functions as the stable- flexible and load bearing structure we count on.

Anatomy books describe the bony structure of the body as the part which carries load and gives the body its dimensions, while muscles and connective tissue provide stability for the skeleton and move the bones. It is a truth which nevertheless leads to the misunderstanding of many body trainings, that optimal body stability requires a maximum work of muscles. True, muscles do stabilise. But over trained, chronically hard working muscles shorten and thicken (T 10). They loose their elasticity, their ability to lengthen and they constantly press onto the organism. Mobility and stability seem to oppose each other.

Is this contradiction a fact we have to accept? (T 11) Buckminster Fuller’s research and structural models prove a different truth: that the human body synergises mobility and stability into the mobile, stable-elastic condition which is so significant for human beings.

I repeat: in our bodies the heavy, compact bones tend to move – or shift – apart and so trigger the stretch resistence of the tissue and the muscles which then contract. Or the other way arround: the abiltiy of tissue and muscles to respond to the moving apart of the bones by maintaining elasticity in contraction allows the bones to move freely, with unfixed joints. This continuous interplay of forces works in all positions (P 12), no matter how or where you stand, on your feet, on your hands, hanging or floating and garantees the intergrity of the whole bodily system. Fuller demonstrates these principles with construction material. But they are just as true for living beings and we can rely on them.

Men and animals also have an extended and complex nervous system. The diversity of the system allows it to initiate muscle reactions to maintain positions independently of our awareness and it provides us at the same time with the possibility to make conscious decisions to act and to steer our actions according to our ideas, needs and judgments. We are able to transform our energy into willed action. Different from unanimated objects we can move on our own will and we can actively influence our surrounding.

However, in spite of a reliable body structure and the most extraordinary nervous system, to be active in this world our body is dependent on forces which counteract to it’s weight. To move from one place to another I am dependent on a world outside of myself, which is solid enough to resist and support me whith its forces of substance and form, from which I can repel. The more dense for instance the ground is on which I want to move, the easier it is to walk on it. Walking on sand is more difficult, because the loose sand lacks density to resist my weight. We cannot walk on water, but in the water, when I do the swimming movement, I push back the water with my arms and legs while I am pushed forward by the water’s resistance.

I want to move a heavy object. Its weight is a force which resists mine. To overcome it (P 13) I push by repelling from the floor or even from the wall behind me. It is with my weight that I apply force upon the ground under me. Its density determines the force of resistance which is directed back toward me, along my entire structure. Or in a physisict’s terms: Resting objects exert forces against their supports and at the same time the supports exert an upthrust against the object resting upon them.

Balance, too, results in an interplay of forces. Take for instance some large pieces of stone, one put on top of the other to form a pillar (P 14). They are heavy, dense, and therefore resistant to pressure. Because of this resistance they may be considered as actualle pushing away from each other. It is the gravitiy of the enormous mass of the earth, which ‚catches’ them back into a stable balance between the two forces, perpendicular over the center of the earth.

Yet the parts of the human body very rarely arrange neatly one on top of the other (P 15) like the stones in the examples before. Every movement contradicts that state. Moving I leave the balance I just had. Moving I risk that my bones fall asunder. Yet I trust, that my connective tissue and my muscles bind the bones which move away from each other back to a new balance, which again allows a next shifting away into a next balanced movement.

In every movement the body parts shift away from each other. Let’s have a closer look (P 16) at a diagram of a person in the act of squatting, seen from the side. Use your imagination to see and sense how the weight of that person is delivered throught the bones to the ground. The ground resists with its density force in the opposite direction, in this case upwards along the bones. The lower legs receive it in an angle of about 45°, the thighs receive it in a counter angle of maybe 90° and hand it on to the trunk and head, again in an angular direction. Each part has its specific center of weight, wide apart from the others. It is the correlation with the continuous contracting, yet elastic quality of connective tissue, skin and muscles arround each bony part and throughout the whole bony structure which assures the synergetic integrity of the body in every movement.

These dispositions we all bring with us to this planet and this planet meets us with its permanent support, allowing us to employ our structural freedom in all dimensions.
As said before we can discover the working of the complementary forces in unanimated as well as in animated nature. The more we know, understand and embody these principles, the more we can let them work for us, in each moment, in every act, as a basic in the use of ourself.

Constructive use of the self includes my awareness that it is a multitude of systems, (T 17), which interact into one functioning human being. Many of these systems function autonomously. Others, like our voluntary breathing, are also influenced by our consciousness. The most elaborate in this regard is the nervous system, which steers most functions without our being conscious of it and has at the time brought forward a human brain and mind, capable to generate conscious goals, needs, believes, fears. actions etc, developed during evolution, and also in every individual life.

We consider ourself as self-determining beings, sometimes to such an extent that we believe we ought to or could will our whole organism or steer all of it consciously. I use Mind over Body as a headline for this attitude.We all know of the opposite idea: Let the wisdom of the organism find its best way and the headline could be Nature over Mind. (T 18)

It is my strong belief that no hierachical either – or point of view is of any help, For our existence in this complex world we are dependent on a multitude of different well functioning systems in us. One of them is what we name our consiousness and self determination. A very different one, one of many, is what I call the Tensegrity system in us, our autonomous inborn mobile-elastic stablity. (P 19) The aim of this lecture is to demonstrate how interactive complementary forces within us and without us bring forth a synergetic third condition, which is more than its parts. This is a truth which can be experienced kinesthetically, as mobility within stability and stability within mobility. Simply put, we move with more trust with this understanding.

And to finish I would like to cite my favorite quote from Buckminster Fuller, which says: (T 20) Unity is plural and at minimum two (Fuller 1992, p. 57)

Bibliography

Fuller, R. B. Cosmography (1992) Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller
Fuller, R. B. Your Private Sky (1999) Lars Müller Publishers
Fuller, R. B. Your Private Sky – Diskurs (2001) Lars Müller Publishers
Roberts, T. D. M. Understanding Balance (1995) Chapman & Hall
Levin, St. M. (1998) A different approach to the mechanics of the human pelvis: Tensegrity’ ATI Exchange 6 / 2; pp. 1, 4-10
Levin, St. M. (1998) ‘Continuous tension, discontinuous compression’ ATI Exchange 6 / 2; pp. 25 – 27

Doris Dietschy had her first experience in the Alexander Technique in 1979. She trained with Y.Kuperman and was certified 1985. She maintains a private practice in Basel, Switzerland, and taught from 1991 – 2005 as co- director at Kathrin von Schroeder‘s Training Institute for F.M. Alexander Technique in Basel, Switzerland. She owes much to the work with Walter and Dilys Carrington, Shmuel Nelken, Marjorie Barstow, Tommy Thompson, Joan Murray and intensiv exchange with Barbara Conable. She was member and chairman of the bord of the Swiss Society / SVLAT and director of the 6th International Congress of the F. M. Alexander Technique, 1999, in Freiburg, Germany

Doris Dietschy, Bäumleingasse 6, CH – 4051 Basel, Switzerland e-mail ddietschy@bluewin.ch www.emindex.ch/doris.dietschy

Evolution of Collective Learning in Kinesis

Tuesday, September 28th, 2010

I am feverishly reading the work of Howard Bloom in preparation for meeting him. His overview of the development of group consciousness (Global Brain, Wiley, 2000) mirrors my own thinking, but carries it deeper and with more supporting evidence. His ideas on the elements of a ‘collective learning machine’ (an epithet that applies to each of us as cell aggregates, to KMI / Kinesis, and to the bodywork / movement profession in general) are particularly relevant to understand our process and advance it. Where are you in this spectrum? (Hint: you can inhabit several places within it in different endeavors, but you cannot be nowhere.)

In every collective learning machine – and I paraphrase Bloom for the rest of this – there are five active elements, more or less in order, but all interacting in a developed system at all times: All of these elements have constructive and destructive phases or uses; read of them without judgment, but notice your affinity.

1) Conformity enforcers impose identity through similarities. These similarities help the group through adverse circumstances, develop a common language, and help the crowd pull together on collective enterprises. The induction process of the KMI training performs this task for us as a group – giving us a common presumptions, approach, language for bodyreading and strategy, the 12-series, and the common goals of length, alignment and a complete body image. Anatomy Trains (and our new effort of ‘Fascial Fitness’) seeks to diffuse a common language to speed the process of collective learning among the larger enterprise of physical education or, as I call it, Spatial Medicine.

In spite of the power it generates, of course, too much cookie-cutter similarity will be the death of any learning machine, so evolution builds in:

2) Diversity generators give birth to variation. Each individual represents an hypothesis in the communal mind. Many of the diversity generators are useless or even potentially harmful, but when circumstances change, some few of these folks hold the key to successful adaptation to the future. In your immune system, many white blood cells harbor antigens which are useless (and therefore kept under control) until a specific invader germ enters the body. Suddenly, these previously useless WBC’s are vital to the body’s survival. The ‘odd ducks’ within a group can be annoying or even detrimental in ‘good’ times, but some few can hold the key to new opportunities in one kind of adversity or another.

The diversity generators are allocated resources by the:

3) Inner judges continually take the measure of results, rewarding contributions of value, and punishing bad guesswork. If we’ve solved a knotty problem, we hear the cheers of fellow workers or family members, and our systems flood us with positive hormones that swell our chests, give us energy, and set our minds ablaze with confidence. If we cannot get a grip or cannot find agreement in what we are offering, our inner judges activate self-destruct machinery (stress hormones) that literally kill off brain cells and dull our wits, steal our pep, and isolate us. Inner judges are sometimes generous but often far from kind. But whatever their action on the individual, they are essential to complex adaptive learning systems.

The inner judges decisions activate the:

4) Resource shifters shunt riches and influence to group members who succeed (in whatever terms success is measured). The resource shifters embody Jesus’ algorithm: To he who hath shall be given, from he who hath not, even what he has shall be taken from him. Again, not very kind or ‘just’, perhaps, but it is the law of the group in learning.

Resource rich groups then engage in:

5) Intergroup tournaments or face offs evoke cooperative effort and innovation from each collective intelligence in an effort to survive and thrive. The mechanism here is familiar from Darwin’s natural selection, but applies in this context to group interactions or ‘wars’. This can range from a friendly dispute over technique to the competition among schools to the competition among methods to nuclear confrontation, but these are the forces – mostly unseen at the level of ‘culture’ that make mass minds click.

Obviously this has implications from family therapy right up through realpolitik on a global level, but let’s stick to the nested group of the individual practitioner, the KMI school, and the collective SI endeavour currently embodied in the IASI.

The KMI training is designed to produce (in an ever-improving recursive iterations) a conformity enforcement of practical fascial pattern-altering skills within a conceptual framework of the 3- and 12-series, but allowing enough room in our admissions policies and methods for ‘odd ducks’ who make us shake our heads and roll our eyes right now, but may at some future date innovate something of real value to the ever-changing situation of the marketplace. Thus our teachers are conformity generators with an eye (and an allowance) for the diversity generators. Once graduated, the group’s inner judges (not individual people, but collective ideas and feelings) will promote some to successful practitioners; others fall by the wayside and seek elsewhere.

Some successful practitioners will become teachers, and material and non-material resources will be ‘paid’ to those who correctly read and fulfill a need in the marketplace of ideas and techniques. These teachers / clinic heads / writers / presenters / volunteers et al. are building and will continue to create the identity of KMI / Kinesis within the SI community and beyond. This identity competes in an intergroup tournament going on among the schools within IASI for the resources of the small group of those interested in structural integration. But there is a larger intergroup tournament among the various bodywork methods for dominion over the larger marketplace of hands-on healing. So even though we compete within IASI for the ‘resource’ of students for practitioning, we band together in IASI to form a group for competing / cooperating with groups outside SI to enlarge the group of potential practitioners (and clients) interested in SI. These intergroup tournaments will improve the outcome of the new physical education and therapy on offer in the 21st century, paving the way for the movement component of health care, if and when we should ever collectively decide to trade in ‘sick care’ for true health care. Ultimately, we are part of the larger intergroup tournament with the medical system monopoly and the old ideas entrenched within it.

Our social health and (I believe) continued existence on the planet requires dismantling and successfully rebuilding our system of caring for and educating our Neolithic children in the human-constructed environment of the Electronic Age. We at Kinesis are an actively conscious part of that process. Conformity enforcement, diversity generation, inner judgment, resource shifting, and intergroup competition may not sound so attractive, and can sometimes be bloody in tooth and claw like Nature herself (it is Nature herself), but it is all part of improving our collective learning in the service of the human experiment.

Some Trinitarian Advice

Friday, July 9th, 2010

Someone in a good position asked me:

As an established expert in our field, if you could offer students and new, grads one piece of advice to further themselves, what would it be?

And I answered:

The one advice God answers as a Trinity:

1) Be clear in your intent. Knowing what you intend to do can inform your hands and inform the client / patient at a subtle level in such a way that makes up for your ignorance of exactly where everything is and what is going on in their tissues. The other side of that coin – mucking around hoping to find something that works (the ‘press and pray’ strategy) is occasionally a way of causing damage.

2) The contrary but still consistent advice is: experiment. When what you know is not working, make a conscious choice to explore in search of a new way. How else do you think all the things you know now were discovered? Most scientific discoveries are not made to the sound of ‘Eureka!’, but to the sound of ‘Hunh?’.

3) The 11th commandment: Thou shalt not bore God. If you are bored, you are doing something wrong. This is the most interesting profession going and it’s a largely unexplored area. If you’re bored, you got down a cul-de-sac, and you need to back out and go on in another direction. If all your sessions start looking and feeling the same, this is a good indication you are bored. Get help via mentorship or a new class.

Tensegrity Cranium

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010

I’ve been in love with biotensegrity from the git-go, and so therefore smitten with the models of Tom Flemons Intension designs . Tom has found sophisticated ways to model the foot, knee, pelvis, and spine (whether accurately or not, only time will tell, but interestingly for sure). The cranium, however, was always a cartoon, just a round tensegrity sphere on top. Of course, the cranium is far more complicated and influential than just a happy face on top of our ever-so-complex tension dependent structure.

But now Graham Scarr, an English osteopath whom I met at the Ulm Dissection Conference, has proposed a way in which the dural membranes can be seen to hold the bones of the neurocranium apart as well as playing a leading role – as we knew they did, but this provides such an interesting mechanism – in the bone growth and shaping.

More on this soon, but here is a link: Tensegrity in the Cranial Vault

Anatomy Trains at BTI

Wednesday, March 24th, 2010

Students enjoy learning the Functional Line assessments outside at North Carolina at BTI with Anatomy Trains teacher Carrie Gaynor.

dscf0240dscf0241

SciAm 2: Energy

Friday, November 27th, 2009

Reading the Nov ’09 issue of Scientific American in post-Thanksgiving tryptophane torpor yields these developments in Spatial Medicine:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=powering-a-green-planet

We could, with the all-important element of political will added, produce enough power simply from ‘income energy’ – wind, solar, geothermal, and hydro – by 2030 to power the entire planet without touching oil, natural gas, or uranium further after that. And we’re talking plenty of power, not a drastic change in lifestyle. It would require a WWII-like dedication – the one that brought out Rosie the riveter and a retooling of the factories that now produce gas-guzzlers to produce wind-turbines and electric cars, or the Eisenhower-Nixon initiative to build our interstate highway system, but it is well within our reach.

All our glaciers – polar and alpine – are disappearing at ever accelerating rates. We burn oil at 4% efficiency, taking the rest as waste heat and pollution. Natural gas is better, and uranium better still in efficiency, but they carry their own not insignificant problems. Our stewardship of the planet, o ye of the right wing, cannot be making our Biblical Jehovah happy. It can be done – read it here – it can be done.