Scoliosis and TAMARS treatment

[CurvySAT05]

May I suggest keeping foul language out of the discussion boards and in PM's only. While this in not in the "Youth" area, there are still young children that visit these boards. It is up to you "mature" adults to censor yourselves, but even if you use symbols instead of the word itself, kids are not stupid.
This might allow the thread to keep a 'hint' of civility.

[Celia]

Gerbo,

That was so sweet of you to say that about me You are a dear friend!

[structural75]

Mandy,
My apologies.

Celia,
Talk about hypocrisy... my goodness, I do recall your language in a previous thread taking the prize for "foul" and "crude". You'd be upset too if someone made accusations about you being dishonest, deceitful, a snake oil salesman or a fraud with no evidence to suggest such.... What are you going to report me for? ...Standing up and defending myself from your ignorant and insulting psychogenic banter? I try and answer questions, give advice or suggestions to people from an educated and experienced standpoint and you pop in with your name calling and immature uneducated remarks... and somehow you still think I'm the one that starts this nonsense.??? Unbelievable!

Can you do anything but ride on the backs of others? Stand on your own two feet for once. And if you're not prepared or capable of supporting your comments with intelligent, sensible and mature reasoning, then spare me from your rude ignorance. What kind of example are you setting here? At least people and children alike can read my posts and see that I'm always willing to give an intelligent and mindful response (versus name calling and such).

[Celia]

I say this with all sincerity...you have got some *real* hostility issues and you need to seek professional help. Here is Linda Racine's post to you when you first joined this forum. I think her message still rings true.. By the way, I wasn't even part of this debate when the following statement was made.

Structural...

Not to fan the flames of this little debate, but attacking people is no way to get your point across. You're obviously passionate about your beliefs, but unless you keep your comments more professional, you stand little chance of turning non-believers into believers. I believe that the vast majority of people who read these forums have structural scoliosis or have children with structural scoliosis. Functional scoliosis is relatively rare.

Don't underestimate the knowledge of some of the people in these forums. Many of us have spent a lot more time researching scoliosis than you.

Regards,
Linda

[structural75]

Celia,

And the post that immediately followed that one read as follows (mind you this person was not one of your elite friends/club members but an unbiased forum member).

I don't get it.

Why can't there be different opinions and treatments shared without people having a close mind and listening to what the person has to say.

I understand asking questions, and having doubts, but can't we keep an open mind without jumping on a person who has different approaches to share about.

Structural 75, I like reading what you have to say, and that doesn't mean I'm sure you're right and don't have any proof but it is interesting.

Have a nice day.

Again, you've pulled something from the archives completely out of context to try and slander me. That was from the Raindrop therapy thread that I entered into to say that in my professional opinion, based on my knowledge of the human body, raindrop therapy was not going to "cure" anyones scoliosis (it was suggested by the person who made that statement that scoliosis was caused by a virus and that raindrop therapy could kill that virus... does that sound reasonable to you?).

Now my posts on this forum, including that thread, are available for all to read. If you actually read that post in its full context, you'd see that I was being attacked once again. In fact, when I first joined this forum (read my first few posts) I was responding to people asking questions about pain management and anatomical issues. Your friend Linda Racine jumped on me right away when she felt threatened that someone else might know a little more than she does. It was Linda that began to attack me from the start... then you and some other friends joined the group. And rather than asking me about structural integration to get a better understanding of what it was, I was simply attacked and discredited because of the same ignorance you're displaying now.

By the way, I don't believe that the vast majority of people on this forum have structural scoliosis. I believe many have ideopathic scoliosis, which is actually the most common type of scoliosis contrary to what Linda stated. And functional scoliosis is different than ideopathic and not rare whatsoever.

Don't underestimate the knowledge of some of the people in these forums. Many of us have spent a lot more time researching scoliosis than you.

If this were the case she would have known otherwise.

As far as my experience on this forum goes, you and Linda R. may as well be the same person, as she used to attempt the same thing that you're doing now. With all sincerity Celia, maybe you should reflect upon your own advice. If you think I have issues, you have completely drawn a blank on this entire conversation. It's so strange, it's as though you're living in some fantasy world... where one moment you say something then you turn around and pretend you never said it... I respond to your comments intelligently with reason and logic and then you ignore my questions/comments that aim to actually move the conversation forward into a more productive realm??? Now I'm the hostile one?????? wow!

[structural75]

By the way Celia, this was a quote of mine you used just recently... however you conveniently left out the rest of the last sentence... let me just post the paragraph in its entirety so that people aren't misled by your selectivity.

You posted this:

Originally Posted by structural75
The good news: If you're 21 years of age then, despite what others may say, there is a possibility that your curve can be reduced to some degree. You didn't clarify if the scoliosis was dertermined to be congenital or ideopathically derived, that would play a major part in the potential outcome. So the question you asked;


"does anybody know of anything besides surgery that actually has been proven to help reduce the curve? "


Yes. There are several methods that claim to potentially reduce the curvature, but I will speak only of the approach that I have used personally and currently practice as a professional with proven results. Structural Integration (a.k.a. - Rolfing) and certain manually based Osteopathic Physicians have had excellent success at times in this realm. It is not a black and white issue, sometimes it works dramatically well (an Advanced Rolfer, Health Practitioner & colleage of mine in Munich, Germany recently worked with a young adult patient with a 46 degree curvature. At the end of the intitial treatment her curve was measured at 18 degrees.).

The last paragraph there actually read this way... but I see why you chose to leave that last bit out... it would be too revealing of my true honesty and not very supportive of your arguments against me.

Yes. There are several methods that claim to potentially reduce the curvature, but I will speak only of the approach that I have used personally and currently practice as a professional with proven results. Structural Integration (a.k.a. - Rolfing) and certain manually based Osteopathic Physicians have had excellent success at times in this realm. It is not a black and white issue, sometimes it works dramatically well (an Advanced Rolfer, Health Practitioner & colleage of mine in Munich, Germany recently worked with a young adult patient with a 46 degree curvature. At the end of the intitial treatment her curve was measured at 18 degrees.). Other times it has little or no effect on the degree of curvature, but may still do much in the way of reducing the chronicity of pain.

Raindrop Therapy thread post #4. Very clever Celia... I'm proud to say that I don't need to revert to such manipulative ways to get my point across... shame on you. Any other tricks up your sleeve?

[structural75]

You know it just occurred to me that there is a woman who continually posts her flyers about yoga classes for scoliosis in NYC. How is it that I continuously get accused of "selling" my work when I've never given my name or info to anyone, but this person posts freely without a single problem?

[gerbo]

ray; my reply was more directed at structural.

structural; there is no hostility in this reply at all and I like people who are not scared for a good discussion and stand up for themselves. You clearly fit into that category. I could imagine meeting you in a pub (typical british social establishment), having a three hour discussion within we do not agree on anything and still enjoy a good pint (british measure of fluidvolume, usually applied to various beers) during (and after).

There seems to be a difference in what both of us feel is of paramount importance. You seem to suggest that if the theoretical concept or theory is correct and logical, than the treatment flowing from that concept should inherently, (and without question!!) work. You forget though that in "proper" science there are further steps to be taken. I.e., based on previous knowledge or observations (for example SI improves backpain or significntly improves jointproblems) you develop a new theory which in your case should be something like; "from my knowledge of SI and known results with other disorders and some observations I made when i tried to apply the same principles of treatment to patients with scoliosis I postulate that SI can treat scoliosis".

Ofcourse you would need to define very clearly what you mean by "treat" (and in the multitude of posts I have lost what you actually mean by it, but it has to be some thing like either 1) in young adolescents with developping scoliosis i can stop or reverse the progression, or 2) in adults with established scoliosis I can reverse the curve, or 3) in either case i can give symptomatic relief, but i cannot change the actual development of the curve)

The next step is paramount to be taken seriously and that is to test your theory by applying it on a group of patients, recording what happens, compare it to likely outcomes if you wouldn't do anything at all and than compare the two groups to see whether you have made any difference. This last step, which you are very reluctant to take, is what you call "scientific evidence", which by publishing it you be would open to scrutiny by your peers or other workers in the field.

Why would anybody bother doing that if the clients come around anyway, with or without evidence?

1) You want to be taken seriously
2) You do not want to give false hope to your clients and be able to tell them exactly whether people being treated by SI are better off (and in what respect) than people not being treated by SI (and remember, even people not being treated by anything can improve spontaneously, so improvement noted is not automatically due to treatment, you need to do better than the natural history to be relevant)
3) There is a kind of moral responsibility; i f you are really on to something (and who knows??) knowledge of this treatment needs to be spread so that it becomes part of what is on offer for everybody. This requires "scientific evidence", it is nearly selfish not to provide this as it would mean that lots of potential sufferers will never have the opportunity to receive this treatment.
4) Fame , and fortune, just imagine the riches the be gained from the being CE (I'll be your humble deputy) of "Structural Inc" a worldwide chain of SI franchises offering hope where there is despair...(etc etc, you get the idea) and a Noble price for science would only be a question of time.....

I do realise that this is all a bit much to take on for a small individual practitioner and a full blown study (randomised, doubleblind etc) might be asking a bit too much. However, the least you could do would be to either alone, or working together with some colleagues, would be to collect together, and keep on collecting, all the information of all scoliotic patients you have treated, which would need some objective measures of outcomes. just describe it; patient Y was 13 years old, had a curve of 40 degrees as shown by xray, i treated her over 3 years with weekly sessions of si and age 16 when she stopped growing age 17 she was only 20 degrees. Pt X was ..........etc. Ofcourse, case studies are inferior to larger doubleblind studies, but they do appear in the scientific literature and can be a starting point for scientific evaluation and scrutiny.

So, for the good of mankind and the greater glory of SI; have a go.

[structural75]

Gerbo,

I hear very clearly what you're saying. And yes, I would love to see, and be a part of, studies involving SI and scoliosis. And you're right in that it would be better suited to have this type of thing performed by a larger governing body of the work rather than my humble self. Bigger is better in this instance.

I do not think that treatment based on this theory will, or should, work "without question"... that would be plain ignorance and naivety on my part. I'm a very realistic practitioner and find myself giving less than desirable opinions to patients somewhat frequently... ie - "I'm sorry, but I don't believe this can be changed utilizing this method, or without surgery, etc, etc... . I'm not throwing 'promises' out to my patients ever.

What I am being completely honest about (and I've been honest and realistic about everything that I've said) is that SI does more than just resolve or diminish chronic pain or joint problems, but it has been scientifically shown and is most prominently known for its ability to change the resting structure/posture/alignment of the entire human body... in ways that no other treatment/approach/method has shown to accomplish. Now that's not to say it's superior by any means, just different in its effect on the human body than most other symptomatically oriented methods of manual or exercise based treatments. So when one person after another walks into an SI practitioners office and they are able to change bend(s) and rotations in the spine/pelvis but that bend was not significant enough to label it as scoliosis, where is the stretch in logic for nay sayers that believe it would be impossible to alter a curve greater than 10 degrees (considered to be scoliotic)

And again, if one can accept the logic behind putting a device on someone that simply applies counter force to the direction of the scoliotic curve, then why is so difficult to comprehend the idea of complimenting that with a far more precise method that is very directly assisting that process... ? And is able to address specific restrictions that the brace cannot... particularly within the inner cavities of the torso.?

Just to clarify for you, and others who might be wondering what my original definition of "treat" entails. I have stated several times that SI MAY prove useful in slowing, stopping or reducing the curvatures, particularly in children and adolescents as less boney deformity has taken place (ideopathic scoliosis is what I'm talking about here). And in some cases it will have absolutely NO effect whatsoever on the curvature/rotations, but may still provide some relief for chronic pain conditions present. It's not very different from any form of scoliosis treatment (non surgical) in that I don't propose it to be a miracle cure nor do I believe that it will be effective in every case. However it is the type of work where you would know very soon into treatment if it was having effect or not... there's no wishful thinking involved or 'give it more time' mentalities here. The body will reveal its adaptive capabilities right from the start.

I don't recall any cases of scoliosis that "spontaneously" resolved without any type of intervention... ? Do you know of any? It may e possible but I don't know of it happening personally.

Again, I wish to be a part of such a study solely to get accurate numbers on effectiveness and consistency. I'm not interested in the least bit in "franchising" any type of treatment... I'm perfectly content doing what I do.. in fact franchising anything usually leads to problems in proficiency of treatment. Money has nothing to do with this for me and it is actually quite upsetting that so many of you feel that I'm here for financial reasons. But you're entitled to your own opinion on matters.

I'm not reluctant to make this into a more "scientific" process. However I have issues with restricting treatment altogether, of any kind, to individuals for the sake of "science". Where's the humanity in that? I don't believe in playing with peoples lives or well being just to get 'accurate data'. I would be more inclined, in fact happy, to perform a study with individuals wearing a brace... one group receives SI as an adjunct treatment and the other does not. That may not be as sterile as you'd like but it's humane and would in fact still be effective at providing some data.

Thanks for the respectful attitude, even if we don't see eye to eye.
structural

[Rayknox]

Now that the bickering has subsided a little, I would just like to make a few pertinent points.
First of all this thread was originally to discuss the TAMARS treatment and rubbish it if it deserved to be rubbished. However it is obvious that no one really knows what the treatment entails. I would have thought by now that someone would have asked something about how it works. I have had criticisms about things that are not remotely resembling TAMARS. Does anyone really know what I am talking about. Has anyone really tried to get information on the treatment?
I understand, probably much more so now, the importance placed upon scientific evidence by everyone out there. I am not complaining about that, but Toni was the only sensible one as far as I am concerned. Precise points, plainly put.
The thread has been hihacked by other treatments, none of which I am actively involved with so I can not comment.
Have fun chatting amongst yourselves.

[gerbo]

did look it up following links. looked interesting, but issue remains; does it really work etc. etc. Whether it works is so much more relevant than how it works. (its like a fridge, as long as it keeps my food cold, i am not bothered how it works) Saying that, once i have seen clear indications that it works, i would want to know more about it....

[structural75]

Gerbo,

You're points are well taken once again... Although I understand and even agree with some of your thoughts, there will probably always be a divide between our viewpoints on this topic (regardless of the methods up for debate). Primarily because I'm a practitioner and you're a concerned and weary parent. You need the studies because it's the ONLY way that you can be convinced that something MIGHT have a positive influence. On the other hand, as a practitioner I see things occur in clinical settings that aren't in any studies, or to put it another way... not NEARLY everything that people walk into our practices with is scientifically studied in relation to ANY or EVERY type of treatment. This rings true throughout the medical community, as most Drs would concur (Drs. are doing this on a daily basis when prescribing a multitude of drugs to people that have not been tested in combination. Or drugs that were designed for certain conditions, and only tested for those conditions, but are now prescribed for a number of conditions with 'similar' symptoms without any studies to confirm their effects.). In fact, most of the people who seek "alternative" or "complimentary" methods are doing so because the 'scientifically valid' Drs. cannot help them any further without using drugs or surgery... in essence they have done what they can, or in some cases they tell the patient there is nothing wrong with them, that it's all in there head because their advanced technological equipment can't find a problem... . Where does that leave them? They can live with the prognosis and limitations of the Drs abilities and scope of practice or they can seek intelligent and sensible alternatives to address the problems. That doesn't mean you pick something randomly either... you choose the most appropriate treatment at the proper time... .

Many things we do in life and in our professions/careers are not validated by formal studies etc.... Although I clearly see where you're coming from, I would hope that you can see where I'm coming from in all of this. I have a perspective on issues like this and others that reading studies and descriptions of things just won't give you. I've treated too many people who have been to their Drs only to have them say they'll just have to live with it because there's nothing they can do. Sometimes that's true, but quite often it's not.

(its like a fridge, as long as it keeps my food cold, i am not bothered how it works)

Well, I think there is something to gain by understanding at least a little bit about how something works. Comparing SI to Raindrop therapy is like comparing your fridge to your nightstand... both may serve a purpose somewhere in life, but you can't expect your night stand to keep your food cold. And surely you do the torsorotations and stretching because you seem to think it makes logical sense... even though I don't know of any "studies" done on the efficacy of stretching ligaments to help scoliotic curves. Maybe I'm wrong... .

In the end, I don't suggest eliminating bracing to pursue other adjunct treatments... But I do strongly believe that we'd be seeing a better success rate with bracing if we were integrating other relevant treatment approaches into it. It's time we start making some effort towards treating some of the causes of this condition and look beyond JUST the symptom. Modern medicine is extremely useful, but most of it addresses the symptoms of problems... we are forced out onto the fringes of health care to find approaches that treat the cause. The fringe eventually becomes an integral part of the primary entity, only to give rise to a 'new' fringe altogether.

One more thing... Despite the scientific scrutiny and testing of various braces, they still fail quite often to achieve the 'expected' and 'hopeful' results. I have to say, at least I'm not putting "false hope" into peoples minds by leaning on a study. Isn't that even more misleading Gerbo, to suggest that just because something was put through a study and showed positive effect it will work on anyone? It appears studies can potentially give people as much false hope as anything else.

Take care and best wishes to you and your daughter....
structural

ps-Ray, very sorry for the distraction from your original topic... Just wanted to clarify myself before moving onward from this forum. Best of luck with your ventures!

[Celia]

It's amazing to me that regardless of how many times we try to get back on topic with TAMARS we are continuously side tracked with a sales pitch for structural integration. I'm sure Mr. Structural is familiar with the whole process of starting a new thread of his own instead of hijacking other threads to get his message across.

[Rayknox]

Gerbo,
How it works is very helpful in understanding why it works. It is a very logical approach and you can usually visibly see a change in the spine during each treatment.
A scoliosis is a twisted spine, hence to remove the scoliosis the spine must be untwisted. I can understand where people are coming from that give exercises to rotate the torso in the opposite direction to the twist, and using wedging etc. The big problem is that the spine is so fixed. Exercise all you like and the very fixed joints will not move, especially the upper thoracic, cervical and sacral areas. This is where the TAMARS treatment excels. There are very few joints (I have not come across any unless they are fused) that will not free up.Now the spine has the ability to move, the reflex action jumps the spine back towards its original position. Many many repeats of this dual treatment is used on each spine.
I was asked 'does it last' and if the patient only gets one treatment then it does not. And the occasional patient is so into miracle cures that that is all they take. Two or three treatments close together and the changes generally remain. If it tends to regress then some part of the spine has not been freed up sufficiently.
Bracing, exercises, etc (including SI which I have not seen performed) may all help if done at the same time. I have not tried any of these except exercises. Bracing may help to keep the spine from regressing during the initial treatments, in the extreme cases where the ribcage is distorted. It all needs testing. If I had easy access to bracing I would do it myself.
All of these things are not as risky as surgery and I always wish that most of the patients I see could have come much earlier before the changes get too extreme and fixed. Unfortunately they have mostly gone through the system which is 'wait and see'. They then have the growth spurts and the spine twists massively in some cases.

Not sure what links you saw, but there are some articles written by scoliosis patients. The treatment was designed to cure back pain, but everyone I see with back pain has a twisted spine. To get rid of the pain you must remove or at least significantly reduce the twists.

structural
I agree with you on a lot of what you are saying esp. about treating the symtoms.

[structural75]

Celia,
I didn't realize you were so interested in TAMARS. And who brought up SI again? Oh, that was you... . If people are going to ask for reasoning/explanations/justifications/etc... I'll oblige, that's not a sales pitch lady. Try again.