| home | how it works | question nutrition | equipment & Training | Testimonials | contact us |            
         
   MRT AND MEDICINE
       
 
 
MRT and Medicine

 
 

Tens of thousands of professionals, including doctors, regularly use some form of Muscle Response Testing (MRT), and based on the results with their own patients, have an unshakable conviction of its legitimacy.  

Most patients are also satisfied with the results of MRT. However, with its increasing popularity over the last two decades, some MRT has come under fire from certain critics.

 
 
Editor's note: The clinical study highlighted below is part of an article titled "Stay Away from Applied Kinesiology" that appears when you search under "kinesiology" or "muscle testing" on Google.  This particular study is referenced in that article.  It's interesting to look into the details.  However, at JSI we do not use the same methodology as Applied Kinesiology, which is one of over 50 techniques in kinesiology in use worldwide today.  Consequently, the findings on both sides are not relevant to what we teach.
 
 
 

In one unfavorable clinical study of Applied Kinesiology, double-blind and placebo elements were applied to ascertain its validity. The value of these controls are well documented - these elements insure a person's mind is not affecting the results.

MRT failed to perform well during these clinical trials. Statistical analysis yielded no significant judgmental reliability between testers, and no consistent correlation of test results with standard biochemical tests for nutrient status.

Double-blind and placebo elements created inconsistencies with test results, with subjects testing incorrectly on placebo elements thought to be nutrients. The conclusion reached based on these clinical trials: Applied Kinesiology was an unreliable methodology for nutritional analysis.

 

 
 

The International College of Applied Kinesiology published a rebuttal letter from the ICAK identifying the faulted muscle testing methods used in the study.

In addition, they stated the Ridler points used in the clinical study were not Applied Kinesiology techniques.  Plus, the 3 "qualified" kinesiologists used in the study were actually two lay persons and one chiropractor whose education in Applied Kinesiology was not identified.

They also point to several other significant studies establishing both the validity and reliability of manual muscle testing methods.  The ICAK has also amassed a considerable amount of positive research over the years, and accepts only physicians licensed to diagnose into its curriculum.  Applied Kinesiology and the ICAK is very well established in the US.

 

 

In one well-designed favorable clinical study published in the prestigious professional journal Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89 healthy college students were subjected to a battery of tests on congruent (true) and incongruent (false) statements. 

Overall, they consistently demonstrated an 17% increase in muscle strength in true vs. false statements.  Test subjects were kept unaware of what changes in muscle strength, if any, would occur.  They had no preconceived notions of how their muscle strength should respond.

This study is highly significant because the JET Technique for Kinesiology uses the key element of the true/false stimulus in most of our testing protocols.  These protocols have been refined and perfected at JSI over the last 10 years.

 

 
 

Who to believe?  While the debate continues over the next 40 years, it may be helpful to keep a balanced perspective.  Millions of people over the last 40 years have experienced MRT. Thousands of health and wellness professionals utilize it daily in their practices. Its validity may be able to rest on these quietly solid statistics instead. There is security in numbers.

In a final analysis on the validity of MRT, a little common sense might come in handy. If one person says it works, they may have an overactive imagination. If 100 say it, you can get 100 people to do anything. But if millions and millions of people worldwide over the last 40 years have used MRT, then maybe it’s time you looked at it.

 

 
What really matters is your personal testing of MRT.  Most people want to know the truth about what's good for them - and what's not.  When you consistently experience the same test result with the same substance 10 days in a row, you’ll know there's something to it.  In the final analysis, isn't your opinion what really counts?
 

   
 
 
 

JET Technique for Kinesiologysm

JSI Institute
866 Ski Park Rd
West Branch, MI USA 48661

phone
US/Canada (800) 381-8039
Outside: +1 (989) 345-8030

hours
Monday - Friday

12 noon - 9:00 pm Eastern

hours where I live

fax

US/Canada (866) 897-3665
Outside: +1 (989) 345-8039

email

      
 
           
    | home | how it works | question nutrition | equipment & training | testimonials | contact us |      

Copyright 2006  JSI Institute with the JET Technique for Kinesiology   -   All Rights Reserved
This information is provided for educational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease or condition.  This information has been provided at the sole discretion of its author, and the opinions and views expressed are the author's own.  The author does not offer medical advice, nor is this to be construed as such; if you need medical advice, seek a medical professional.  This information has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.