These models also helped me a lot during my exam.

We don't know this for sure! :-P

Kinda like Bijoy's instincts about……anything, really.

:-D

Also here: Does Computer Work cause Carpal Tunnel? This is an interesting paper as it shows that the epidemiological evidence for computer usage causing carpal tunnel is lacking. That doesn't mean that computer work is not a culprit only that the studies done have not be good enough to really hammer in a link.

But Davies does NOT actually claim that trigger point massage is the answer to everything. Probably a standout theory would be the dyslexia thing, pg 26. Now, as a "serious reader" I'd say that one 1. There are no "odd" coincidences. Coincidences are just that, coincidences. If they are really "odd" then they are no longer coincidence. 2. He confuses correlation with causation. That does not mean that the connection does not exist, though. However, he does NOT claim that trigger points cause dyslexia. Not once. The way I read it he is presenting it as an example of the kind of thing that could be connected to trigger points and says, quite plainly, at the end: "it would seem worth checking out". Now that does not sound like a man who is trying to say anything for certain.

The qutoe above, again, on page 44:

" If you hurt all over and massage is doing no good or seems to make the pain worse, you may be dealing with fibromyalgia or some other systemic problem and will have to seek other remedies".

What? You mean trigger point therapy isn't always the answer?

If I wanted to be really super critical I'd say that going right to fibromyalgia and then having the OR part is a bit leading. That is he is calling attention to the only very clear case where muscle pain is not of myofascial origin, which would tend to reinforce all other pain of being myofascial or of trigger point origin in general. However, I doubt he did that consciously and whatever the case, he does NOT say that trigger point therapy cures everything.

You could argue that it's buried but it IS under massage guidelines, which actually makes it more prominent than the opening and ending chapters seeing that massage guidelines are part of the meat and potatoes of the book and the opening and closing chapters, most readers will see as optional.

You echo my thoughts exactly on this. So what if he is a "true believer" or zealot. DOES it work? Is the information useful? Ingram gives not one ACTUAL example where any of the info is 'wrong' and simply attacks the style. Plus, most of the opening chapters actually follow Travel and Simons. So if he's going to bash Davies he better be willing to bash them.

There are varying degrees of knowledge. Not everyone has a masters in kinesiology, nor do they care to have one. They just want to know where to apply pressure. If Ingraham wants more knowledge he should buy a book with a higher degree of knowledge associated with it. A master carpenter is not going to buy the dummies guide to deck building, but someone oblivious to the subject may find it extremely helpful and informative, despite the carpenter's opinion.

I found his review to be emotionally charged. He bashes the writing style and the zealotism (word?) but never talks about the actual knowledge presented. Is the knowledge wrong? I can live with a poorly written picture book, lol. The thing that got me was the continually advertisement for his own trigger point book. The transparency is there. He's slamming the competitor in favour of his own product. Its like the pepsi vs coke debate. One claims superiority but in the end people stick with what they like.

I like the trigger point workbook because I like to find info quickly, not have to spend half an hour looking up words and phrases I don't know. Massage techniques are half the battle. Personally I like the informal approach of some of the stuff in the manual. And I don't mind his suggestions and 'original theories' because they will either help or not. If they help I'm ahead, if they don't I'm no further ahead. Its better than nothing at all!

Am I the only one who finds this review by Paul Ingram of the Trigger Point Therapy Workbook to be a bit off target?

Basically he can't actually find specific reasons to discredit the book so all he can do is bash the begining and end, which most people will ignore anyway, while alluding generally to Davies making far-fetched claims.

But what gets me is his idea that a self-help book should be "extremely detailed" so that you turn out an expert on the subject. That's not the point. People don't want to make a scientific study of it..they just want to know how to self-treat.

This is related to the practice of "data dumping" I'm always complaining about. The point of a self-help book is to HELP people help themselve, not help them understand how very knowledgeable you are and how many facts you know.

He also states that some people can't get help with their very difficult cases. Aspirin doesn't always work for very difficult headaches. But when it does work, the relief is real.

He calls Davies a Zealot. While I can understand why someone would think Davies a zealot I don't think it is fair to call a man you have never met, and presumably only know threw this book, a zealot. One of the defining charateristics of a zealot is that they are uncompromising. You have to give a man the chance to compromise before you can say that about him. And since he is no longer with us we don't know.

If he is a zealot that does not make the actual info less credible. Zealots are not cranks. You judge the info not the attitude.

Paul Ingram cannot actually say that large majority of the book isn't right and yet says it is "not credible" What he is saying is that Davies is not credible. Since the majority of the book simply takes Travell and Simons and makes is usable, then they also, must not be credible.

This is so related to the "perfectionistic syndrome" I was alluding to in my bad fitness article posts. The harder you try to make something aimed at a general audience perfect, the less useful you make it.