This post serves more as a "heads-up" as opposed to anything otherwise informative. To date, I have managed to accumulate a solid 21 years of professional experience in the field of health sciences...ranging from high performance fitness training, teaching human anatomy in University science labs, and more recently to the rehabilitative challenges of neurodevelopmental disorders. Although the years may span a decent period of time, it is actually the diverse population of people and experiences that are perhaps the most valuable. I have been fortunate enough to work with some of the most physically impressive specimens as well as some of the most fragile individuals imagineable...and everything in between.
It is with this plethora of exposure, combined with many interactions with intelligent collegues, and some all-important healthy criticism, that has lead to the Fascia Therapy concept I am currently launching in Chile and abroad. This new and refreshing endeavour has lead to the opportunity to present this experience and philosophy in writing in the form of a formal publication...hopefully to be released sometime in the very near future. This conglomerate of experiences, theories, formulations, and philosophies has come together to form what I have termed: The Fascia Therapy Theorem for Neurodevelopmental Disorders.
Although the official text has yet to be completed...and is still very much in "draft" form, I wanted to share the current introduction here for those interested to read. I am somewhat unfamiliar with publication "protocol", however I am hoping to be able to share more "bits and pieces" as time goes along. It is only a very small portion if the entire text, but it should present a decent image and "texture" for the entire body of work.
Cheers!
New Frameworks and Solutions in
Rehabilitation for Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Gavin Broomes B.Sc.
Introduction:
The
objective of this chapter is to present a global perspective on what can be
considered a very elusive and daunting topic.
Neurodevelopmental disorders are very diverse and present equally
diverse manifestations and challenges.
However, despite this reality, there are some very tangible similarities
that essentially allow the medical professional / practitioner to impose a
significant amount of productive and positive benefit which will ultimately
result in more manageable situations, more efficient treatment strategies, and
significantly better treatment outcomes.
In the 20+ years of formal education, clinical, and
hands-on experience leading up to this current philosophy, I have been
fortunate enough to have been exposed to a very wide spectrum of human
performance…from the most highly trained athlete to the most fragile child with
neurodevelopmental disorder. It is my
firm belief and conviction that this exposure has provided some valuable
insight and perspective into the exponentially complex human organism. In essence, a very explicit demonstration of
not what separates these two
polarities (which is relatively obvious and certainly intuitive)…rather what is the common thread between
them. This is a seemingly paradoxical
suggestion…how can two polarities (extremes) share anything in common? The answer to this is that both are not
exclusive entities, but are simply very
different manifestations of the singular human condition. To be more
precise, they both share the same embryological material and subsequently
contain the same “architectural building blocks”…which effectively serve as the
key to elicit the most powerful systemic and mechanical change.
This fundamental understanding was the genesis for the
development of the new frameworks and solutions presented in this chapter. It was important for me to formulate this
relatively complex philosophy to reflect a certain “neutrality” with respect to
any specific belief, conviction, or position a professional may have. Any such bias would inevitably result in the
breaking of the “law of contradiction” which specifies that any allegiance
towards a specific “technique” or approach would essentially imply that any
other course of action or belief would be “wrong”…therefore a philosophy that
is based in fundamental neutrality can be applied across the entire spectrum of
personal and professional ideals and convictions.
1.
Organic
Versus Mechanistic Perspectives:
The Organic vs.
Mechanistic comparison is typically associated with the analysis of business
models and issues surrounding hierarchical structures of large corporations,
however when this general philosophy is imported into the biological analysis
it demonstrates equal ability to elicit enhanced clarity and perspective on an
otherwise complex task.
Mechanistic
Organization
This type of organization is characterized by
hierarchical and “bureaucratic” focus.
Within the biological context, this is the overall equivalent to the
overwhelming focus and attention solely on the neurological considerations…or
in essence, a “top-down” mentality where the central nervous system (brain) is
locus of control for everything. This
analysis is in-line with the precise definition of a mechanistic
organization: highly centralized authority, formalized “procedures and practice”,
specialized functions.
The mechanistic perspective in the neurodevelopmental
context is almost a necessity due to the fact that it is easier and simpler to
manage. Additionally, it provides
significant quantitative metrics through which practitioners can measure
progress, deterioration, and even assign diagnoses. Although relatively easier to manage, it is
very sensitive to rapid change. The
essential “chain of command” is quite strong and therefore requires that all
decision-making come directly from the top.
In that sense, the brain is considered as the overriding system that
ultimately controls, moderates, and directly influences all physiological
functions…from the systemic to the mechanical.
Further, this organizational structure is characterized by
“communication” and information flowing solely from the upper levels…even more
so, any communication that goes to (or comes from) the bottom is vertical,
meaning that there is very little lateral communication within the lower levels.
Organic
Organization
In contrast the mechanistic organization, organic
organization is characterized by what is defined as “flatness”, which
essentially means that communication and interaction is primarily horizontal.
Ironically, there is also a certain low level of specialization
which indicates that elements (tissues, in the biological context) adopt many
different roles depending on the specific environment and stimulus. An example of this would be the paradoxical
role of connective tissue as both “connecting” and “disconnecting”
contributors…in addition to its role in force transmission, injury repair, and
systemic homeostasis. Additionally,
there is a characteristic “decentralization” in the decision-making
process…meaning that some actions / reactions are directly and indirectly
managed by the lower levels (or the more primitive levels, in the biological
context).
The organic organization reflects a contrasting
“bottom-up” performance and therefore is extremely adaptable and flexible to
sudden, large, or rapid change. The
sharing of roles and responsibilities makes it “less fragile” and more
robust.
Organic Organization and links to rehabilitation
This analogy is less of a dichotomy and more of a
continuum. To be precise, the human
organism is exponentially more complex than a business model therefore it
cannot be explained with a relatively simplistic analysis as this. The “organic versus mechanistic” model
ultimately serves as a philosophical framework that essentially encompasses a
larger fundamental understanding which then results in a certain clarity of
thought.
The complexities of the human organism are far too
numerous to describe…and given that we have yet to uncover ALL of the wonders
of the human body, the absolute complexity remains a mystery. It is this fundamental reality that
underlines the necessity for an expanded perspective when it comes to the added
complexities of neurodevelopmental disorder.
Assuming a hierarchical / mechanistic approach alone lends
to the unrealistic assumption that we have ultimate control over the human
organism and the associated systemic and mechanical manifestations. The infinite number of micro and macro
processes that take place every second of every day are incalculable…and occur
without conscious or voluntary input…and in some cases completely outside of
the neurological context, relying solely on mechanical inputs to facilitate
gene expression and tissue differentiation. In essence, the majority of human processes
exist on this “primitive and autonomic” plane.
The so-called “voluntary or mechanistic” manifestations are effectively
REFLECTIONS of a functioning organic system of auto-regulation,
self-organization, and self-healing. Therefore, any and all interventions that
develop, support, and nourish the primitive systemic oscillations (respiration,
circulation, digestion, lymph) ultimately provide the most beneficial and
“metabolic cost-effective” strategy for improvement of overall health and
homeostasis.
