Editor's note: See the counterpoint to this article, "Research Basis for Applied Kinesiology," also in the June 14, 1999 issue of DC.
The most recent letter to Dynamic Chiropractic from Dr. Yanuck, the research advisor for ICAK (International College of Applied Kinesiology), cited six studies in the current literature. Dr. Yanuck claimed these studies to be supportive of the tenants of AK. He also cited four more studies which are as yet unpublished. Since these last four are unpublished, inaccessible and therefore cannot be reviewed, I will not comment upon them in this review paper. I attempted to review the six citations which Dr. Yanuck provided. I found an additional five studies in the current, indexed literature which will also be reviewed.
I reviewed what I could of the six citations provided by Dr. Yanuck. This consisted of reading the abstracts on a Medline search of studies one through four and number six. I could not find number five in any search pattern. I could not find the original text of any of the citations in either the Palmer College West or Stanford medical libraries. Neither library carries the journals in question. Stanford used to, but stopped carrying them due to a lack of requests. An acquaintance of mine requested reprints from the ICAK as Dr. Yanuck had suggested. They promised to fax them right over. After waiting a few weeks, he determined that they were not coming.
I then embarked on a brief review of the literature to determine for myself the extent of AK research. I found only five studies, all of which appear to be negative when testing AK principles.
After reviewing the available data my conclusion is the same. There is no research supporting AK. However, there is research refuting the tenants of AK.
Let's start with a definition of AK. AK is a system where manual muscle testing is relied upon as a diagnostic tool to determine clinical or subclinical pathologies. The general AK practitioner will test various muscles searching for weakness. Based upon the muscle in question and its response to various challenges, the practitioner will then render a diagnosis and prescribe treatment. A challenge can be anything from gentle pressure on a joint to stimulation of a neurolymphatic point to sublingual supplementation. Most AK texts note that it should be used in conjunction with other diagnostic procedures. Many AK practitioners rely exclusively on manual muscle testing. I have witnessed AK practitioners prescribe vitamin C for laryngitis after noting strength increases when a bottle of vitamin C was held on the patient's chest. I have attended seminars in AK where diagnoses were made with nothing but manual testing. Standard methods were never discussed.
I reviewed a standard AK manual. One section contained 196 pages of manual muscle tests. Every muscle in the body had a test. Most had a nutritional, glandular, subluxation, orthopedic and systemic condition associated with a weak test. If the sartorius muscle tests weak, this could theoretically indicate the need for adrenal nucleoprotein extract, vitamin C, pantothenic acid, an adrenal weakness, an SI subluxation, a knee disorder or a problem with blood sugar handling. Everything could be clarified with the appropriate challenge -- put vitamin C under the tongue. If the muscle then tests strong, you've found the problem: the patient needs vitamin C.
None of these 196 pages had a single reference except to standard anatomy texts. Contrast this to current texts by Dr. Hammer or Dr. Croft. These texts have an average of 3-4 references to research journals on each page. One randomly chosen chapter of Arthur Croft's book had 53 pages and contained 162 references.
Based on the previous definition, let's look at the evidence as cited by Dr. Yanuck, the research advisor for ICAK. The citations here are sufficient to perform a Medline search if needed. For the full citation, I would refer you back to Dr. Yanuck's letter published in the February 22, 1999 issue of DC. For those who have internet access, HealthGate (www.healthgate.com ) will perform free Medline searches. That is where I found the following articles. If I have misinterpreted anything, I invite Dr. Yanuck to send me the full text of any articles he has cited. My e-mail address is listed at the end of this article.
In the preceding four studies, manual muscle testing was found to have an interesting, reproducible but unexplainable neurologic component. The conclusion drawn can only be that humans have strong and weak muscles and that this difference can be detected by machines and other trained humans. No pathologies were identified. No link was established between manual muscle testing and any diagnosis. None of the standard challenges which in AK theory could change muscles from weak to strong and therefore indicate a pathology were tested (i.e., neurolymphatic points, nutritionals, etc.). No pre- or post-treatment component was examined. These studies can be considered evidence in support of AK only by the greatest leap of faith imaginable. Using these studies in support of AK is analogous to discovering that opening and closing doors in a house causes some lights to go off and on, then claiming that you can use this to diagnose any house ailment from termites to clogged drains. All you have really discovered is that the refrigerator door has a switch.
I did not set out to find only the negative studies. This is everything I found. There were no positive studies. These studies directly tested the basic tenants of AK and found them to be invalid. One was for a musculoskeletal condition; one for nutrition; one for mental states; and one for systemic problems. They were all negative.
A scientist looking at this evidence could only conclude that AK has discovered that muscles are sometimes weak and sometimes strong. This variability can be affected by muscle spindle fiber stimulation; it has an unexplored neurologic component; and it has no proven correlation to human pathologies. Based upon this, AK should not be practiced on humans unless they are involved in a legitimate research project.
Scientists should not rely on personal opinion, leaps of faith, or smoke and mirrors. Unless AK can come up with something better than what has been presented so far, my opinion remains: AK has no research support. In fact, the available research denies AK's validity. Based upon the lack of support and the presence of well done negative studies, it is my opinion that AK should not be used on humans for health care except for purposes of further research.
Many relevant diagnostic signs are not performed deliberately by the examiner or by the patient at the examiner’s direction. They are observed as the patient reacts to their condition. Fortin’s finger sign, Minor’s sign, and Vanzetti’s sign are three examples of this principle.
On Feb. 1, 2024, two more legislators – John R. Carter (R-Texas) and Robert “Bob” Good (R-Va.) – co-sponsored the Chiropractic Medicare Coverage Modernization Act of 2023, bringing the co-sponsor total to 155, two more than the total achieved over the entire two-year congressional cycle in which identical legislation last appeared (2021-22).
While working at the Lovelace Medical Center in Albuquerque, N.M., one of the primary care physicians stated that imaging every patient prior to receiving chiropractic was not medically necessary. It was at that point I reconsidered the need for the imaging of every patient to avoid malpractice.
