40 posts / 0 new
Last post
Joshua Shrum
Joshua Shrum's picture
Kyusho Points Vs MMA

Karateculture.com recently asked me to do an article about the use of pressure points inside of MMA. I looked around to find a good starting point, and I figured what better way than to look at some of the best knock outs in the UFC. I found a video on YouTube of the Top 20 UFC Knockouts, and broke it down hit by hit. I compaired what point was used and explained how to find it. It was amazing to slow down the video and watch these fighters hit pressure points. Of course a top favorite was Stomach 5, because of how easy it is to use it.

I encourage others to comment on what you think of MMA using pressure points! We recently got a great video (From karateculture.com) showing authentic karate techniques compaired to MMA moves. I think this video does the same similar thing, showing us that these points work! Also goes to show that pressure points can be used in every style, regardless of where it came from!

Heres the like to the video and article:

Kyusho Points Vs MMA

Let me know what you guys think!

Tau
Tau's picture

I keep intending to do a YouTube video on this due to regularity questions on the validity of Kyushu appear.

In the world of Martial Arts, the views on pressure points tend to be very black and white. Either they exist and they're the hidden aspect to Martial Arts that few understand and that will enhance every technique.... or they don't exist. Those in the latter camp cite acknowledged human physiology (and sometimes a little psychology) as to their effect

I'm a rare one in that I sit firmly on the fence. I do believe and, and teach, kyushu. Yet I have no problem with people who dismiss them. What I ask for in open-mindedness on both sides of the argument. I'm a 25+ year Martial Artist and also a health care professional so I can look at both side of the debate.

Stomach Five sits in the middle of mandibular body. On the one hand it's a yang Earth point. The ideal conquoring meridien would be liver (yin Wood.) Combined, these disrupt energy flow around the body. On the other hand, you cause rotation to the spine potentially including connection with the brain stem. You cause the brain to move violently inside the skull. There will probably also be a vertibular effect due to the sudden rotation. And incidentally, being hit in the liver is a experience like no other.

So there are two perspectives for you.

In honesty, I think whatever we choose to call it we must agree that a good solid whack on the jaw is a pretty good tool for gaining knockouts. Having an understanding of the mechanism is very important so as we can treat appropriately afterwards. Somehow I doubt Rhonda Rousey was hoping someone knew the healing cycle of kyushu after That Head Kick! It's fire, incidentally so she probably needed a good arm massage wink. On another day, another person, another level of contact this may be appropriate.

I refer you to Iain's podcast on Pressure Points. It's testament to how much I sit on the fence in that I disagree with Iain but still cite this as one of his best podcasts and have included it as a reference on literature that I provide when I do Kyushu seminars! To best understand a subject you need to be able to see both sides.

Now, sitting on the fence... I'm acquiring splinters in my bladder meridien!

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

I have never yet seen any evidence to support the existence of "chi" or the reality of meridians. As Peter points out above, I did a podcast on this a while ago, and written version can be found here:

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/pressure-points-sceptical-examina...

I won't repeat the article here, but I will say that I feel weak points based on western medicine are undoubtedly effective (i.e. a punch to the jaw can cause unconsciousness, a strike around carotid arteries can cause a drop in blood pressure, etc), but there is no evidence that manipulating "chi" works in any fashion. When it is shown to "work" it's always because the point in question overlies an area where western medicine can explain the mechanism (See Jack Dempsy photo in the article). I also think this is what is happening in the video you show. These are good strikes to weak areas that are causing things best explained by western medicine. This begs the question why use acupuncture terms and theories when they explain nothing and just add confusion.

For me to accept that "chi based kyusho" had any validity I would need to see a genuine knock out utilising an process unexplainable by western medicine (and a demonstration on a fellow believer would not fulfill this requirement). Otherwise, all we are seeing is good strikes to known anatomical weaknesses having the effects that western medicine states they will through scientifically valid mechanisms. It's the "hear hoof beats, assume horses not unicorns" thing for me. Don't complicate without neccestity or make assumptions without evidence (Occam's razor and all that).

I'm not a fan and feel that "chi based knockouts" are asking people to believe in magic and are detrimental to the credibility of the martial arts. The methods of MMA do fair well when tested. It has been my experience that "Chi based knockouts" don't.

All of this said, I am a great believer in both sides of the discussion being put forward so that people can see what makes most sense to them. Whatever side of the fence we are on (or if, like Peter, we are on the fence) it's good when people take the time and effort to share their thoughts in a well written way. The martial arts need more of it.

Regards,

Iain

Joshua Shrum
Joshua Shrum's picture

Iain, 

I had seen your article a while back when it was given to me from a fellow martial artist. I think that you put up some good arguments and really cover a wide range over the use of pressure points as well as chi. I feel as though there are a couple of things that have to be looked at.

First I think that he is correct when it comes to the view of pressure points. It is either something you believe, or something you don't. Very black and white. It is interesting enough that all of the  'meridians' follow along nerves, nerve bundles, and nerve endings. It is simply a matter of how you want to describe what you are hitting. What an eastern medicine practicioner would call chi, the western would call electricity.

I think this was explained really well in an interview Jesse Enkamp did with Evan Pantazi. He quoted this about how to describe this "energy"...

J: Great – I’m sure my readers are knocking themselves senseless already! Now… what about the “no-touch” KO then? You know; a blindfolded McDojo grandmaster projects “ki-force” through his fingertips and knocks a student out from across the room.

EP: “Hah! I knew this question would come up, and a complete answer would be a full interview all by itself – if not a full book! Let’s look at the components before I state my opinions, which are rather strong and to some may be offensive:

Our brain sends bio-electrical energy throughout our entire body by way of our nerves. This can be measured, and now even seen, with scientific devices of many types. We have even done this in several Kyusho studies with medical professionals. Now, anytime electricity moves through or along a conduit – like a nerve – electromagnetic energy can form outside, or even leach out of, the insulated conduits. This electricity can not only be measured, but also felt.

That is how humans feel anger, love or mistrust of people in close proximity. Emotions are energy. And this “energy” (term used for brevity as explanation can get down to/beyond molecular particles), is not a mystical chi/ki force. It is physiological reality. It can, and constantly is, influenced by many external as well as internal “energy” sources like the sun, florescent lighting, cell phones etc. Is it real, and works because of this electrical interplay we just looked at.

In case you would to read the whole article here it is:

http://www.karatebyjesse.com/exclusive-interview-evan-pantazi-the-pressu...

I feel that this was a great way to describe the "energy" in regards to pressure points. We have to rememebr that Kyusho translates to vital points. This can mean eye, throat, neck, JAW, or any other area that can inflict great pain. But most importantly it can also refer to places where those nerves run, ie: the meridians. How ever you want to call it, you can see how the bodies mechanics (nerves) match the corresponding areas with the meridians.

Second, I do want to note that though I persoanlly believe in these pressure points... I do not believe there is such thing as a "no touch" knockout. We have yet to see any scientific evidence or proof. It does unfortunately give martial arts a bad reputation. And on a side note, even if it was real... not very practical in a fight! haha

Last closing comment. I think that pressure points are a fantastic tool to use, and I always encourage those who do not agree with similar or like minded concepts to engage in conversation! Forces everyone to grow, adapt, and learn.

Something that I always loved about the late Wally Jay is that he would tell people, "Pain makes believers." His son Wally Jay continues on that motto with his Small Circle Jujitsu and Kyusho fighting. If I am ever across the sea in your area, I'd love to train together and explore the concept of pressure points!

Peace Out!

Joshua

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Hi Joshua,

Thanks for the comments and for kicking off the thread. It’s always good when opposing views result in a through exploration of the topic. Obviously, we hold very different views on the subject … and that’s what makes for a good read and an informative thread :-) Thank you!

Joshua Shrum wrote:
It is interesting enough that all of the  'meridians' follow along nerves, nerve bundles, and nerve endings. It is simply a matter of how you want to describe what you are hitting. What an eastern medicine practicioner would call chi, the western would call electricity.

I hear that a lot, but it is not accurate. Nerves are nerves; not meridians. Nerves have been thoroughly mapped and they don’t match up with the meridians of acupuncture. There is no “large intestine nerve” that follows the “large intestine meridian” and that flows from the tip on my index finger to the side of my nose. Same goes for all the other meridians. It’s therefore not right to suggest they are the same thing.

Nerves and the stated path of meridians do intersect at certain places, and those places are where many of our effective striking points lie. From this we can conclude that the nerves we know exist are the cause of any effect; as opposed to the unproven effects of the meridians that have never been shown to exist. This is why I feel we should abandon all talk of chi, meridians and acupuncture points. Western medicine gives a solid undeniable explanation of why weak areas work. “Chi based” terminology adds nothing but unnecessary confusion.

Chi is also not electricity. Electrical impulses do indeed flow along nerves. Chi is said to flow along meridians. As I mentioned above, no nerves follow the path that meridians are said to. Additionally, the electrical nerve impulses can be measured and shown to exist. Chi cannot be measured and there is no evidence for its actual existence.

The behaviour and nature of electricity is also well understood. People are able to read this because of our deep understanding of the laws of electricity. These laws are something I know about having worked in electrical engineering for a long time. We have no “chi based computers” and the “laws” relating to chi are entirely different. There is no electricity that is “water” in nature and hence has a reducing effect on electricity that is “fire” in nature. They are not the same thing at all.

It’s not accurate to say that nerves are meridians, and that electricity is chi. Meridians and nerves follow entirely different pathways; and chi and electricity are said to work to entirely different laws and are totally different in nature.

Western medicine can explain why a punch to the jaw will result in unconsciousness. When we say that “Stomach 5” will knock someone out we are adding in loads of unnecessary complication. Firstly, we have to assume that the unproven energy of chi exists. Secondly, we have to explain the mechanism of how disrupting the flow of this unproven energy to the stomach would result in unconsciousness. Thirdly, we have to explain why disrupting that same energy flow to the stomach at other places does not have any effect on consciousness. And so on.

To me, we are adding on layer after layer of confusion for no discernible benefit.

Occam’s Razor states: “Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.”

Firstly, I would say that western medicine explains what is going on with much more accuracy and authority. So I would not say that the two hypotheses are “competing” in this case. In much the same way we can explain lightening as a discharge of electrical energy, or as Zeus hurling the thunderbolt made for him by Hephaestus. The former is obviously the far stronger explanation. However, even if we put “chi” and western medicine on a level playing field, then western medicine is still the preferable theory because it has by far the fewest assumptions i.e. no need for an unexplainable magic force, identified mechanism as opposed to an unidentified one, and so on.

Joshua Shrum wrote:
”Now, anytime electricity moves through or along a conduit – like a nerve – electromagnetic energy can form outside, or even leach out of, the insulated conduits. This electricity can not only be measured, but also felt.”

There’s some pseudo-science going on here. As someone who worked in the field, I am well aware that any flow of electricity will result in a magnetic field being formed. That’s the principle by which electric motors operate i.e. put a current through the windings of a motor and the resulting magnetic fields will cause the motor to rotate. This can be measured by instrumentation, but to infer it can always be “felt” by the human body is untrue.

I spent years working with high voltage equipment and there is no way you can “feel” if current is flowing or not just by being near it. And when it comes to the human body the level of current flowing is many magnitudes smaller. To the uninitiated it may sound plausible, but to those in the know it is undeniably false.

If it was true, we would not need to put people in shielded rooms when trying to observe brain activity magnetically due to the fact that the field is so weak (a lot lower than things like the magnetic field of the earth and general “noise” from electrical equipment). The magnetic field from your average fringe magnet is around 1000000000000 times more powerful and we can’t feel that! The only way we know it magnetic is when it is near metal.

If I were to get you to close your eyes and then place my mobile phone in your hand, you would not be able to tell if it was switched on or off. What is being suggested here infers that people would easily be able to tell.

It gets worse …

Joshua Shrum wrote:
”That is how humans feel anger, love or mistrust of people in close proximity. Emotions are energy. And this “energy” (term used for brevity as explanation can get down to/beyond molecular particles), is not a mystical chi/ki force. It is physiological reality. It can, and constantly is, influenced by many external as well as internal “energy” sources like the sun, florescent lighting, cell phones etc. Is it real, and works because of this electrical interplay we just looked at.

This is now off the charts wrong. Show me the scientific paper that says all humans can “feel” the emotions of another and that this is due to the magnetic field created by the flow of electricity associated with that emotion! If it were true, then humans would never be able to lie to one another or misunderstand one another because we would have 100% infallible empathy.

Magnetic fields are proportional to the flow of electricity. The flow of electricity in the body is tiny (really, really tiny!). We therefore need high-tech equipment and substantial shielding to detect the resulting field. What is being suggested here would mean such medical equipment was pointless because we could “feel” it naturally.

Joshua Shrum wrote:
I think that pressure points are a fantastic tool to use, and I always encourage those who do not agree with similar or like-minded concepts to engage in conversation! …

… Something that I always loved about the late Wally Jay is that he would tell people, "Pain makes believers."

Pain would not make me a believer in this case. I agree that knowledge of weak areas is important. Where we disagree is the mechanism at play. I would say that any pain felt when people get hit on vulnerable areas is due to the nerves doing what they do. Chi would not come into it. If I get hit on a nerve it will hurt. That does nothing to further the argument of those who would claim chi and its associated theories have any legitimacy tough.

As in the video linked in the article, what were are seeing is good strikes to known weak areas. Chi does not come into it at any point … unless we force it in there. And if we do that we gain nothing but unnecessary complexity and unverified claims. So why bother?

People may have to trust their lives to this stuff. Far better to stick to demonstrable facts as opposed to unverified claims. The burden of proof lies with those making the claim … and if anyone could show that chi was real they will revolutionise science and our understanding of the universe. There are sure to be Nobel prizes to be won for anyone who can show a previously unidentified kind of force / energy.

To date no one has shown such a force to exist outside of human imagination, and therefore I put it in the same category as dragons, unicorns and magic. It is therefore my view that chi needs to be completely rejected and that our study and use of weak areas should be entirely based on the solid foundation of western medicine.

All the best,

Iain

Tau
Tau's picture

This thread has so far only really looked at knock outs. I would like to add that this is only one aspect of kyushu, although it's the one that's probably most commonly used and abused in demonstrations. No touch KOs.... there's a Hadouken in Niseishi, right ;-)

Interestingly, the more that I explore the meridien system and the more that my understanding of physiology improves the less I'm using kyushu terms. There days I reference the occiput or the carotid sinus much more than I do BL10 ot ST9. And I agree that many demonstrations of utilising Ki power are easily explained in physical terms. For example, activating Kidney 1 to improve a wrist lock. KI1 is underneath the foot. Would that be anything to do with changing angles and dropping bodyweight by using cat stance? Engaging TW11? Maybe you're crushing the median nerve? Unbalancing by energy draining by a strike to Spleen 10? The origin of the medial co-lateral ligament is certainly a week point. In honesty I probably say "spleen ten" much more often that "the origin of the MCL" and I don't want to simply describe "the knee" but a more specific "sweet spot."

All this typed, there remains some points that I can't explain. Why does massaging LI4 reduce feelings of nausea? I've achieved this myself on others and am aware of acupuncture working in the same way.

The only answer is that I continue to explore both sides of the debate. Maybe one day I'll decide to sit firmly in one garden. For the moment, this fence gives me a good view!

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Joshua Shrum wrote:
In case you would to read the whole article here it is:

http://www.karatebyjesse.com/exclusive-interview-evan-pantazi-the-pressure-point-picasso-pt-2/

I feel that this was a great way to describe the "energy" in regards to pressure points.

He is talking about no-touch knockouts and not “chi” specifically.

Having done a little more reading on Evan Pantazi (quoted above) it seems we are on similar wave lengths when it comes to chi, acupuncture points, meridians and the role of “chi based theories”. He does not see value in it either.

I can’t agree with him on the bodies’ magnetic fields – nor can I agree that no touch knockouts have any validity; even a non-combative one – but his sounds solid enough to me (my highlight):

“Now of course some Kyusho targets are underneath acupuncture point designated spots, but as the Traditional Chinese medicine hold that there are as many as 2,000 acupuncture points on the human body... they of course will overlay the Kyusho Targets, but that does not make them the valid targets …

“… So the main point of this article is to hopefully open your mind and potential by getting you to realize that there is no "Pressure Points" involved in the study of Kyusho.  They are anatomical structures (real physical structures, not imaginary or supposed points and lines) and they can be attacked to cause damage and alter physiological function …

… when thousands around the world are working it more successfully without the complexity and false paradigm of pressure points and TCM, then why use any of it.  Martial Arts is not by nature supposed to be complex (except in maybe demonstration as fancy impresses people more than practical), it is supposed to be effective and utterly simple.”

http://www.kyusho.com/no-point/

Totally agree. We should base our knowledge of weak areas on known structures and abandon the notion of chi and associated theories.  

All the best,

Iain

Joshua Shrum
Joshua Shrum's picture

To be honest I think that fence riding on this topic is allowed! lol I also think this brings up a good point. That article/research made by British Journal of Medicine found similar studies regarding specific "areas" associated with self healing. I'm a Sheriffs Deputy here in the United States, and part of their defensive tactics they teach include pressure points. They specifically define pressure points as vulnerable nerve strikes. A great example is the brachial plexus tie in. This location of nerve bundles rests ontop of the shoulder blade. That exact spot is also where Gall Bladder 21 rests. I wanted to point that the meridians DO NOT follow nerves, but every single pressure point rests on a nerve. (In case I was confusing when referring them to resting on nerves...)

But back to the brachial plexus tie in. We use those to strike down onto someone when coming up to an attacker from behind. I have used these multiple times in real life fights and they do work. Whether you want to say the nerves caused the damage or the meridians is up to you. But you do have to correlate the similarities between the two.

One other example of something I have used in the field. The Chinese call it your "third eye" which doesnt necessarily relate to a meridian rather than a spot for "energy" to be transfered. Most martial artists have heard it or seen something like it, it rests literally in the middle of your forehead. Its very interesting that you can try to push it with an arm, your fingers, or even the back of your hand and the opponent won't budge. But if you use the palm of your hand to push on it, you can move the head in any direction. Push on the temple or anywhere else and it won't budge. You can try this with a partner. I used this on a male opponent that had gotten high off bath salts. Nothing worked on this guy (there were 4 of us) EXCEPT the third eye. Why does it work? To be honest, I don't really know. 

These people that claim to be able to move "chi", or even worse do "no touch KO's" are a joke. I think they are the true group of people that give the name "pressure points" a bad reputation. Very unfortunate. Is chi real? Thats up to you to decide. We didn't know there was such a thing as red blood cells in our blood until 1674, only a couple hundred years ago. I am sure we will continue to learn about the human body as technology advances.

When I teach a seminar to students, they are able to remember and use a pressure point if I call it GB21, rather than the brachail plexus tie in. If I tried to use the second (adults included) they give a look of extreme confusion. then later when asked to recap the places we struck, they would side shoulder... But we all know there are many places to strike on the shoulder, neck, collar bone.

Closing points! I honestly think that both sides have to be observed and used. Chinese medicine has been around for a very long time, over 3,000 years. What I think we have to be careful of is assuming that one method is the ultimate catch all. Both Eastern and Western medicine has had some sketchy practices in the past when it comes to what they believe as "truth."

Good talk guys! As my father would tell me when I came home from class as a child (a Captian for the Sheriffs Department)...

"You may know that Kung Fu stuff, but unfortunately son... it won't stop my bullet. ;) "

Tau
Tau's picture

In class tonight we inadvertedly wandered over into peripheral kyushu points. These include points who's effects western medicine is so far unable to explain. How to travel bands (sit on Pericardium six if I recall correctly) work? How does massaging spleen six reduce period pain?

If there's a western medical explanation to all of the kyushu effects then that's fantastic and I have no problem with rencouncing that way of thinking. But so far there remains too much mystery.

Joshua Shrum
Joshua Shrum's picture

In class tonight we inadvertedly wandered over into peripheral kyushu points. These include points who's effects western medicine is so far unable to explain. How to travel bands (sit on Pericardium six if I recall correctly) work? How does massaging spleen six reduce period pain?

That is a good point. I am not sure how it can be explained honestly (Pericardium 6 is correct). I have never heard of Spleen 6, will have to ask around about it. I know mid-wives are taught that if a woman are having issues beginning labor they rub BG 21... Something to ponder...

Tau
Tau's picture

Joshua Shrum wrote:

I have never heard of Spleen 6, will have to ask around about it.

A couple of centimetres above the medial maleolus. Natural divot. Kick it for balance break. On a downed opponent, kneel on it for pain response (it's over a nerve.) Or ladies should gently massage it for for period pain relief.

As an aside I taught this point on seminar some years ago and, in explaining about the heeling properties of points, mentioned that SP6 gave relief from period pain. One the chaps I was teaching piped up "if I rub it at the right time of the month will I go deaf?" cheeky I didn't answer that one.

Joshua Shrum
Joshua Shrum's picture

laugh Haha, too funny. I wasn't very clear lol. I know Spleen 6, we use it for the same purposes. I had never heard of it being used for that kind of relief! Crazy...lol

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Joshua Shrum wrote:
One other example of something I have used in the field. The Chinese call it your "third eye" which doesnt necessarily relate to a meridian rather than a spot for "energy" to be transfered. Most martial artists have heard it or seen something like it, it rests literally in the middle of your forehead. Its very interesting that you can try to push it with an arm, your fingers, or even the back of your hand and the opponent won't budge. But if you use the palm of your hand to push on it, you can move the head in any direction. Push on the temple or anywhere else and it won't budge. You can try this with a partner. I used this on a male opponent that had gotten high off bath salts. Nothing worked on this guy (there were 4 of us) EXCEPT the third eye. Why does it work? To be honest, I don't really know.

Personally I would simply put this down to the fact that the palm of the hand is better at transferring force and the nature of the muscles of the neck (muscles on the front not as strong as those on the side). Also, the higher on the head you are the more leverage you get; but if you go any higher then you’re pushing on the curve of the head, not the flat of the forehead. I would agree that will work, but I don’t see anything mystical or unexplainable going on.

Joshua Shrum wrote:
These people that claim to be able to move "chi", or even worse do "no touch KO's" are a joke. I think they are the true group of people that give the name "pressure points" a bad reputation.

I’d totally agree.

Joshua Shrum wrote:
Is chi real? Thats up to you to decide. We didn't know there was such a thing as red blood cells in our blood until 1674, only a couple hundred years ago. I am sure we will continue to learn about the human body as technology advances … Chinese medicine has been around for a very long time, over 3,000 years.

In those 3000 years we’ve never shown chi to be real. So at this point I see no reason to believe in it. I don’t believe in the Yeti or the Loch Ness monster because there is no solid evidence for them either. But if such evidence came forward I would change my mind. How cool would that be! :-) I’d also love it if solid evidence for Chi came forward. But as we stand the evidence firmly leads me one way.

Joshua Shrum wrote:
When I teach a seminar to students, they are able to remember and use a pressure point if I call it GB21, rather than the brachail plexus tie in. If I tried to use the second (adults included) they give a look of extreme confusion.

That’s a good point. The medical terms are confusing to a lay person. I personally would not use acupuncture labels for the reasons discussed. I also generally don’t use the detailed medical terms. There is another simple option though. Rather than say “TW17” or “Seventh Cranial Nerve” or “Dokko” (Funakoshi’s name for the point in Kyohan) we could simply say “back of the jaw” or “here”. Ultimately “a rose by any other name would smell as sweet”, but keeping it simple is my preference.

Joshua Shrum wrote:
Good talk guys!

Agreed! Lots for people to ponder over in this thread and I’m really grateful to you for taking the time to share your thoughts and knowledge.

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Tau wrote:
These include points who's effects western medicine is so far unable to explain. How to travel bands (sit on Pericardium six if I recall correctly) work?

I travel lot and suffer badly from motion sickness. Always have. I’ve therefore tried those bands and they had no effect on me whatsoever.

Placebo is known to be very powerful. This BBC documentary is well worth a watch: http://goo.gl/rVEY8Q


The human mind is an incredible thing and I think the known Placebo effect is more likely to be at work than chi.

I would therefore suggest that western medicine can explain it, and that explanation is the placebo effect. It would also explain why the motion sickness bands do not work for me … I don’t believe they would work, so they didn’t.

Tau wrote:
If there's a western medical explanation to all of the kyushu effects then that's fantastic and I have no problem with renouncing that way of thinking. But so far there remains too much mystery.

I think there is, once you also factor in things like the power of suggestion and other physiological effects we may see in demonstrations and the “master” / student dynamic.

Everyone feels it when punched in the jaw, but some people are “insensitive” and “non-responders” to the more esoteric points. To me, this tells me that they are more likely to be “working” for psychological as opposed to physiological reasons. Stage hypnotists and unethical “faith healers” can get the exact same results (i.e. get people to collapse or “go under”) with no reference to chi.

If we run with Occam’s razor again, then the placebo effect and the power of suggestion are better explanations because they are known and well-studied phenomenon that don’t require the assumption of a “force” that has not been shown to actually exist.

I recall reading an article in a martial arts magazine where the author was writing about a “study” they had done on chi based knockouts. They had wired the subject up to various bit of medical kit and then “knocked them out”. They reported no change in heartrate, blood pressure, brain activity, etc. Their conclusion was that there must, therefore, be some mechanism as yet unknown to science that was resulting in the person losing consciousness. My conclusion was that the person was simply not knocked out! They were either knowingly faking it, or the power of suggestion from a person in authority was getting them to subconsciously play along. That’s the most obvious answer and takes us back to, “you hear hoof beats think horses, not unicorns”.

The world is a complex place and there’s much we don’t know … but there is a lot we do know. We don’t know that chi is real. We do know a lot about placebo, the power of suggestion and the dynamics of relationships where one person is viewed as having special authority. So, for me, I am strongly inclined to look for the simplest explanation that accords with what we know, and that does not violate what we know.

If chi were real it would revolutionise the way we view the world and ourselves. It would be a HUGE discovery. So far, whenever people have looked to prove it, they have not been successful. If that changed, then my view would change. For the moment though, I see no good reason to believe in chi and plenty of reasons not to.

All the best,

Iain

Dave. H
Dave. H's picture

Joshua Shrum wrote:
To be honest I think that fence riding on this topic is allowed! lol I also think this brings up a good point.

I disagree with this statement completely!

It is not ok to sit on the fence when the actual evidence only supports one arguement.

I know this wont be a popular idea in an age when we have to 'show respect' for even the most absurd of ideas so as not to offend, but the weight of any arguement should be limited to the amount of actual evidence it brings to the table.

Anecdote and wishfull thinking do not make an arguement!  Saying it does opens the flood gates for allowing the unprovable and the unbelievable to enter arguements where they may actually undermine principles of evidence and evidence based thinking through the acceptance of the absurd.

I do not wish to repeat the arguements that Iain has put forward, because not only would it be repetative, but he has made them better than I could.

In this case we only need to take a look at the origins of both arguements and we will have a clear winner.  Traditional eastern medicine followed the same lines of enquiry as the 'humours' of European medieval medicine, and those practices are based on external observations only, combined with a lot of filling in the blanks with guess work based on the limited understanding of the world of that time.

Western medicine is based on evidence based observation and study of what is happening, inside and outside of the body.  This is also why modern medicine continues to evolve as our means for examining, and our cumulative knowledge, on the subject matter increases constantly.  It is not based on looking at something, then filling in the blanks to match my theory of the world.  A huge leap was made when the disection of human corpses started happening, a practice that was taboo in the east for much longer than it was in the west.  Now we can look at living bodies and see the organs, systems, & processes in action.

The only way presure points, and the existance of chi/ki, could possibly be taken serious would be if their existance could be proven by understood scientific means, and that the evidence gathered by any controlled study could stand up to peer reviewed scrutiny.

Until then, there is no arguement.

Joshua Shrum
Joshua Shrum's picture

David H. wrote:
 I disagree with this statement completely! It is not ok to sit on the fence when the actual evidence only supports one arguement.

I feel that you are wrong in making that statement. I think you view someone that is sitting ont he fence over a topic as being on the "wrong side" of the argument. Instead, being on the fence simply means they are still exploring and understanding the topic given. Now if someone was to stay on the fence for the sake of avoiding an argument, or remaining there for a long time... then theres an issue!

Iain wrote:
 Agreed! Lots for people to ponder over in this thread and I’m really grateful to you for taking the time to share your thoughts and knowledge.

Thanks! I feel that so many martial artists are afraid to challenege beliefs, techniques, and concepts. As the world changes we have to be willing to look at what we believe is true, what we were taught, and we teach to see if it is still relevant. I see it all the time, a fantastic instructor is teaching a martial arts system that just holds no practicality in todays society.

This is one of those topics where I don't think either side would budge. I am thankful for the discussion guys!

Tau
Tau's picture

Joshua Shrum wrote:

I think you view someone that is sitting ont he fence over a topic as being on the "wrong side" of the argument. Instead, being on the fence simply means they are still exploring and understanding the topic given. Now if someone was to stay on the fence for the sake of avoiding an argument, or remaining there for a long time... then theres an issue!

Completely agree.

Further to Iain's post of course we're aware of placebo effect. Trust me I see it most days. It's amazing how patients limp in, have an x-ray and walk out! And of course many acts of "kyushu" are indeed psychological. I have no doubt of that. But I'm a critically-minded person. Hell, I've just started my first Masters degree module so if I wasn't before I soon will be. Yet I believe that I've experienced aspects of kyushu that even my critical mind can't dismiss or explain. I've also seen it work on people that weren't aware of the intended outcome. That's why I won't let it go yet.

Dave. H
Dave. H's picture

The placebo effect is an understood phenomena with explanation based on facts from multiple disciplines within science, whereas chi/ki and meridians are based on a theory from watching something from the outside with limited to no understanding of the science and anatomy. Based on that level of thinking, if i showed a car to person from medieval europe, and a person from Victorian Britain, one is likely to think there are tiny horses under the bonnet and the other a tiny steam engine. Both are wrong, but one is at least leaning in the right direction.

I suppose we are also to give equal intelectual weight on the subject of Quantum physics to both scientists who have studied quantum physics for many years, and alternative healers (and such like) who claim to know more about the subject without equipment more advanced than crystals, magnets and string, and who have never been subjected to the strict scientific practices that underpin actual science, backed up with strict peer scrutiny.  For more information on this suubject let me direct you to Ben Goldacre's book "Bad Science".

The point I am making is that ALL talk of ki/chi/meridians are the claim, NOT the evidence.  The burden of proof lies on the person or persons making the claim. All of the 'evidence' can be dismissed as conditioning of subjects, parlour tricks and/or explained by provable and repeatable scientific experiment.

I stand by my statement that sitting on the fence is not an acceptable position, because the weight of evidence falls wholey on one side, hence there is no arguement.  To sit on the fence in spite of all the debunking and evidence simply because there are a few elements that cannot be explained with certainty is something I find strange and disturbingly cultish. Science may not have all the answers, but at least it is looking.  The only thing worse than questions without answers are answers that cannot be questioned. 

Also, another common arguement on this subject, is that these methods would not have survived had they not held value.  However, a quick look at the history of east and west will throw up an obvious answer.  In the east a good student didn't ask questions and did as they were told, so ideas (good and bad alike) would be perpetuated and re-enforced generation after generation.  No doubt these ideas also added a layer of mystery to wow westerners with when the eastern fighting arts moved west.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Dave. H wrote:
The point I am making is that ALL talk of ki/chi/meridians are the claim, NOT the evidence.  The burden of proof lies on the person or persons making the claim.

All of the 'evidence' can be dismissed as conditioning of subjects, parlour tricks and/or explained by provable and repeatable scientific experiment.

Fully agree with that and it’s very much where I come from. If you are making a claim (chi exists, no touch knockouts work, etc.) then you need to provide evidence for that claim. Proper evidence.

Dave. H wrote:
I stand by my statement that sitting on the fence is not an acceptable position, because the weight of evidence falls wholey on one side, hence there is no arguement.  To sit on the fence in spite of all the debunking and evidence simply because there are a few elements that cannot be explained with certainty is something I find strange and disturbingly cultish.

I differ slightly here because I have no problem with given individuals holding beliefs that they can’t prove, but nevertheless find to be useful or of value, providing they accept that their belief is not a “fact” that others should accept as an objective fact.

I think everyone has some beliefs like that. The example given when I’ve had discussions like this before is asking a happily married man to “prove your wife loves you”. He can point to the fact she acts like she does, and says she does, but ultimately that internal feeling is unknown to all but her. She could be faking, but the husband acts as if his wife loves him even though he ultimately can’t prove it. He is just going with what he believes based on his own experiences.

So if people want to believe in chi then I’m OK with that, but they need to be OK with the fact there is no evidence to support their belief, there is no obligation on me to believe as they do without proof, they need to accept that my experience is that they are wrong, and that the objective evidence is firmly on my side. But I can agree to disagree if they want to hold that belief regardless.

Dave. H wrote:
Also, another common argument on this subject, is that these methods would not have survived had they not held value.

While I don’t hold to a belief in chi as a real force, there is plenty of evidence to show that mindfulness, meditative breathing and placebo can all have positive effects on mental and physical health. So if a person believes in chi, and as such engages in practises said to develop chi which will include a focused mind, controlled breathing and visualisations of positive health, they may well get results. So in that sense these practises do work.

The “chi mindset” can help them work too because it provides a framework for the practise. However, modern studies show that there is no evidence for chi, so the mechanisms as to why these practises work is false … even if the results are not. As already discussed, the fact that tai-chi is good for general health and well-being does not mean that chi exists because other mechanisms are at play. However, that does not take away from the fact that tai-chi can be good for general health and well-being.

Some may find that operating to a “chi based worldview” helps them get the results they want; so in that sense I have no issue with them holding that belief. Where I have an issue is when they present their subjective internal experience as being objective real world fact.

All the best,

Iain

Evan Pantazi
Evan Pantazi's picture

Thank you Mr.Abernathy for granting access to your forum, it is greatly appreciated as well as the civil discourse on this touchy subject that in past has been quite uncivil.

I have been working with Kyusho for over three decades and have affliates in over forty countries working with Kyusho.  In that time I have taken this Kyusho thing to task in scientific, medical and a large number experential settings and tests.  My thoughts, understanding and methods have all changed greatly over the years with these tests and constant research... some may call my view hypocritical but I see it as telling it like it is now, no matter what beliefs I held in the past.

As this thread is very long, I will refrain from a diatribe of thought and stand ready to help answer any questions that any may wish to ask.

As for the energies... (I use the word energy frequently in instructional application), I refer to kinetic energy and it's affects.  I am a licensed and practicing oriental bodywork therapist as well as starting my journey in Kyusho involving the theories... and after arduous medical and scientific testing have reached vastly different opinion and understanding (even in the therapuetical aspect).

My personal opinion is that Kyusho is definitely not TCM in theory or application, I prefer to work with God made paradigm as opposed to man made.

All that stated as a base, let me know if Imay be of further help.

Evan Pantazi

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Evan Pantazi wrote:
Thank you Mr.Abernathy for granting access to your forum, it is greatly appreciated as well as the civil discourse on this touchy subject that in past has been quite uncivil.

Thank you for posting and clarifying your viewpoint. It’s good of you to do that and your direct input is much appreciated.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
My personal opinion is that Kyusho is definitely not TCM in theory or application, I prefer to work with God made paradigm as opposed to man made.

Your stated position in the above post was what I had gleaned from your articles i.e. you have a take on weak points that is based on known anatomical structures as opposed to unverified meridians, chi flow, element based cycles, etc.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
In that time I have taken this Kyusho thing to task in scientific, medical and a large number experiential settings and tests.  My thoughts, understanding and methods have all changed greatly over the years with these tests and constant research... some may call my view hypocritical but I see it as telling it like it is now, no matter what beliefs I held in the past.

I agree with you and I don’t see that as hypocritical at all. We should all modify our viewpoint in the light of new information. To do otherwise endures stagnation and cult-like unquestioning behaviour. As Dave said, “Always better to have unanswered questions as opposed to unquestioned answers.”

To progress we need to question, and then accept the evidence that questioning brings forth.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
I refer to kinetic energy and it's effects.

Thank you for clarifying. No denying the effects or existence of kinetic energy :-)

Evan Pantazi wrote:
As this thread is very long, I will refrain from a diatribe of thought and stand ready to help answer any questions that any may wish to ask.

I think the study of weak points is often put in the category of “martial woo woo” when claims are made around chi, energy cycles (“fire burns wood” and all that) and even time of day strikes. However, there is no doubt that some places are better to hit than others due to known anatomical weaknesses. I therefore think that kyusho would greatly benefit from sticking to scientifically verifiable causes and effects. My question would therefore be in three parts:

1 – Do you agree that the study of kyusho is better done – from both a functional and credibility perspective – from the viewpoint of modern anatomy as opposed to the viewpoint of traditional Chinese medicine?

2 – If you do agree – and from what I’ve read it seems you do – was there any particular finding or observation during your extensive study of weak areas that was instrumental in convincing you move to an anatomical as opposed to chi-based view of weak areas?

3 – Would you like to see more and more kyusho people move to an anatomical viewpoint, and if so, what do you think will convince them to make the change?

Thanks once again for this. I welcome the opportunity to pick your brains directly as I think it will add lots of value to the thread for both participants and readers.

All the best,

Iain

Evan Pantazi
Evan Pantazi's picture

Sir,

It will be an honor as it is my mission to awaken a differnt approach for all in the Martial Arts/Sciences.

IA:  1 – Do you agree that the study of kyusho is better done – from both a functional and credibility perspective – from the viewpoint of modern anatomy as opposed to the viewpoint of traditional Chinese medicine?

1.  I have worked with both TCM and MWM (Modern Western Medical) paradigms and have gained far more working with real anatomical structure, function and physiology. Yes I have abandoned the "Pressure Point" model and prospered since making that switch to the real anatomical structure with the added benefit that the affects, reactions, future issues can all be measured and predicted (of course within certain percentage of accuracy as each human is different in many regards even though we appear the same).   

IA:  2 – If you do agree – and from what I’ve read it seems you do – was there any particular finding or observation during your extensive study of weak areas that was instrumental in convincing you move to an anatomical as opposed to chi-based view of weak areas?

2. In a word "experiences" sovery many from research to hands on, moved me toward the anatomical model, that and a shot of common sense with a loudly exclaimed "DUH".  We can not only do any and all of what the TCM school can, but we can far exceed them.  I firmly believe they are working with MWM but think and theorize it to be TCM... I closely scrutinized this aspect.  As example during our cadaver research, the governing Doctor in charge was surprised to see that the cadaver we were working with, had a nerve not in the same location as was "Typical", that in iteself was a huge eye opener that in turn led to greater research in this area.  But what changed it greatly for me during that study as I was allowed to touch, grab, manipulate certain structures to teach that Doctor someKyusho... at the exact time I grabbed the Radial Nerve of the Cadaver and explained the reaction a person would have (then demonstrated on a fellow onlooker) my entire concept changed. The doctor verified why that specific reaction would occur and that was the end of pressure points for me (but a slow transition for those that work with me so as not to overwhelm).

PS as a side note here, all the ancient scrolls andtexts relate Kyusho with anatomical charts, modern man has changed it to "Pressure Points".

IA:  3 – Would you like to see more and more kyusho people move to an anatomical viewpoint, and if so, what do you think will convince them to make the change?

3. Yes absolutely as more would listenand learn and all the arts would benefit... truth has a way of winning the day in the end.  Where we now have skeptics for Kyusho, it is turning as they fully understand that a liver shot as example, is real, not a metal thing hurting a wood thing as you eluded to earlier.  What is needed is plain talk, even spewing medical terms as I have on occasion is confusing and irrelevant in time of need.  I continue in part however for those interested in understanding to a higher degree (especially helpful when working with Doctors and Scientists too).  I also continue to talk of "Pressure Points" as landmarks also so that those from that school of thought also feel accepted as change needsto come from within, not from a preacher.  There must be desire and that AHA moment for each... and that will only come one person at a time and over time.

Here is a short (maybe long for some) speechI gave a private training group:

One more PS:  I fight some folks my own group often with this same issue, people love the myth and as it seemingly elevates or makes them seem more special.

Evan Pantazi

diadicic
diadicic's picture

Holy S@#%. Just watched two of the most well respected Martial Arts teachers that I have followed for the last 15 years or so mix their their knowledge together. Mind blown. Lot to think about now.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Hi Evan,

Thank you for the response.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
I have abandoned the "Pressure Point" model and prospered since making that switch to the real anatomical structure with the added benefit that the affects, reactions, future issues can all be measured and predicted (of course within certain percentage of accuracy as each human is different in many regards even though we appear the same).

Sounds good to me! As you say, “Throw away the acupuncture book and get an anatomy book”.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
The doctor verified why that specific reaction would occur and that was the end of pressure points for me

Thank you for sharing that. My experience has been that modern medicine can explain things far more authoritively and effectively. I have not studied weak areas to the depth you have, so it’s good to have my view backed up by someone who as looked at both sides of things in great depth and came away the firm conclusion that an anatomical view is the way to go. That’s a powerful statement that people would do well to heed.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
PS as a side note here, all the ancient scrolls and texts relate Kyusho with anatomical charts, modern man has changed it to "Pressure Points".

ABSOLUTELY! I had this discussion only a few weeks ago! The argument was made to me that if “pressure points” and chi-based-theories were not at the heart of striking areas in karate then how come we have all the old charts that show those points? I made the same point you just did. It is modern authors and martial artists that have layered “acupuncture terminology” on top of the charts as they originally appeared.  So yes, that’s exactly right!

The TCM view is of points is both untraditional and less effective. I’m with you that there is no good reason to use it.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
Where we now have skeptics for Kyusho, it is turning as they fully understand that a liver shot as example, is real, not a metal thing hurting a wood thing as you eluded to earlier.  What is needed is plain talk, even spewing medical terms as I have on occasion is confusing and irrelevant in time of need

Again, I’m totally with you! As I said earlier in this thread:

“The medical terms are confusing to a lay person. I personally would not use acupuncture labels for the reasons discussed. I also generally don’t use the detailed medical terms. There is another simple option though. Rather than say “TW17” or “Seventh Cranial Nerve” or “Dokko” (Funakoshi’s name for the point in Kyohan) we could simply say “back of the jaw” or “here”. Ultimately “a rose by any other name would smell as sweet”, but keeping it simple is my preference.”

Evan Pantazi wrote:
I fight some folks my own group often with this same issue, people love the myth and as it seemingly elevates or makes them seem more special.

There’s a reason superhero movies are so popular :-) There’s a part of all of us that wants to have that “special power” or “secret knowledge”. I can therefore understand why certain folks like the idea of using some “arcane knowledge” or “energy unknown to science” to “easily defeat attackers”. Hard work, blood and sweat does not have the same ready appeal to many; despite it being the only way to really develop usable skills.

Martial arts have loads of these myths: Zen Samurai, Bodhidharma creating kung-fu in the shaolin temple, “karate peasants” rebelling against samurai oppression, and on and on.

For me, the martial arts get so much deeper and more valuable when we clean away the myths and the nonsense. Hopefully, we can convince those who feel the need to hold on to these myths that a more effective, enjoyable and honest martial world awaits when they let go.

Thanks once again for sharing your thoughts and experiences.

All the best,

Iain

Evan Pantazi
Evan Pantazi's picture

Dear Iain and all,

Modern life has all been obfuscated by propaganda, agenda and by those seeking to control...the more we get back down to earth through personal experience and as you stated blood and sweat (add tears and physical dysfunction to that list).  It has become so prevalant that most people no longer resist and or research for themselves.

As example I was around when the main thrust turned to the "Pressure Point" paradigm and know who was the architect and why... but that human intervention was opposed to documented writings, hence personal investigation must be initiated.

We have investigated and attempted to measure all even up to that ever elusive Chi or "No Touch KO" with science.

In any event, thank you for the bandwidth and for being a beacon of self discovery over the spewing of the narcistic stuff slingers.

And as always I am available for further questions at any time from all.

Sincerley,

Evan Pantazi

Dave. H
Dave. H's picture

Evam Pantazi wrote:
I fight some folks my own group often with this same issue, people love the myth and as it seemingly elevates or makes them seem more special.

(Sorry, but i cant figure out the quote function properly)

This is a good point, and something I have come accross once or twice, some people want to be special more than they want to be correct.

I also train Jujitsu with Kevin O'Hagan, and we use a basic medical model to understand joint manipulation and anatomical weakness.   When i asked to learn more he recomended a book to me "anatomy and physiology for nurses".  Unlike books aimed at doctors, this is aimed at the average person, so it is not excessively complicated.

Marc
Marc's picture

Hi, I follow this thread with great interest. The anatomical view of kuysho makes sense to me as it is not only able to identify the most effective targets but also to explain why these targets work as intended - for example pressing a nerve onto a bone.

Now, how about the kyusho revival methods, like sitting the receipient up and slapping their neck to relieve them of the effects of the kyusho technique. I have seen Evan Pantazi use them in his videos, so I guess their useful.

How do these revival methods work? How do they relate to the anatomical structures that have been hit?

Thanks and all the best

Marc  

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Dave. H wrote:
(Sorry, but i cant figure out the quote function properly)

This explains how to do it: http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/how-quote

I've also "fixed" the post :-)

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Marc wrote:
How do these revival methods work? How do they relate to the anatomical structures that have been hit?

That’s a good point and is the “other side of the coin”.

For me, I would once again stick to what modern medicine advises. As instructors here in the UK we need valid first aid certificates. That typically means a course and test every few years. If someone in my dojo was to pass out / get knocked out then I should stick to what is recognised as good medical practice and what is in line with the training I have received.

If I were to try some “alternative revival” there are two main issues:

Firstly, and most importantly, I could be putting the person in my care at risk by not doing what should be done.

Secondly, having not done as I was taught to do in first aid training I am wilfully negligent and that could bring all kinds of legal problems.

If these “alternative methods” were the “go to” option to revive people, they would be what we should be taught in first aid training. Indeed, they would be what doctors, nurses, paramedics, etc. would be taught to do. That’s obviously not what happens and the reasons that does not happen is because the commonly taught medical methods have proved themselves to be best practise.

I would reject these “alternative revival” methods as being both potentially very dangerous and highly irresponsible. If someone is hurt or “out” then we need to look after them in the most effective way i.e. valid and up-to-date first aid procedures.

All the best,

Iain

Evan Pantazi
Evan Pantazi's picture

A good loaded question for sure... but one easily answered.

First we call them revivals as youdefinately feel revived after use, however they are more appropriately a restoration.

When you work with Kyusho on the neurological level (which is 90% of our work for specific reason), we cause an imbalance or overload on that system and in turn it closes down to "Self Restore".  If left alone say from a KO, given time the person we re-awaken... or you can shock the body elsewhere and that will awaken them.  You can kick them in the leg, slap their face, grab them by the chin or limb and just shake...they come to.  So yes the slap on the back of the neck can wake them, but that is not why we use it (By "WE" I mean people in my group Kyusho International), the answers in other groups are very vague if even present.

Sorry back on track; we use them so that the recipient feels better again and does not suffer from some side issues that may occur, headache, nausea, eyesight, etc.  (we also have additional first aid measures for these in case of very sensitive people or an overly ambitious KO where they may need extra care).

We do these as we know what we did and what possibilities can occur, we also have assesment processes and can boast that in over 30 years I still do not know of a single injury from Kyusho (and youcan not say that about most Martial Arts, from muscle pulls to over zealous joint work... and yes WE use realistic fighting, sparring, grappling, etc.).  

That said, if I came across a person that was downed and not by my Kyusho application (one reason the applier is the best to be the reviver as well), I would not apply a revival... yes that is wide open for legal issue andstupid to think or guess why they were down.  But we have many a paramedic, nurses and doctors that have used it... we even have one microsurgeon that uses it constantly in surgical procedure, yes in a hospital not a Dojo. I have many aquired stories over the years and each has taught me so much more about Kyusho, it's affects as well as better application.

One quick story:

Over ten years ago I was attending a large Uechi Ryu tournament (Big in Massachusetts), talking with Hanshi George Mattson as we were watching a Black Belt sparring elimination bout.  One contestant recieved a great shot up under the side of the jaw with a kick that isntantly dropped them unconscious.  I immediately turned to Hanshi and asked if I could go and help.  He said no due to legal issues and that we needed to wait for the medic... which we did for over 5 minutes.  The man had regained consciousness by then, but wasn't in a good way and still on the floor.  When the medic arrived he took a flashlight, looked in the mans eyes, then in his ears and then told him to go sit on the sideline.  So I asked Hanshi Mattson again if I could go to him, which he said yes.  I sat down next to him and when he looked at me his pupils were still a bit dialated and he was in another place not fully there.  I asked him if I could try something to help to which he agreed.  Since I saw the strike, how it landed, what it did to his body, I worked the revival (restorative measure) which brought him back to focus... a thank you, a handshake and that was that.

Now that story was just to say, there should be Kyusho methods introduced into MMA, Boxing, Etc. as we see peple always go down and the way they are handled, legally this must be so, but after the legalities at least the trainers should want their figthers back quicker with less side affect.

So here we have the beautiful example of the duality in the arts, the Yin and the Yang so to say.  I firmly believe all trainers must know both sides, but it is severley lacking these days.  Not in the old days as there was always both in the texts until modern times.

We must also remember that first aid people can only work with what they know and the second part is the medical societies around the world are so strong politically as well as financially, they constantly fight any alternative anything to their status quo.  Change is one person at a time.

I hope this answered the question adequately... maybe even raised more.

Evan Pantazi

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Hi Evan,

Thanks once again for answering. It is really good of you to do that. This thread is getting lots of hits and I appreciate your part in making the exploration of these topics so thorough.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
When you work with Kyusho on the neurological level (which is 90% of our work for specific reason), we cause an imbalance or overload on that system and in turn it closes down to "Self Restore".  If left alone say from a KO, given time the person we re-awaken... or you can shock the body elsewhere and that will awaken them.

To understand and accept this I’d need words like “imbalance” and “overload” clarified. What is imbalanced? How do we measure that balance / imbalance? What scientific instruments can measure the ratios?

When we say “overload”, then what is overloading what? What biological quality is now too high? And what anatomical processes shuts down consciousness as a result of this biological quality increasing?

Why does the body need to shut down to self-restore in this fashion? We are obviously in a very vulnerable state when unconscious and, as I understand it, we generally enter that state because something has gone very wrong i.e. impact, lack of oxygen, shock, etc. It’s never a good thing done for our benefit.

It seems you are suggesting that we “need” to be unconscious for the body to “rebalance”. What is the medical process here?

Additionally, by what biological process does this second shock result in an quicker restoration of what was imbalanced?

I appreciate this could be a huge topic and time constraints may prevent you from writing out a detailed answer to all points. I nevertheless hope you get the gist of where I am coming from. What is being suggested does not seem to be in line with what I do know about the way the body works. I am not a doctor, nor am I an expert on anatomy, but I am generally sceptical and like detailed information before adopting something.

Maybe there is a medical or scientific paper you could direct us toward?

Evan Pantazi wrote:
But we have many a paramedic, nurses and doctors that have used it... we even have one microsurgeon that uses it constantly in surgical procedure, yes in a hospital not a Dojo.

I find that worrying. When I put my health in the hands of a medical professional I want them operating to established medical procedure and defined good practise. Of course, what is good practise does change over time as a result of new studies, but I’d be very unhappy to hear of any medial professional “going their own way” like that. I’m sure that here in the UK that would result in the person being banned from practising medicine.

Any doctor who used what he’d learnt from martial arts in preference to established good practise would almost certainly be barred from practice; especially when we are talking about reviving an unconscious person.

As I understand it, here in the UK it is the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guidelines (NICE Guidelines) that determine good practise.

For resuscitation, can read the Resuscitation Council (UK) Guidelines (which are NICE accredited) via this link: https://www.resus.org.uk/resuscitation-guidelines/introduction/

As we can see, a massive about of work and scientific study has gone into determining these guidelines and they are regularly reviewed.  NICE guidelines can be legally enforceable and doctors can face suspension, being struck off and even legal prosecution if they fail to comply with them.

I therefore don’t find anecdotal evidence of medical professionals using unapproved procedures convincing; indeed it calls me to question their professional competence because they are acting unprofessionally, unethically and probably illegally.

If these methods were found to have value – via the scientific process – they would undoubtedly be included as good practise. Seeing as they are not, then I find myself compelled to go where the bulk of the evidence leads me.

As always, that is not an unequivocal rejection. Just a call for those who believe these methods to be a viable and useful alternative to approved procedures to follow the scientific prepossess and get those methods approved too. If that is done, then I’m on board. Until then I will stick to what has been shown to work scientifically (and hope that medical professionals will do the same).

Evan Pantazi wrote:
I firmly believe all trainers must know both sides, but it is severely lacking these days.  Not in the old days as there was always both in the texts until modern times.

It’s true that things like the Bubishi, Motobu’s writings, etc. also include information on how to fix what has been broken. I also agree that trainers need to know both sides. Indeed it is a requirement here in the UK. I would still prefer that to be modern first aid though because that is what has shown to be effective.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
We must also remember that first aid people can only work with what they know …

True. We are not doctors and should stick to the first aid we are taught. First aid trainers will also be teaching the first aid procedures they have been taught. Neither we, nor they, should think we know better than the high-level experts who formulated the approved first aid procedures though. As with the resuscitation guidelines above, they don’t come from nowhere but are instead the result of innumerable studies by innumerable experts who generate the consensus of what is good first aid.

Evan Pantazi wrote:
… and the second part is the medical societies around the world are so strong politically as well as financially, they constantly fight any alternative anything to their status quo.  Change is one person at a time.

I think I have a more optimistic and less conspiratorial view of the medical world. Especially the scientific wing. The scientific method has served us well and people are living longer, healthier lives with each generation. The “status quo” has pretty much been one of continual improvement. I can’t believe that, in spite of all the strides we have made, that there would be enough medical researchers to stall medical advancement and suppress information that could be of benefit. I’m sure that if a method could be shown to be useful that it would be adopted. From my perspective, that is how it has worked up until now.

All the best,

Iain

Pages