We know that organs of the body can produce chemicals that are harmful to the organism, espcially if there is incoordination or DIS-EASE due to vertebral subluxation. Perhaps the endorphins “created” by the brain are an abnormal drug that the educated intelligence administers. The apparent symptomatic changes of some energy medicine procedures, including those techniques adopted by chiropractors that involve more than correcting vertebral subluxations alone, may be the result of educated brain-produced chemicals. If that is the case, then are they any different in approach than the injection of pharmaceuticals that would achieve the same objective?
On the other hand, if your thinking is correct, is it any different than the manipulations performed by chiropractors that change endorphins/chemicals to achieve an “educated” (if there be such) result?
I’m not sure I understand your Comment/question Dr. A. Are you asking whether there is any difference between a chiropractic “adjustment” to treat a medical condition and a energy medicine procedure to treat a medical condition? If that is your question, it’s a good one. If not, please clarify.
perhaps… but are you presupposing that correcting a subluxation can never create any symptomatic change or release of chemicals even if that wasn’t the original intent, and that those changes are always harmful if they do occur? Or am I misunderstanding something here?
Heavens no doc. Correcting VS often creates symptomatic changes. Imagine if DD got no symptom change? He would have said “pushing on a bone to cure deafness, what the heck was I thinking?”
The ii of the body often releases needed chemicals after an adjustment, 99.9% of the time without our even knowing it. In that case it is always good. But, the ED. I. also has the ability to create chemicals which may or may not be good (see reply to Dave M. above) and that is what happens in every therapeutic measure. If you inject insulin into your arm, that is an educated function. It may keep you alive but it is not the perfect quality and quanity that the ii would produce. If we use our Ed I to influence someone else’s EI to create chemicals, the liklihood of that being the result that the ii of that person’s body wants is practically nil! Thanks for the input.
The cells of Educated Body are to be considered as Innate Body so far as metabolism is concerned including endorphins “created” by the brain. It is supplied with mental impulses through nerves from INNATE BRAIN by the Subsource which is the Innate Intelligence of the body (source being Universal Intelligence).
All the cells of the body are Innate Body. Let’s not forget that… Otherwise we are way off course (just as these chiropractoids using energy medicine). I’m getting sick and tired of slipping our checking instead of checking our slipping. Let’s get back on track by turning on our auto-pilot (the green and blue books) hooked to our GPS (the 33 principles).
The classification of why all the cells of the body are Innate Body is according to function more than anatomically. ALL tissues must have metabolism, even voluntary ones. The tissues which have voluntary, also have involuntary functions, at the same time.
“Apparent symptoms changes” of some techniques using energy medicine is outside-in and is NOT chiropractic.
The approach would be quite the same (outside-in). The product would be what is different, being produced by the body. Those that have slipped latch on to the product to justify the approach. Syringe or not, it is still medicinal.
Good observation Dave. I guess the point I was trying to make is that everything produced by the body is not good, especially if that production comes through the educated brain. If it’s the bottom of the 9th, two outs, the Phillies have a 3-2 lead but the Giants have bases loaded, my body is producing adrenalin (hopefully, it will not result in a heart attack). Unless I am on the mound, my body does not need that adrenalin but my EI is causing its production.
Not sure that I get the entire concept here. What makes you think that endorphins being released is an educated response versus an innate response? Secondly, certain energy medicine seems to have an impact on other communicative systems of the body as well as using neuroreflexes to stimulate or inhibit educatedly this system. It may be argued by some of those practitioners that they are entering a sort of innate to innate connection, a “tapping in” if you will to the consciousness of the body/mind on the table. There are those in our profession that teach this sort of technique as a chiropractic technique when in reality it is either a therapeutic modality or, if there truly is some sort of innate to innate knowingness of what that innate needs, then perhaps it could be considered an ADIO approach albeit not a chiropractic approach.
Steve, I think that most definitely the educated brain can overcome, not the ii of the body, but innate expression. Some examples:
Eg. 1. When I jump in my pool, my ei overcomes my innate breathing mechanism. That’s good. EI adapts us to our external environment.
Eg. 2 When legitimately expressing the fight or flight mechanism. That’s good also.
Eg. 3. The Phillies/Giants game example. Not good. My wife thinks I’m going to have a stroke one of these days.
Eg. 4. Certain forms of meditation that can lower blood pressure, lower heart rate. May be good, may be bad. Definitely outside-in.
Eg. 5. Indian fakirs who can lie on a bed of nails and feel no pain, inhibiting a normal innate function. Not good.
Eg.. 6. Chiropractors who can walk on hot coals and not feel pain, overcoming an innate function. Just plain dumb.
Eg. 7 Hypnosis for eating problems. Acupuncture to stop smoking. Both may be good, but definitely outside -in. Like every therapeutic (oi) measure, they have harmful side effects. How great or whether worth the results is not our place to judge.
Not all the above, necessarilyinvolve endorphins but they all are examples of EI changing body chemistry and all are outside-in.
Second statement. re. tapping in/ii to ii communication: That concept is not consistent with our philosophy. Ii is limited by LofM. ( Prin#24) The confines of each human body is its greatest limitation. Our ii is only concerned with our body. Any activity out side of that involves educated. All technique involve the EI of the technician. To think that you can educatedly know what the needs of someone elses ii is even more arrogant than thinking you can educatedly know what your ii needs. Steve, I really appreciate one, your thinking, two, your desire to expand your understanding and most of all your humility in asking questions.
Joseph,
Do you think that when the educated brain overcomes the innate expression, the educated brain becomes an external invasive force that is overcoming an internal resistive force? If so, it will cause a vertebral subluxation.
No normal educated mind will try to oppose innate mind. When educated mind interferes with innate mind, it is abnormal. If it is abnormal, it is because of interference with transmission and the educated brain cells are slightly unsound…. consequently, instead of working in harmony with the innate intelligence of the body, it hinders the efficiency of body operation as any other unsound organ would do
Interesting question Claude. I think educated mind is not an EIF but the cause of the EIF,(the chemical it produces) kinda like the banana peel. In my Phillies/Giants example, hopefully the adrenalin rush will be neutralized by the ii of my body and not subluxate me. (If they get that last out, the chances are better). What about the jumping in the pool example? Isn’t that a legitimate function of ii, to adapt us to things external which ii (due to L ofM) cannot handle? I like your use of the word “oppose” because in that case educated is not really opposing ii. If the ii of the body knew it was going into water, it would stop breathing (because getting water in the lungs is not good!). So in that example ii is not really opposing ei. That’s why I like your word oppose. To add another twist: I had a nephew who, as a child, would hold his breath in a temper tantrum. His parents were worried until someone told them, that the worst case scenerio would be that the child would pass out and start breathing again. That would be trying to oppose innate mind. Good thoughts.
So what you are saying, Joseph, is that ei can (in your case of the phillies) “create” a situation where it will be so worked up that the adrenal glands will have excess adrenalin where ii will have to deal with according to your body’s LoM…
Through incoordination this excess adrenalin would be in a place where it should not be, it becomes an eif and might overcome the irf of your body, thus causing a subluxation. (poor Iris…)