Home > All, Internet, Media, Medicine, News, Rant, Science, Skepticism > Reflexology Is A Science? So Says “The Citizen” (Auburn, NY)

Reflexology Is A Science? So Says “The Citizen” (Auburn, NY)

So I was browsing through “The Citizen,” the online local paper from Auburn, NY and stumbled upon an article about reflexology. You know, the “holistic,” alternative mode of treating basically any disease by rubbing your feet? Yeah, I was caught off guard, too.

According to this article, reflexology is a science. Oooh. Sounds scientific… until you get into what reflexology really is.

Reflexology (zone therapy) is an alternative medicine method involving the practice of massaging or applying pressure to parts of the feet, or sometimes the hands and ears, with the goal of encouraging a beneficial effect on other parts of the body, or to improve general health.

Improve general health? Wait a minute. That sounds pretty vague. I think I’ll need some more information before I buy into something like that.

The article says that…

It is a science because it is based on physiological and neurological studies…

Really? I’d be curious to read about those studies. Where will I find them? The New England Journal Of Medicine? The Journal Of The American Medical Association? A quick search on PubMed doesn’t reveal any studies concerning the efficacy of reflexology, or that even address the claims that reflexology makes. So much for that claim.

What I want to direct your attention to is the following statement from this article

…but the art of reflexology must not be confused with a basic foot massage. It is a pressure technique which works on precise reflex points of the feet. This is based on the premise that reflex areas on the feet correspond with all body parts.


Put simply, this whole “science” of reflexology is based on a false premise. There are no “reflex points” on the feet which correspond to any other body parts. This is simply New Age, woo woo, nonsense.

Dr. Stephen Barrett, M.D. points on in an article on QuackWatch that…

The pathways postulated by reflexologists have not been anatomically demonstrated; and it is safe to assume that they do not exist. Similar rationales are used employed by iridologists (who imagine that eye markings represent disease throughout the body) and auricular acupuncturists who “map” body organs on the ear (a homunculus in the fetal position). The methodology is similar in both of these; and some commentators consider pressing on “acupuncture points” on the ear or elsewhere to be forms of reflexology, but most people refer to that as acupressure (“acupuncture without needles). The Reflexology Research Web site displays charts for foot and hand reflexology. The fees I have seen advertised have ranged from $35 to $100 per session.

Strange. This supposed “science” has not been anatomically demonstrated. Not much of a science, if you ask me.

Now, the author of this article, Diane DelPiano gives a decent, although short, account of the history of reflexology. But, the article is altogether credulous of the claims made. She goes on to say that…

Reflexologist’s believe that granular accumulations of waste matter called uric acid crystals concentrate around reflex points. With training, you can feel these accumulations. The goal is to break these accumulations down to open the energy pathways and improve the blood flow to the reflex organs. It is also intended to open blocked nerve pathways and helps to flush toxins out of the body.

The good ol’ “toxin” gimmick. Nobody wants toxins in their body. But, what toxins? You’ll never hear a reflexology, or any New Age, alternative medicine practitioner mention specific toxins. Just the general term. Even the term “uric acid crystals” is bunk. Here’s some information about uric acid from a Wikipedia article on the subject.

In humans and higher primates, uric acid is the final oxidation (breakdown) product of purine metabolism and is excreted in urine. In most other mammals, the enzyme uricase further oxidizes uric acid to allantoin.[2] The loss of uricase in higher primates parallels the similar loss of the ability to synthesize ascorbic acid.[3] Both uric acid and ascorbic acid are strong reducing agents (electron donors) and potent antioxidants. In humans, over half the antioxidant capacity of blood plasma comes from uric acid.

Don’t alternative medicine practitioners go on and on about how important antioxidants are? This is simply an example of stupid. Or FAIL, if that’s your favorite pejorative term. Not only is uric acid not a toxin, but it’s also necessary for the human body.

The stupid!! It hurts!!

There are no toxins in your feet, or anywhere else in your body. The kidneys, the liver… they’re purpose is to remove those things automatically. And how much more natural can you get than that?

I found an interesting quote from a blogger on the Fighting Spurious Complementary & Alternative Medicine (SCAM) blog that speaks well to the “detox” myth.

Detoxification is a common feature of alternative medicine, but I have yet to find anyone who can name the toxins that need to be removed from the body or explain how each treatment will remove these toxins.

If toxins accumulated in the body as is now suggested by practitioners of “natural medicine” then the human race would have died out centuries ago. There were no detox diets for the knights of the middle ages.

Before this post gets to be too long, I’ll just finish with addressing the final part of this article which deals with the “benefits” of reflexology.

Further benefits of reflexology include: relaxation and stress reduction, improved circulation and oxygenation, improved lymphatic flow and stimulation of the immune system. Additionally, by stimulating the immune system, reflexology helps the body take up more nutrients and helps to revitalize and energize the body.

While these seem to be evidence of an effective modality, a close look reveals something quite different. It’s relaxing. It “improves” circulation and oxygenation, “improved” lymphatic flow, and it “stimulates the immune system.” These claims are so vague and general that you couldn’t even begin to test them. What does “improved lymphatic flow” even mean, in a medical sense? How specifically does it “stimulate” the immune system? Does it inject foreign bodies for it to attack, similar to how immunizations work?

No, there is no mechanism. It’s just New Age, magical energy nonsense. The reason for such vague and non-specific claims is, as I said before, to avoid lawsuits for false medical claims. Reflexology is nothing more than a massage.

But don’t take my word for it. The next time you see your podiatrist, ask him about “energy flow,” “toxins” and “reflex points.” I bet you’ll get a little chuckle before he tells you that alternative medicine is dangerous to your health, simply for the fact that it doesn’t actually do anything.

If you’ve got something seriously wrong with you, and you go see a “naturopath,” or an alternative medicine practitioner before you see a real doctor, you could end up seriously injured, or dead. Just take a look at WhatsTheHarm.net. You can read all about people who have suffered (or died) at the hands of those practicing “alternative medicine.”

It’s not just a “different kind of medicine.” It’s wrong.

Again, here is the link to the article in question.

  1. Thursday July 23, 2009 at 9:21 AM

    I can’t believe you missed the studies on PubMed. Slow down a little. they are there. And some really interesting ones. There are fMRI’s, doppler sonograms, EEG’s and EKG studies. There are a lot o0f controlled studies as well. But I guess you aren’t really interested in facts that would contradict your opinion.

    You are dealing with some pretty old material here. Uric acid is as an explanation is out of fashion. So I agree with you on that. I object to many of these statements. But there are logically, rational explanations based in the nervous system.

    Reflexology is not a phenomena rather it is addressing a long forgotten neurological rich area. The bottom of the feet for instance helps us stay upright with coordination of the vestibular apparatus and the brain. Repeated patterns exist throughout the body for many reasons including locomotion and survival.

    Why do skeptics attempt to dismiss reflexology by calling it nothing better than massage? That is opinion and not factually accurate. The only studies that confirm this have been run by skeptics. Funny thing.

    BTW The public knows better.

    Hope this helps.

    • Thursday July 23, 2009 at 9:52 AM

      Plain and simple. The pathways postulated by reflexologists have not been anatomically demonstrated. They don’t exist. Now, it’s nice to cite studies from alternative medicine journals that, when it all boils down, relate correlation with causation. A logical fallacy. Not scientific.

      Take this study, which I’m sure you’re referring to.

      “Somatotopical relationships between cortical activity and reflex areas in reflexology: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study.”

      At first glance, it seems credible. They mention scientific sounding terminology. They even used an fMRI machine! Sweet! It must be credible.

      Yet, if you read the abstract carefully, it says…

      A statistical analysis showed that reflexological stimulation of the foot reflex areas corresponding to the eye, shoulder, and small intestine activated not only the somatosensory areas corresponding to the foot, but also the somatosensory areas corresponding to the eye, shoulder, and small intestine or neighboring body parts.

      The fMRI played absolutely no role in this “study” whatsoever. A “statistical analysis” method was used. Meaning, someone wrote down whenever the patient thought he felt something. The fMRI would actually be able to produce any type of pathways that were visible. I’m assuming that because nothing was mentioned about there being actual, physical pathways, that the use of the fMRI machine was used to make the study seem more credible. I mean, they even used it in the title of the study, right?

      Not only this, but it mentions that the corresponding areas were “activated,” OR NEIGHBORING BODY PARTS. What this basically means is, they took every single little signal they got – even if it was noise in the data – and marked it down as a “hit.” This is not the mark of good science.

      If nothing else, these studies indicate that the same “benefits” that come from reflexology are the same as with a basic massage. Unless you can cite a study that proves otherwise, this is the only “evidence” I can find.

      This is no different than when acupuncturists claim, when a study indicates acupuncture has the same effects as a placebo, then that must mean acupuncture works. Grasping at straws.

      As for your last point, that “the public knows better,” you’re not correct. The public doesn’t have a solid grasp on the scientific method. It’s because of this lack of understanding that people get sucked into alternative modalities such as reflexology. Alternative medicine proponents will cite a “study” such as the one I’ve just mentioned and the public will take it at face value.

      You’re playing on people’s ignorance.

    • DarkLordJim
      Saturday February 27, 2010 at 2:05 AM

      All of this coming from a scammer who backs up his claims on Junk Science

      Waay to go Kev………When will the new BMW Z4 come in??????after uve scammed everyone LOL

      • Saturday February 27, 2010 at 10:36 AM

        So you can slander me and not use your real name. That is cowardly. And it isn’t substitute for real factual arguments. You are bluffing just like GodKilzYou. You have nothing.

        • DarkLordJim
          Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 10:52 AM

          Whoa nice comeback dick…….There is a good reason why I dont use my real name but if you dare..count me in

          Its interesting how you (Kevin) claim I have nothing yet the alleged “facts” you provide are a whole lot of nothing. You and your buddies who dabble in junk science, conspiracy theories, paranoia and drug-inspired BS claim that anyone who questions your ridiculous notions throw nothing but ad hominems at you yet you guys do just exactly that when presented with evidence, just like what you’ve been doing on this page.You claim that theres a whole conspiracy of skeptics who are trying to shut you up yet when some people question your “facts”, you silence them yourselves

          Just proves that you have a sense of intellectual dishonesty, just like your friends in the Junk Science community

          And the fact that you have responded to my post months after being offline heres proves you have no other life

  2. Nathan
    Wednesday August 5, 2009 at 11:41 PM

    This was a well written post. I agree with you as I have been looking for evidence to support my mother-in-law’s obsession with Refloxology and can not find a creditable source to support her claims. It all seams to be based on personal “testimonials” and not on scientific results or the scientific method.

    • Thursday August 6, 2009 at 3:00 PM


      Thanks for the comment.

      It’s important to point out that you won’t find support for these ideas in any credible medical journals. Reflexology demonstrates no benefit above a basic foot massage, or placebo. Any citations of “studies” come from “Alternative Medicine” journals, or, as you said, personal testimonials from Complimentary And Alternative Medicine (sCAM) proponents.

      The bottom line is that reflexology has no scientific basis for its claims. It’s as simple as that.

  3. Thursday August 6, 2009 at 5:31 PM

    You are bluffing right? You don’t really know a thing about fMRI? Right?

    You are using your intuition instead of facts. Right?

    And you believe there is a world wide conspiracy to doctor reflexology research. Right?

    I will pursue this with vigor unless you stop bluffing and tell the truth.

    Kevin Kunz

    • Thursday August 6, 2009 at 6:07 PM

      Actually, Mr. Kunz, if you’re referring to the common mode of using fMRI referred to as BOLD (Blood-oxygen-level dependent) measurements, I’m somewhat familiar with it.

      Considering that the claims of reflexology involve direct connections in the body from the feet to other organs, we can conclude that an fMRI study would not be a proper test for these claims. And here’s why I think this is a reasonable conclusion.

      Nowhere in the history of anatomy has there every been demonstrated these physical connections, physical or otherwise, between the feet and other organs. An fMRI study is, in most cases, used to demonstrate the blood oxygen levels in these affected areas. This study presupposes the existence of these natural, or supernatural, pathways connecting the organs.

      Because fMRI machines have a very high signal-to-noise ratio, even positive results are meaningless in the face of a lack of support for anatomical connections originating in the feet.

      I believe that it is because of this high signal-to-noise ratio that fMRI was chosen in this test. It would be easy to mark down the results as positive – especially with the “statistical methods” terminology they mentioned in the abstract.

      And I don’t believe there is a “world-wide conspiracy” to doctor reflexology test results. There are just instances of bad science out there. One test is not going to displace or undermine the consensus of the entire scientific community.

      I am pleased to accommodate any pursuance with vigor, seeing as how you assume you have absolute truth. I’m still waiting for you to demonstrate that there are actual physical links between our feet and every organ in our bodies. Until that can be established, there is no point studying these still un-demonstrated connections.

      If that were the case, I’d simply go for a walk when I felt ill.

      • Saturday February 27, 2010 at 10:40 AM

        You are still bluffing. You read an abstract not the full study and extrapolated all this. Amusing. BTW I don’t have the absolute truth, Far from it. But I am not pretending to be God unlike some of us.

        • DarkLordJim
          Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 10:54 AM

          Notice how he loves using the phrase “You are still bluffing” everytime you present him with factual scientific studies????then he claims that we do not have scientific evidence????how amusing……….people in his field love to throw ad hominems cause that what they do best when facts are presented to them

          • Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 11:08 AM

            He went on and on about me bluffing. But, as soon as I agreed to his terms, he fell silent. All I want is a study in a reputable (non-alternative medicine) journal demonstrating the efficacy of Reflexology. Instead of drawing attention to my character and my personal traits, just cite a study.

            The whole thing is a ruse to keep the focus off of the issue. If he can continually focus on the person instead of the arguments, he’ll never have to prove his case…

  4. Rick
    Sunday November 1, 2009 at 8:45 PM

    This seems like a waste of space. What do you care what anyone claims about reflexology or anything else? Talk to someone that has benefited when nothing else worked. Isn’t that what matters? If you want to serve go to Afghanistan. That is certainly more important than this petty drivel!

    • Sunday November 1, 2009 at 9:11 PM

      And I suppose you’ve just caused us to have to rewrite all of the medical literature because of your anecdote? Seriously, what can be more important than truth? If people are being lied to and being conned out of their money in hopes of being cured through magic… how is that not a valuable service to show how incorrect these “therapies” really are.

      If you want to serve go to Afghanistan.

      By your logic, we should let thieves run free because murderers are much worse of a threat, right? We can’t deal with more than one problem at a time… is that what you’re trying to say? You’re arguing with your emotions… that’s probably how you’ve convinced yourself that this nonsense works.

      • Saturday February 27, 2010 at 10:45 AM

        You are playing God again. You assume that all studies that don’t agree with your world view are false. You can’t know that unless of course you are God. You use metaphors that are emotionally charged Yet you are purely logical and devoid of emotion. Very amusing.

        • Saturday February 27, 2010 at 11:19 AM

          The problem is that none of these “studies” can be found in reputable journals. It’s always an alternative medicine journal, chaired by people who practice alternative medicine. Their peer-review process is not very rigorous.

          Thanks for the ad hominems, though. I appreciate it.

  5. Saturday February 27, 2010 at 12:08 PM

    So Medline only takes CAM articles that are not peer reviewed. Again you are bluffing you don’t know what journals are being used and you aren’t familiar at all with their peer review process.

    Logically how can you know this? Have you reviewed all the journals involved. Or you just have this opinion and just know this is true? Your opinion or does this have a factual basis.

    Are you really going to maintain this falsehood? It is easily derailed. Are you going to call me on it? Because it would be easy to demonstrate it is indeed a falsehood. I would be careful. Your all knowing attitude might take a hit.

    • Saturday February 27, 2010 at 12:25 PM

      Cite a study in either the New England Journal or JAMA which claims Reflexology works. Then let my “all knowing attitude” take a hit. Or is it just “Magic and Woo-woo Weekly” that has these studies?

  6. Saturday February 27, 2010 at 12:38 PM

    Clever but I am not buying it. I don’t have a New Journal of Medicine or a JAMA study. You said a peer reviewed medical journal. Those aren’t the only two. Is this your way to wiggle out of your challenge?

    • Saturday February 27, 2010 at 12:42 PM

      Cite a study from any journal that isn’t dedicated to promoting alternative medicine. If you want to move the goalpost and use special pleading, I’ll play along.

  7. Saturday February 27, 2010 at 12:50 PM

    That wasn’t moving the goal post and you know it. Stop bluffing you know you said,”Any citations of “studies” come from “Alternative Medicine” journals, or, as you said, personal testimonials from Complimentary And Alternative Medicine (sCAM) proponents.” You did not say NEJM or AMA. Look up our post and you will see what you said. It’s your blog.

    Stop trying to weasel out of your patently false statement. If I can cite a study from any journal that isn’t dedicated to promoting alternative medicine will you concede?

    • Saturday February 27, 2010 at 12:55 PM

      The study will have to demonstrate that the mechanism you propose makes Reflexology work is reproducible, and the effects can be conclusively shown to be from those mechanisms. I won’t accept vague correlation vs causation links.

      Instead of nit-picking over my words, just show that Reflexology works.

  8. Saturday February 27, 2010 at 1:00 PM

    I knew you would weasel. That is a further expansion of what you said which was: “Cite a study from any journal that isn’t dedicated to promoting alternative medicine.” Are you going back on your statement?

  9. Saturday February 27, 2010 at 1:07 PM

    And by the way quoting someone’s exact words is not nit-picking. You said it.You own it. I am ready to disprove your statement but first you have to agree that you will stop trying to wiggle out of this and man up.

    • Saturday February 27, 2010 at 1:14 PM

      You knew I would weasel? So you call requiring solid scientific research “weaseling?” I’m not sure I understand. You’re attempting to straw man my position, and trying to get me to accept substandard research as evidence. I’m not going to accept a study as proof before I even get a chance to see it.

      If you’re so afraid of citing a study, just say so. Instead of trying to tear me down on a personal level, cite the damned study already. You don’t have anything to lose, do you? This seems like a lot of pretense when you supposedly have all the evidence.

      I mean, if it was so obvious that Reflexology worked, you’d just cite the study and be done with it. But, instead, you’re trying to attack my character and do your own form of “weaseling.”

  10. Kevin Kunz
    Saturday February 27, 2010 at 1:20 PM

    Nice try. But you aren’t standing by your original statement. You are trying to divert attention from that statement. Aren’t you?

    Sorry agree to owning that statement and then I will disprove it. Simple. Stop trying to divert attention.

  11. Saturday February 27, 2010 at 1:38 PM

    All studies citing the efficacy of Reflexology come from alternative medicine journals. Now let’s see what you’ve got…

  12. Saturday February 27, 2010 at 2:04 PM

    Again nice try, Let us go back to your original statement. “Cite a study from any journal that isn’t dedicated to promoting alternative medicine.” That is what you said and that is what I intend to disprove.

    If you want me to show the evidence that “All studies citing the efficacy of Reflexology come from alternative medicine journals.” is a false statement as well I will be happy to oblige.

    But first the statement you made earlier. Agreed?

  13. Monday March 1, 2010 at 11:57 AM

    What happened? You were all about proving me wrong. But as soon as I agreed to your stipulations, you never followed through with citing any studies from a journal which wasn’t promoting alternative medicine…

  14. DarkLordJim
    Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 11:17 AM

    TheSkepticalAtheist :
    He went on and on about me bluffing. But, as soon as I agreed to his terms, he fell silent. All I want is a study in a reputable (non-alternative medicine) journal demonstrating the efficacy of Reflexology. Instead of drawing attention to my character and my personal traits, just cite a study.
    The whole thing is a ruse to keep the focus off of the issue. If he can continually focus on the person instead of the arguments, he’ll never have to prove his case…

    Very well said……..Notice how he runs away from an argument when he is forced to present real facts….hahahahahahahahahaha embarassing from someone who writes books on the subject but when faced with a small question he runs off completely

    • Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 11:25 AM

      I think the problem is that my requirement is that the study he cites comes from a journal which doesn’t promote alternative medicine. There are no reputable scientific journals (those with a rigorous peer-review process) which publish positive studies in regard to Reflexology – because there aren’t any scientifically rigorous studies which demonstrate that Reflexology has any efficacy.

      I guess my point is that if the mechanism and efficacy of Reflexology can’t be shown to be compelling to a blogger on the internet, how does he thing the scientific community is going to be convinced?

      • DarkLordJim
        Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 11:51 AM

        Thats because even in their own little insane world(reflexologists), there is no general consensus on reflexology.Take for example the foot and hand charts…if you go on Google Image Search and type in reflexology charts as keywords, you will get over a few hundred alleged “charts” and guess what….after looking at a few of them you’ll notice that each of them have different “reflex points” for certain organs, e.g. in one chart the heart “reflex” is on the center of the sole and on another its on the side sole……….I mean Jesus these people self contradict themselves yet they expect us or the scientific community for that matter to take them seriously LOL…I think not

  15. Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 12:15 PM

    Reflexology and fMRI: Frontal lobe activation

    Hypothesis: applying reflexology stimulation to inner lateral corner of the left great toe to see if this would activate the part of the brain reflected by this reflex area, the right temporal lobe. Reflexology was applied to the specific area of 10 healthy subjects. The fMRI showed activation of brain: Temporal lobe (strongest) (Sensory pathways and/or memory, auditory or language functions); Cerebellum (Motor-sensory pathway); Right claustrum (secondary somatosensory cortex); Right anterior central gyrus (Tactile stimulation and movement of toe during work)

    Tang Annie M., Li Geng., Chan C.C., Wong K.K.K., Li R. and Edward Yang Brain Activation at Temporal Lobe Induced by Foot Reflexology: an fMRI Study, 11th Annual NeuroImage Meeting. 2005, 1445. (Publication No. :102229) http://www.humanbrainmapping.org

  16. Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 12:16 PM

    I forgot you don’t accept fMRI’s because they are rigged in someway.Oh I have been busy. sorry.

  17. Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 12:19 PM

    Forsch Komplementarmed 1999 Jun;6(3):129-34

    [Anderung der nierendurchblutung durch organassoziierte

    reflexzonentherapie am fuss gemessen mit farbkodierter


    [Article in Gr]

    Sudmeier I, Bodner G, Egger I, Mur E, Ulmer H, Herold M

    Universitatsklinik fur Innere Medizin, Innsbruck, Austria.

    [Medline record in process]

    Using colour Doppler sonography blood flow changes of the right kidney during foot reflexology were determined in a placebo-controlled, double blind, randomised study. 32 healthy young adults (17 women, 15 men) were randomly assigned to the verum or placebo group. The verum group received foot reflexology at zones corresponding to the right kidney, the placebo group was treated on other foot zones. Before, during and after foot reflexology the blood flow of three vessels of the right kidney was measured using colour Doppler sonography. Systolic peak velocity and end diastolic peak velocity were measured in cm/s, and the resistive index, a parameter of the vascular resistance, was calculated. The resistive index in the verum group showed a highly significant decrease (p </= 0.001) during and an increase (p = 0.001) after foot reflexology. There was no difference between men and women and no difference between smokers and non-smokers. Verum and placebo group significantly differed concerning alterations of the resistive index both between the measuring points before versus during foot reflexology (p = 0.002) and those during versus after foot reflexology (p = 0.031). The significant decrease of the resistive index during foot reflexology in the verum group indicates a decrease of flow resistance in renal vessels and an increase of renal blood flow. These findings support the hypothesis that organ-associated foot reflexology is effective in changing renal blood flow during therapy.

    PMID: 10460981, UI: 99392031

  18. Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 12:44 PM

    Got a lot more studies that are from scientific, peer reviewed journals. That was your criteria, right? Or are you changing the rules again? Ready to say Uncle?

  19. Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 12:45 PM

    Is DarkLord like a Disney character?

    • DarkLordJim
      Wednesday March 3, 2010 at 11:16 AM

      No its my screen name moron. Are you really one dense turd Kevin…….since im brushing off your overbloated false ego(which all you self-proclaimed idiots have),Face it Kev, you may be someone to your endless sheep a.k.a followers but in the real world youre nothing, which is why when someone puts a mirror in your face to prove that your a nobody you go bananas

      • Wednesday March 3, 2010 at 1:02 PM

        Come on, you aren’t going to stand behind your statement?

        Admit you were wrong about your statement, “.

      • Wednesday March 3, 2010 at 1:05 PM

        Sorry DarkLordJin. It was a cheap shot but I enjoyed it. It is a very macho name and don’t anyone ever take away from it.

        Bananas I love bananas!!!

        • DarkLordJim
          Wednesday March 3, 2010 at 11:14 PM

          “Come on, you aren’t going to stand behind your statement?”

          I have been standing by them since I first joined the thread….but unfortunately pussy you cannot give any logical arguments so you throw worthless ad hominem arguments at me….which btw im enjoying as this shows the whole world what a big douche you are

          FYI Kevin….Keep it coming while I laugh my ass off

          • Sunday March 7, 2010 at 2:19 PM

            When you get civil we can continue.

  20. Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 3:21 PM

    You’ve already tried these lines of argument elsewhere.

    Now, I already know what you’re going to say. I have to admit that Reflexology works because you managed to dig up 2 studies found on MedLine. You may call it “weaseling” or “bluffing,” but 2 studies which, combined, don’t study even 50 individuals is far from convincing. You’re going to have to do better than that.

    It seems that you’re data mining and cherry picking. I think what’s important to note is that study after study after study after study shows that Reflexology is ineffective above the level of placebo. I’ve even included some from alternative medicine journals to make it fair and balanced.

    So, you can call me a “weasel” or tell me that I’m “bluffing.” The bottom line is that your foundation for Reflexology is based upon 2 studies. I’ve produced twice as many that contradict those findings.

  21. Tuesday March 2, 2010 at 5:03 PM

    “All studies citing the efficacy of Reflexology come from alternative medicine journals. Now let’s see what you’ve got…” This is what you said which is wrong by your own admission. I will not be drawn away from your statement. You are wrong…you are wrong… you are wrong…

    Now admit that that statement is wrong and then we will deal with your other fabrications. Don’t weasel out of it.

    • DarkLordJim
      Wednesday March 3, 2010 at 11:17 PM

      Fabrications…………are you fuckin kiddin me.The author of the thread provided you with REAL studies showing Reflexology is bullshit yet you keep on with your idiotic statements…………weasel boy

      Oh and btw…the fact that you claim its a fabrication makes you a bigger moron……Probably theres an Illuminati conspiracy with their alien allies to prevent reflexology from being taught so we have to go to doctors hahahahahahahahahahahaha

      • Sunday March 7, 2010 at 2:21 PM

        See this would actually bother me if I cared about your opinion.

        • DarkLordJim
          Monday March 8, 2010 at 12:57 PM

          Of course it wont since you make all your dough from this bullshit…………..without people gullible enough to buy into your theories and Iphone Apps you wouldnt be going to your nearest BMW dealership to take home the Z4 lol

          But when confronted by skeptics who question the blind faith your kind promotes, you cannot present ACTUAL FACTS other than the same old rubbish

          • Monday March 8, 2010 at 2:13 PM

            You are going to give me a BMW. How kind of you.

  22. Wednesday March 3, 2010 at 10:38 AM

    I don’t know why you’re so focused on what I say… the literature is what’s important here. If you’d worry more about presenting an effective case for Reflexology, instead of continuing this ruse of bickering over my choice of words, we might make some more progress.

    No matter what I say, there’s still no case to be made for Reflexology. I understand you rake in the dough by duping people into believing this nonsense, and you’re just trying to protect your investment, but at least understand that there are people who know better. And trying to convince them through shoddy science is only making your case look worse.

    2 studies which don’t even encompass a total of 50 people is not a valid basis to reach a conclusion. 50 people wouldn’t even be enough to fill the placebo arm of a reliable study.

    And, of course, there’s the whole demonstration of anatomical connections between the feet and every organ… never been demonstrated, and we already have human anatomy mapped out, which means there are none.

    • Sunday March 7, 2010 at 2:16 PM

      You said that there were no studies in reputable journals outside of CAM journals.. Are you backtracking? Are you saying you didn’t say it? Are you saying that Medline does not have peer reviewed reputable journals?

      Admit you were wrong and I will take on your arguments. I did not produce those two studies to prove reflexology has validity. I produce them to demonstrate you are wrong about your statement.

      I know you are trying to draw me off into accusations and my defending myself from your opinions disguised as facts but I am not taking the bait. Be a man and admit when you are wrong and I will take on your other opinions.

  23. Sunday March 7, 2010 at 2:25 PM

    You have shown that you are willing to hurl insults like your friend DarkLordJimbo. Insults are opinions not facts. The fact is that you made a false statement. Opinions such as insults made by people with a seemingly limited vocabulary are not facts. And slander is also opinion and actionable.

    • DarkLordJim
      Monday March 8, 2010 at 1:08 PM

      “You have shown that you are willing to hurl insults like your friend DarkLordJimbo. ”

      LOL……….Friend????? I barely even know the guy who owns this thread but then again……..given the cuckoo tendencies that you people have………im not surprised a bit

      Yeah Kevin hes my friend…..we belong to the Anti-Reflexology Special Brainwashing Division of the Evil Satanic Illuminati where we brainwash people by injecting Satan Juice into evil processed foods and non-organic vegetables so no one would believe in Reflexology since were trying to cover it up so that the hospitals and pharmaceutical companies (run by us, of course!!!) would make a lot of money selling medicines plus the medicines contain evil brainwashing chemicals so we can brainwash them to worship us and if Reflexology is around, people would stop buying medicines LMFAO

  24. Monday March 8, 2010 at 2:12 PM

    You lost me with this rant.

  25. Monday March 8, 2010 at 2:31 PM

    It is obvious that this isn’t going anywhere. The moderator of this blog won’t admit he was wrong. And I am not going to take on any further arguments until he does. And Lord whatever he is is just making no sense. So I am going to give you some quotes to ponder before I leave.

    Dogs bark at what they don’t understand.

    People are down on what they aren’t up on.

    Nobody likes change but a wet baby.

    All truth passes through three phases. First it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third it is accepted as self evident. Arthur Schopenhauer


  26. Monday March 8, 2010 at 11:58 PM

    In my overarching point, I am not wrong. Reflexology is not an effective modality for treating anything. But, instead of acknowledging that, Mr. Kunz is focused on what I said about where studies can be found.

    This point is irrelevant when considering what this debate is about. Reflexology doesn’t work. And what difference does it make that I was wrong about the location of 2 studies you cited? They don’t show that Reflexology works… you’ve only shown that crappy studies can be found most anywhere.

    It’s apparent that red herrings are Mr. Kunz’s specialty.

    • DarkLordJim
      Tuesday March 9, 2010 at 10:15 AM

      Kevin is both good in Red Herrings and Occam’s Razors when debating ;)

  27. DarkLordJim
    Tuesday March 9, 2010 at 10:14 AM

    Kevin Kunz :
    When you get civil we can continue.

    And i wont stop unless u come up with ACTUAL FACTS and REAL STUDIES rather than flood the blog with incoherent babble

  28. Friday March 12, 2010 at 12:52 PM

    See you can’t be civil.

    • DarkLordJim
      Friday March 19, 2010 at 11:56 AM

      And you don’t have a life outside the internet……………..which is sadly becoming the home of deluded morons who buy into the theories of people like you who are usually elitist with such unwarranted self-importance and false ego

  29. Friday March 12, 2010 at 1:06 PM

    Kunz will never admit to the fact that Reflexology doesn’t work. What he does is focus on irrelevant details which have no bearing on the topic at hand.

    His first comment on this blog cited no studies at all. Vague references to medical equipment was all we got. But, when it came to actually addressing the issue, the conversation deviated to you (DarkLord) and me “bluffing.” Nowhere does he actually show us where we are wrong. And this is the problem.

    This whole discussion has been nothing but a red herring on Kunz’s part. He did cite 2 studies, 1 of which wasn’t even an actual study but a presentation. And yet, no matter what studies I show to the contrary, I’m “bluffing.”

    The bottom line is, regardless of who is “bluffing,” or whatever other personal attacks are thrown around, Reflexology DOES NOTHING. It’s magical thinking that has absolutely no data to back up its claims.

    Kunz, you can tell me I’m “bluffing,” but until you show actual evidence of the efficacy of Reflexology, I’m going to regard it as what it is… pseudoscience and magical thinking based on ancient misunderstandings of how the body actually works.

  30. Friday March 12, 2010 at 1:46 PM

    You are wrong because you made the statement,”All studies citing the efficacy of Reflexology come from alternative medicine journals.” So you are wrong. Admit that these two studies show that you were wrong and I will present more studies also from legitimate journals as well as present how reflexology works in the nervous system.

    Stop trying to draw me into an argument without admitting to being wrong. I am not falling for it.

    • DarkLordJim
      Friday March 19, 2010 at 12:17 PM

      You have been using that line with people who question your ridiculous theories…but you have never come up with legitimate studies………………or the “evidence” to back it up…all you are doing here is trying to reinforce your false ego and tough-guy attitude…..which proves that you FAIL at life miserably

  31. Friday March 19, 2010 at 1:23 PM

    Okay I will bite what is my ridiculous theory? Because I only have one. Pressure to the feet causes a change in the autonomic nervous system. True or false? Reflexology works within the nervous system and every function and structure is explainable using conventional terms.

    Thanks for asking. My life is great and we have many studies from Medline. Do you want me to start listing them since you seem to lazy to look them up yourself?

    And as far as failing miserably we have 14 books on reflexology in 19 languages. Sorry that one doesn’t get a twitch.

    But you still didn’t admit you are wrong. There are studies on Medline. I am being kind allowing you to advance without owning up.

    • DarkLordJim
      Saturday March 20, 2010 at 12:29 AM

      Medline posts such studies for the sake of academic freedom…..which is slowly dumbing down the populace and turning legitimate science into a hodgepudge of mud with “sciences” like Reflexology, Qigong and all other tinfoil hat methods of healing………….

      And in your last message….you did NOT explain 1) How does pressure in the feet cause a change in the autonomic nervous system 2) How does applying pressure to diffferent areas of the feet have a profound effect in each organ and 3) how does the autonomic nervous system flush the “toxins” and “heal” each organ

      There are more books on Angel Therapy, Faith Healing, Auric Healing and other magical tinfoil hat bullshit that have far better circulation and have been translated into far more languages but that doesnt PROVE that any of them are any more factual and legitimate than the stuff you peddle

      But you still did not provide any LEGITIMATE PROOF and you still fail at that miserably……..the only reason why you’re in business is because of the continued and gradual dumbing down of mankind

  32. Saturday March 20, 2010 at 8:50 AM

    Okay so you are saying that academic freedom is dumbing down the populace, Intersting> The aternative would be no academic freedom and research run from a central bureau with the likes of you who have “hunches” and what is truth.

    And therefore Medline which is a database containing peer reviewed journals done to NIH standards (the highest in the world) is corrupted, Because it has research on reflexology whch you do not agree with it is no longer valid. So your opinion or call it intuition should be more valued than the academics from various branches of the medical sciences. Interesting.

    Let me jump ahead and address your guilt by association. I did not bring up my accomplishments to prove anything other than your tactics of name calling didn;t effect me. I don’t care about your opinion of me. It is strictly opinion and matters nought. I also like the fact you are trying the trick of guilt by association.

    Pressure to the feet does cause a change in the ANS each and every time it is applied. That is the nature of a sensory demand. The body has a interpreted the nature of this demand. Is it a threat or is it benign? It requires the coordination of fuel- glucose and oxygen in order to make a proper response. Therefore the internal organs must coordinate their activity with the action of the muscle and nerves in order to ensure survival. There is a generaized adaptive response and (something a lot of people miss) a localized adaptive response.

    Applying pressure to the feet causes a shift globally in the ANS because it effects allosasis or the active ongoing attempt to mainatain balance or homeostasis in the system. Allostatic load or the adaptive load on the system shifts to respond to the new demands. It feeds forward a different set of commands requiring less energy. These adaptive measures depend on resources the body has. As we know they are finite.

    Too much adaptive demand and the body experiences “wear and tear”. The allostatic load is simply too high. But by interrupting the demand with a new demand. The allostatic load shifts to a lower operatng tempo. Lower operating tempo is feedforward to the internal organs and muscles. That leads to less wear and tear. If you can input enough information (pressure) and the body has the resources to begin the process of self repair.

    Often times the unexpected happens which is truly fascinating part of what I do. A person comes in with problem A and problem B gets resolved. Why because if the body has enough resources it goes about the process of self repair. At times I don’t even know problem B exists and yet the problem gets resolved.

    As far as toxins and the removal of waste matter it is fairly simple when a system is under stress such as fight or flight priorities are shifted. Heart, lungs and large muscle groups are given priority and it is shifted away from activities such as waste removal. The lymphatic system as an example shrinks under stress. Because the lymphatic system has partial responsibility for removing toxins and waste things tend to back up. Relax and the tone or tension level causes a resumption of these tasks.

    It is well know that stress causes a situation which compromises the immune system. Rising levels of cortisol have been shown to have a detrimental effect to the immune system.

    The feet help set the tension level for the body. This is part of locomotion. This is in fact because the feet are rich in proprioceptors. Proprioceptors as we all know are tuned to the stretch of muscles, angulation of joints and deep pressure to the bottom of the feet.

    So there is your logical rational argument for why reflexology works. So pick holes in my argument. I welcome you to do this. But please don’t continue with emotional, hysterical rants. I am not interest in your opinion, hunches and intuition. Because if you go on with this you have failed to keep your emotions in check. I win!!!

    • Sunday March 21, 2010 at 10:08 AM

      I’m sorry Kevin, but even if someone were to lash out and use nothing but ad hominems against you, you don’t “win” by default. Your argument still has to be proven true.

      This sounds like an argumentation tactic taken by Creationists. They seem to think that the only thing they need to do is discredit evolution, and then suddenly Creationism is immediately true. Unfortunately, even if evolution were discredited, there’s still no case for Creation.

      In this same way, just because someone throws an insult or fails to keep their emotions in check, it doesn’t make Reflexology true by virtue of that… So, no, you wouldn’t just “win” like that.

      As for your description, it’s clearly a placebo effect. You even stated…

      Often times the unexpected happens which is truly fascinating part of what I do. A person comes in with problem A and problem B gets resolved.

      I don’t think anyone goes to a real doctor for a problem, using scientifically valid modalities, and finds that some other problem they had was suddenly fixed by their triple-bypass surgery. Like, wow, after my heart surgery, I suddenly don’t have back pain anymore!

      No, this is evidence that what you’re doing is simply a placebo, and these things get better on their own anyway.

      Reflexology was originally developed by Fitzgerald in the early 1900’s, he called it “Zone Therapy,” based upon the new age “energy” idea that there is some magical force running through our bodies. It allegedly focuses on the feet.

      What seems to be happening here is that because you can’t make a case for this magical energy, you’re attempting to use scientific-sounding words to create a new mechanism for how it might work. It’s like saying that pixie dust isn’t real, but quantum mechanics serves the same purpose.

      It sounds like your argument here is that because the feet are sensitive to pressure, therefore you can have an effect on internal organs. The only things I could find about ANS and reflexology were written by you, or were found on Reflexology websites.

    • DarkLordJim
      Monday March 22, 2010 at 5:47 AM

      Ok………………I could see your point but the author of this thread has debunked that…….

      But here are my inquiries which I hope you can explain as to the gaps in Reflexology

      1.Why when I looked up online for Reflexology Maps, different maps provide different locations of specific “reflex points” (e.g. Heart Reflex, Lung Reflex, etc.)The maps you peddle on your website and IPhone apps are different from the rest of the maps online…………If reflexology is an established science then why there is no general consensus on the location of the reflex points on tghe soles of the human feet????Can you explain this???And how can I tell a valid reflex map from a non-valid one???Kindly explain

      2.The basic premise of Reflexology is that there is “energy” that is centered on the feet and Reflexology aims at “removing energy imbalances” from the feet to restore overall health.Has this “energy” been anatomically demonstrated or scientifically proven and measured?????If so provide studies that has proven the existence of these energy fields??

      Hope you can answer these too…………Cant wait to hear from you

      • Monday March 22, 2010 at 7:48 AM

        I’d also throw in another point that Reflexologists never address. There is no evolutionary benefit to this idea of pressure points on the feet corresponding to the organs. How could something like this have evolved if the entire system would require previous knowledge of how the system works in order for it to evolve??

        All of the healing and “toxin” cleansing systems in our body function without our conscious effort. Reflexology requires conscious effort to “work.”

        There is no plausible explanation for this, and in fact, I would say that it’s ridiculous to claim that this would have any evolutionary benefit.

        It is more evidence that modern Reflexology is simply a form of apologetics for the magical form it originated as.

  33. Kevin Kunz
    Monday March 22, 2010 at 8:22 AM

    You know the more I read your stuff the more I realize you are trying to bluff your way through again. If you understood how the nervous system worked you would not say I am using scientfoc sounding terms. You would know those are scientific terms.

    And you don’t real understand the placebo effect you can’t say everything us a placebo effect. That is ridiculous. How do you have a placebo effect with a fMRI? And why do you think they have control groups?

    I presented you a credible rational and logically explanation for Reflexology and like our first declaration you try to bluff your way out. Now tell me where the flaws in my argument are and don’t try to distract me.

    I am tempted to dive into the other questions posed but I am patient and will wait until you poke holes in my argument with facts and not opinions. Or concede that it is a plausible theory.

    • DarkLordJim
      Wednesday March 24, 2010 at 12:46 AM

      Again………………using red herrings would not help your cause as this would just prove that you do not stand firm in your beliefs and you do not have various sources other than the same stuff you continuously parrot on this thread

      The FMRI studies are good…………that could be a step forward to prove reflexology in scientific terms but that study also refers to my first question since the study (which I looked up) states that by applying pressure to the “kidney reflex”, it stimulates efficient renal blood flow……but here’s the thing…if different reflex maps show different locations of the “kidney reflex” on the soles of the foot..then how am I supposed to support that study if there is inconsistencies on the location of that reflex point which could destroy the credibility of the study

      I am not distracting you but rather coming up with simple questions on how the system works………being over-defensive and throwing in your rage and discontent here does nothing but taint your reputation and your “science” Kevin……..If you are confident enough it works…why not answer a simple damn question instead of giving me the roundarounds??

  34. Wednesday March 24, 2010 at 9:34 AM

    That’s rich you guys accusing me of red herrings. You both are constantly diverting attention. Like when you state there was no research on reflexology in anything but CAM journals. Your attempts were amazing.

    I stand firm in my belief that reflexology works within the nervous system and that pressure to the feet causes a change in the ANS. Beyond that my beliefs are irrelevant. It is not my opinion or your opinion that matters. It is the facts drawn up by research. sink or swim.

    Now you are right on the kidney study. Because reflexology charts differ in nature where was the effect elicited from. But that doesn’t destroy the credibility of the research study. I think more it speaks to what I have been pushing for a long time. We need to know who did the reflexology. That would tell us the type of chart used. (I am actually surprised at how many positive responses reflexology has since the type of reflexology is not standardized.)

    Here is how charts breakdown. There are reiterative charts like ours. There are energy based charts like acupuncture and acupressure, There are empirical charts based on personal experience. And there are charts done that are just artwork done for visual appeal.

    My guess would be that since this is an Austrian study it probably is a reiterative chart. Now Germans tend to use more pressure than Americans so the areas will differ slightly but not by much. We speculate this has something to do with the pain receptors but that is another story.

    I will grant you a vaild point but would dispute that it destroys the credibility of the study. However nothing the pedigree of the reflexology being done is very important.

    Now here is an interesting point you brought up I have been thinking about. fMRI are just dandy for tells you what is activated in the brain such as the cerebellum. But what about the internal organs. The way the nervous system works by referral (that by the way is why reflexology works).

    I was very curious about the fact that one fMRI study showed the area of the shoulder was shown to be activated in the brain. That means that they must be looking at the sensory-motor cortex. That opens a whole new channel for validating the reiterative principle. It doesn’t however clear up the problem of the internal organs since internal organs tend to work by referral and aren’t represented on the homungculus.

    Studies have been done have been done showing an influence on hormones and neurotransmitters which strongly implies this influence. But it is going to be tricky. I am not sure but I am wondering about thermography as we saw in Tokyo in 1990.

    I am sorry. I do bait you guys. I helps me to fire up me engines, Scotty. It also gives me a chance to test my arguments. The interesting thing in nature is that irritation creates pearls.

    Are you really interested in how reflexology works? It actually is quite interesting. And by the way I wouldn’t dream in going outside of science (you know real science) to explain the workings of reflexology. Just isn’t necessary.

    Now let me know if I have given you a less then straight answer. I would also be inerested in any ideas for fMRI’s and the internal organs. But I suspect the studies will have to be measuring function of the organs rather than than neuro imaging.

    • Wednesday March 24, 2010 at 9:45 AM

      There are energy based charts like acupuncture and acupressure, There are empirical charts based on personal experience.

      So you’re saying that these charts are based upon either magical thinking, or anecdotes. Neither of these are even slightly reliable. The plural of anecdote is not data.

      But, I think my biggest problem with the whole “fMRI studies” thing is the fact that you can make an fMRI study say whatever you want it to say. This article shows the serious downfalls of doing research with fMRI’s. You can get fMRI readings from a dead fish.

      It’s no wonder that people promoting Reflexology cling to fMRI studies. It’s so easy to get the results you want.

    • DarkLordJim666
      Thursday March 25, 2010 at 4:17 AM

      “Now you are right on the kidney study. Because reflexology charts differ in nature where was the effect elicited from. But that doesn’t destroy the credibility of the research study. I think more it speaks to what I have been pushing for a long time. We need to know who did the reflexology. That would tell us the type of chart used. (I am actually surprised at how many positive responses reflexology has since the type of reflexology is not standardized.)”

      Thats the problem right there……….we cannot determine the credibility of the study if we do not know the basic factors…such as the types of charts used, the methods and everything else but the studies show none of these details which is why the study has its faults…….

      Plus anecdotal evidence or simple testimonies dont qualify as evidence, especially in Reflexology since we have too many different types and that alone wouldnt tell us the difference between sham or placebo reflexology and “genuine”reflexology, if there is any

      • Thursday March 25, 2010 at 9:22 AM

        Well sometimes they provide this information. but it isn’t a standard practice and it should be. It is never to my knowledge been included in a full study.

        I think my interest is less about outcome studies and more about physiological studies as I think the real issue has to do with our feet and hands relationship to the body.

        While outcome studies are indeed important blinding a study is a real problem. “Sham reflexology” is very problematic. I think it is even more problematic when the operator does both sham and the real reflexology.

        I have problems with certain positive outcome studies because of what we consider a problem with methodology. It is easy to skewer results in either direction with humans involved.

        Taking the humans out and showing the underlying forces at work to me is cleaner. I use andecdodal stories not as evidence but see them as clues to potential areas of promise.

        An example would be a discussion of mothers with autistic kids who find it helps calm the kids. Or the nursing students who as amateurs work on an Alzheimers patient. They found he had distinct moments of clarity after being worked on.

        You guys need to think outside the skeptic’s box. The feet and hands have a profound effect on the body. That is because the feet and hands are instrumental in survival and locomtion. The amount of real time calculations that are necessary to make intelligent movements possible are phenomenal.

        The repeated patterns that reflexology and other methodology describe to me are a part of information sharing that are necessary for survival and have evolved over the eons.

        I think what we have ignored is the sensory-motor servo mechanisms called the feet and the hands. They do their jobs to the point of exhaustion.

        The feet and hands are sensory rich fields. They respond to pressure, stretch and movement because this is the language they “speak”. The idea is fascinating from the perspective of the opportunties that exist from harnessing this asset.

        The body has finite resources. What is the advantage of tight feet and hands? Does it really do us much good? If we are in a fight or flight situation the feet and hands need to be tight to meet the demands of survival. But what about afterwards? Our tight feet and hands eat up the valuable resources and for what?

        But if you free up these resources by interrupting this ongoing stress signal the body resets itself to a lower operating tempo. That is where the results come from.

        But do not forget that the stress response is very specific as well as a generalized response. Hans Selye, the famous stress researcher, went onto to study the mechanism on calcification in response to specfic injury. Very site specific mechanisms are at work in our bodies to respond to a variety of insults.

        I find it very interesting that there is such a thing as “movement intelligence”. If we had to think out and engineer each and every move we would not survive.

        Instead we have an intelligent system at work in the background. It is reacts to every demand thrown at us and fashioning each and every reponse in nano seconds. When it isn’t fending off stressors it is continuosly repairing itself.

        The stimulus is pressure. The response is a relaxation effect. If you can lower the stress load on the body the body very intelligentl starts the process of self repair. It is that simple or should I say that complex.

        I think testing reflexology reflexology is just fine. But what I find even more interesting is testing the relationship between the feet, hands, brain and body even more interesting.

  35. Wednesday March 24, 2010 at 10:09 AM

    That is not what I said. Nice try. Bluffing again. You only addressed two types of charts.

    Also how exactly can I manipulate fMRI studies? Worldwide conspiracy theory again? Sorry I missed the last meeting.

    This is a not a debate. It is a joke. You can’t believe that this suffices for an actual rational, logical thinking. I like DarkLordJin better. He asked a very credible question. You are just trying to take my words out of context to smear reflexology. Shame on you.

    You won’t admit when you are wrong. You cherrypick my responses. Let me talk to LordDarkJin. He is at least stimulating.

    • Wednesday March 24, 2010 at 10:15 AM

      So when I point out flaws in your arguments, I’m “cherry picking.” Ah, the moving the goalpost fallacy. Almost forgot about that one.

      And you don’t need to “manipulate” fMRI studies. The results are unreliable, and all you need to do is look for a “hit” and there you go, a positive study. It’s the same method that psychics take. They make enough predictions, something will inevitably come true, no matter how vague.

      With fMRI, you leave the machine on long enough, and rub enough feet, you’ll see something akin to a “result.” Then you just latch on to that.

      You are wrong. There’s no bluffing. Again, pointing out flaws in your arguments is not “cherry picking.”

  36. Wednesday March 24, 2010 at 10:20 AM

    Why didn’t you mention reiteration?

    • Wednesday March 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM

      Reiteration is nothing but a rehashing of the original charts by Fitzgerald in the early 1900’s. It’s obvious that it’s based on the ridiculous idea of the homunculus, or the “little man.” That there is somehow a representation of the entire body on one particular part of the anatomy. Ear Reflexologists do the same thing. Here’s a chart laying out all the body parts connected to the ear.

      It’s just as ridiculous as this going on with the feet.

  37. Wednesday March 24, 2010 at 11:06 AM

    So I take it you reject the homoncululi in the sensory/motor cortex and the cerebellum as ridiculous.

  38. Lee
    Monday July 16, 2012 at 7:16 AM

    I just happened upon this article written in 2009. I could not believe that I was wasting my time reading words written by a bona fide idiot!!!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Tell Me What You Think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: