| "The word 'tensegrity' is an
invention: a contraction of 'tensional integrity.' Tensegrity
describes a structural-relationship principle in which structural
shape is guaranteed by the finitely closed, comprehensively continuous,
tensional behaviors of the system and not by the discontinuous
and exclusively local compression member behaviors. Tensegrity
provides the ability to yield increasingly without ultimately
breaking or coming asunder."
- Buckminster Fuller
The spine has been the subject of endless study and debate. Back
pain is a universal complaint and scientists and clinicians have
probed, imaged, dissected, fused, discectomized, injected, bolted,
inserted rods, pummeled, cracked, stretched, twisted and exercised
- ad infinitum - in the elusive attempt to alleviate this age-old
affliction.
The advent of early imaging techniques, namely the X-ray, presented
the spine as a disembodied stack of bones, separated by essentially
invisible (to the X-ray) discs and other soft tissues. The apparent
misalignment of vertebrae and/or the collapse of the intervening
space, led to the conclusion that this “fragile” and
frequently imbalanced structure must be the source of the patient’s
symptoms.6 Indeed the spine is richly supplied with pain
and kinesthetic receptors of every description, and stimulation
of these pain receptors will reproduce the presenting complaint.
The ultimate medical intervention to relieve this condition has
been to ablate the offending pain nerve fibers.2 Nothing
like treating the cause!
A Unified Structural Model
Theories regarding the function of the musculoskeletal system
have borrowed piecemeal from mechanical engineering principles
which were originally developed to describe the characteristics
of man-made materials and structures. Columns, posts and lintels,
hinges, struts, suspension braces, guy wires, pulleys and levers
have variously been applied to living organisms with limited success
and even less consistency. Conventional engineering models apply
to one or several of the characteristics associated with organic
forms, but cannot be universally applied.
The need for a unified model applicable to living structures
has important clinical implications. The principles, which govern
the intrinsic nature of living tissue, should, in theory, form
the basis of restoration of function. The fact that there exist
so many divergent therapeutic models is a testament to the veritable
Babylon of structural concepts upon which they are based. The
various therapeutic systems each have some value within certain
applications, but appear to be limited in others. This fact would
support the conclusion that the structural model upon which they
are based, must, in some way be deficient.
The concept of Tensegrity or the Tensegrity Structural Model
(TSM), as a viable model to explain the complex properties of
living organisms was put forward by Stephen M. Levin, M.D.4
This model, which is essentially an icosohedral crystalline extension
of the carbon atom, appears to answer many of the seemingly impossible
functional characteristics of organic forms. It is inherently
stable and independent of gravitational forces and has properties
to allow for controlled movement and the transmission of forces
throughout the entire contiguous structure of the organism. This
model explains the tremendous forces required to support vertical
weight-bearing as well as the horizontal forces necessary to allow
for a giraffe to bend over for a drink of water and for a gymnast
to project her body over seemingly impossible distances and bend
into extreme contortions. Many of these postures and movements
would cause a column supported by guy wires to literally fly apart.3
The Tensegrity Structural Model has now been verified as the
underlying structure of all organic tissue.3 It explains many
of the observed phenomena related to body support, movement, response
to stress and trauma as well as the effects of various therapeutic
interventions. This theory has been verified by several studies
in recent years. According to Ingber, a key investigator who has
proven the existence of this structural model:
“The principles of tensegrity apply at essentially
every detectable size scale in the human body. At the macroscopic
level, the 206 bones that constitute our skeleton are pulled up
against the force of gravity and stabilized in a vertical form
by the pull of tensile muscles, tendons and ligaments. In other
words, in the complex tensegrity structure inside every one of
us, bones are the compression struts, and muscles, tendons and
ligaments [and all, interconnected internal fascial structures]
are the tension-bearing members.”
- Donald E. Ingber, from The Architecture
of Life,
Scientific American, January 1998.
Diagnostic and Therapeutic Horizons
The Tensegrity Structural Model explains
the instantaneous transmission of fascial strain forces,
which is the basis of the assessment procedures used in
Matrix Repatterning. This accounts for the peripheral or
secondary effects, which are noted in many cases of somatic
trauma. The neutral tensegrity structure has balanced tensional
forces and is stable and low-energy consuming at the molecular
level. (See Figure 1a.) The strained tensegrity structure
(Figure 1b.) is rigid due to pre-stressing along one or
more lines of force. This reduces the adaptability of the
involved tissues and creates abnormal lines of tension in
contiguous structures. Regions of hypertonicity and hypotonicity
are thus created. This structure is unstable and high-energy
consuming at the molecular level.
|

Figures 1a & 1b
(click picture to enlarge) |
This feature of tissue is not confined to articular or myofascial
structures. It permeates every layer of the body, including visceral
structures and bone itself. Visceral fascia and intraosseous (within
bone) lesions have been found to be common primary areas of involvement
by those using Matrix Repatterning.
One method of applying this phenomenon is through the use of
inhibition as described by Barral.1 He found that by
placing pressure on one area of suspected somatic involvement,
a secondary area of involvement would demonstrate a connection
to the primary area by alteration of its tone. Therapeutically,
this translates into the ability to trace back the source of a
condition, to its primary dysfunctional locus. The application
of this characteristic of the Tensegrity model provides for an
increased efficiency of diagnosis.
Therapeutically, the application of minimal force at the focal
point of restriction, as determined by the above method, will
rapidly and permanently restore the original form of the molecular
ultrastructure (as in Figure 1a). This molecular state is, being
a lower energy state, is the native condition of normal tissue.
The disturbed biomechanics created by the traumatically induced,
pre-stressed state, can be restored to the original, tonally balanced
condition, by providing an appropriate, directional and minimal
amount of energy (via recoil or sustained pressure, known as induction).
The rapid restoration of normal tone, including the release of
rigid, apparently fibrotic muscle and fascia, normalization of
articular biomechanics and improved flexibility and conformation
of bony tissue, is often surprising to the novice in this new
field. The fact that these experiences are common and routine
for the experienced Tensegrity therapist, bears out the validity
of this approach.
Spinal Dysfunction – Primary or Secondary?
As part of the interconnected fascial-crystalline icosohedral
matrix of the body, the spine would be subject to abnormal strain
patterns emanating from any one of a number of possible primary
sites. (See Figure 2)
It may be possible that the numerous segments
of the vertebral column have developed out of the need to
provide protection for the critically vital structures of
the central nervous system. Perhaps the myriad positional
possibilities provided by the complex intervertebral joint
motor-units are designed as a load-dissipating system to
reduce intrathecal pressure and shearing forces. The spine
may, in fact, be designed to give in response to strain.
The coupled motions, which incorporate rotation, lateral
flexion, flexion and extension – may provide an essential
role in diverting potentially damaging forces from exerting
a noxious influence on the vulnerable tissues of the spinal
cord. The inherent joint play provided at each segment may
allow for the dissipation of strain arising from extra-spinal
tissues.2 |
Figure 2
(click picuture to enlarge) |
The painful signals relayed to the conscious perception of the
individual may be an attempt to alert the sufferer of a potentially
dangerous range of motion, which would jeopardize the viability
of the organism (i.e. threatening his or her ability to ambulate,
feed, escape predators and reproduce). Perhaps the pain is simply
a useful symptom, which has nothing to do with the source of structural
dysfunction. The spine may be simply reacting to the overall structural
imbalances being expressed throughout the body and performing
its overriding function of protecting the delicate tissues housed
within it. The distortions of vertebral segments, seen on X-ray,
might be an expression of this protective response. I would suggest
that, in some cases, the source of apparent spinal dysfunction
is extra-spinal, i.e. arising from some other tissue, which is
exerting a fascial distortion via the tensegrity structure of
the body, and thus affecting the spinal motor unit.
Given this scenario, is it logical or advisable that the spine
should be subjected to the numerous therapeutic interventions
designed to force it to conform to some artificial concept of
normal range of motion or position? I believe it is worth reconsidering
the source of spinal pain and addressing the body as a whole.
Case Study
A 38-year-old female presented to our office with a complaint
of neck pain of over 10-year’s duration. She had a history
of numerous sports injuries – a self-confessed tomboy as
a youngster. She had received extensive and repeated chiropractic
care over the years as well as physical therapy – all to
no avail.
My examination revealed hypertonic paraspinal musculature in
the area of the cervical spine, especially on the left. C3 was
noticeably rotated to the left, translated to the left and exquisitely
tender to the touch. Left rotation and right lateral flexion of
the cervical spine were reduced. Tensegrity assessment revealed
four major primary foci. The left femur was compressed in the
long axis (I have found this to be a common sequel to a fall on
the knee.). The left femoral neck was compressed in the long axis,
which is the result of a common type of injury namely falling
sideways onto the hip. This usually also causes the ipsilateral
sacroiliac to become strained medially along the X-axis (‘inflare’).
The third lesion involved the fascia of the left kidney, which
was tense and tender and in relative ptosis (the dense, water-filled
viscera are common victims of impact-type trauma and are often
a missed part of the diagnosis of musculoskeletal dysfunction).
The fourth area of involvement was in the shoulder girdle, where
a previous lateral impact to the head of the humerus and the acromion
had resulted in a typical compression of these elements and a
medial translation of the scapula in relation to the posterior
thoracic wall (scapulothoracic articulation).
Treatment was directed to the above primary lesions over two
sessions. The apparent cervical strain completely resolved upon
re-examination. Range of motion was restored and the rigid hypertonicity
of the paraspinal musculature was normalized. The patient has
had no further complaints of neck pain in the four months since
treatment was rendered.
Summary
The above case is typical of the types of undiagnosed primary
areas of tension, which can alter spinal biomechanics. The spine
is a potential source of dysfunction, however, I would submit
that it is much less frequent than would be assumed from the amount
of therapy traditionally directed to this region.
The spine has been a central theme in chiropractic and in several
other major specialties within medicine. The fact that it is often
the site of pain, may be a case of guilt by association. If we
consider the recently revealed truth about the nature of organic
tissue, we must consider many other possibilities as the source
of spinal dysfunction and the related painful symptoms. It has
been the experience of the author and many of his students, that,
when therapy is directed appropriately to the source of the dysfunction,
spinal biomechanics are often instantly restored. Many practitioners,
using Matrix Repatterning®, have found upon re-examining the
spine, after therapy has been performed, a presumed ‘subluxation’
is no longer in evidence. Primary lesions of the spine do exist,
but, based on the new information about the underlying structure
of organic tissue, we should keep an open mind, and consider that
the primary source of spinal dysfunction may lie elsewhere.
“He who treats the site of pain is lost.”
-Karel Lewitt, M.D., Dr.Sc.
Professor, Rehabilitation Clinic
Second Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
References:
1. Barral JP: Visceral Manipulation: Eastland Press, St. Louis,
1990.
2. Gray G: Functional Kinetic Chain Rehabilitation; Overuse
and Inflammatory Conditions and Their Management: Sports Medicine
Update, 1993.
3. Ingber, DE: The Architecture of Life: Scientific American,
January 1998, pp. 48-57.
4. Levin SM: The icosohedron as the three-dimensional finite
element in biomechanical support. Proceedings of the Society of
General Systems Research on Mental Images, Values and Reality
Philadelphia, PA: Society of General Systems Research, St. Louis,
May 1986.
5. Roth, GB, D’Ambrogio, KJ: Positional Release Therapy:
Assessment & Treatment of Musculoskeletal Dysfunction: Mosby
– Harcourt-Brace, 1997.
6. Schultz, AB: Biomechanics of the Spine. In Nelson L (Ed):
Low Back Pain and Industrial and Social Disablement. London, American
Back Pain Association, 1983, pp. 20-25.
7. Wang N, Butler JP, Ingber DE: Mechanotransduction Across
the Cell Surface and Through the Cytoskeleton: Science, Vol. 260,
May 21, 1993.
Dr. George Roth, D.C., N.D. is a practitioner
with over 25 years experience in the field of energy medicine.
He has developed a number of leading-edge technologies to assist
individuals in the achievement of optimal wellness. He lectures
extensively to various groups and educational institutions and
is a published author.
For more information, or to make an appointment, please contact
Dr. George B. Roth,
The Matrix Wellness Centre,
33 Victoria Street, Aurora, Ontario, Canada, L4G 1R1
Phone: 905-726-8770
1-877-905-7684
Fax: 905 726-8575
Email: info@matrixrepatterning.com
Web site: www.MatrixRepatterning.com
Back to Articles &
Research Back to Top
|