Hello and thank you all for reading and commenting on my article. I would be delighted to give more details. First, understand that with a 700-word limit and limited referencing capabilities, it is difficult to describe "kinesiology" and its evidence as thoroughly as one would like. I am glad for the opportunity to explain salient points in more detail here.
Yes, as most of you are aware of, there are a number of modalities out there that are called "muscle testing." I have identified three distinct “types” (but there may be others). The first is the orthopedic type, as Sue and Gary have discussed. The second type of "muscle testing" is Applied Kinesiology – to which I believe Michael, Tim, Rachael, and Rosemary are referring. And there is a third type of manual muscle testing, which is commonly referred to as simply "kinesiology*.” For the time being, I will call this type “kinesiology-style manual muscle testing,” or kMMT. I have suggested that this third kind of muscle testing be called something else, like "Muscle Response Testing," or a similar, more appropriate term. Nevertheless, we are stuck with this term for the time being. So, agreed, the terms “muscle testing” and “kinesiology” are confusing, as the three types of muscle testing are very, very different. So, Sue, you are absolutely correct: It IS something completely different!
True, I am currently finishing my DPhil (PhD) through the University of Oxford's Department of Primary Care - in conjunction with Oxford's Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (CEBM). The topic of my dissertation is on the accuracy of the THIRD kind of muscle testing, and more specifically, its accuracy when used to test truth vs. lies. When investigating the prevalence of the use of kMMT, I found that there are literally hundreds of applications of kMMT, and that it is used by over 1 million people worldwide – this fact alone, makes EBM researchers’ ear prick up! (If you are interested in learning more about the uses of kMMT, click on some of the links I've included in this article.)
Now, what does kMMT test or measure? It is NOT strength or power (as in the first two types). So Gary, and Sue, a standard measure or baseline (such as those used in orthodox medicine) are not feasible. In kMMT, either a muscle stays locked or weakens – it is a dichotomous test. And what is it used for? In my research, I have found literally hundreds of applications of kMMT – for instance, to detect anything from muscle imbalances to chi imbalances to chakra imbalances... from organ dysfunction to abnormal stress responses. And the list goes on. I am simply reporting what kMMT is being used for out there in the real world – and I do so without judgment or prejudice. I am but the messenger. In the true nature of scientific investigation, I remain curious.
Okay, so one might wonder how does kMMT work? The truth is, at this point in time, we do not exactly know the mechanism. We do not know WHY the muscle weakens after someone speaks a lie (for example). However, personally, I am not concerned with the HOW or WHY it works, but rather IF it works (i.e. how useful it is). I chose this paradigm to test (truth vs. lies) because of the widespread prevalence of its use, and also because it offered a clear Index Test (necessary for studies of Diagnostic Test Accuracy) : Truth. It is easy to control when someone is telling the truth or lying – and we fundamentally know which is which.† Sue, Tim, Simon, and Rachael, I steered clear of testing for conditions with ambiguous Index Tests – such as allergies, nutritional status, Power Bands or magic energy bracelets. For example, there are very few Index Tests to determine and very little evidence to show who would truly benefit from a particular supplement or product. Also, exact definitions of terms and benefits might differ from field to field. This would be too confusing. For my Oxford DPhil, Michael, I had to design robust studies with stringent measures – which my supervisors and I believe we have accomplished. I was extremely fortunate to have my study designs reviewed by some of the world’s leading researchers in EBM – many of whom commented how well they were designed and who were impressed with the results. I am in the process of writing up my dissertation at the moment, and very soon will be submitting papers to peer-reviewed publications and conferences. If you would like to track on my progress, you can add me as a friend on Facebook (search for drannejensen) – you will learn my results there first. I also will be making my papers available on my website: www.drannejensen.com. But I can tell you this: kMMT used to distinguish truth from lies was consistently significantly more accurate than either chance or guessing. More later – watch this space!
Just a few more points to tidy up...
Michael, I am well familiar with the paper by Haas et al. Firstly, again, in this forum, it is difficult to include references full stop. Secondly, its full title, “Disentangling manual muscle testing and Applied Kinesiology: critique and reinterpretation of a literature review,” is enough to raise concerns about its usefulness as “evidence” – it is not a systematic review, just a commentary. And it is mainly concerned with Applied Kinesiology – which is off topic for me. Same goes for the papers suggested by Rosemary. But thank you for pointing these papers out. Rest assured that they will be included in the lit review of my DPhil dissertation.
Tim, Simon and Rosemary, true, the peer-reviewed evidence in support of Applied Kinesiology (AK) is weak. And the evidence for kMMT is weaker still. With more than 1 million people worldwide using kMMT and 40% of chiropractors using AK, the lack of robust evidence is of great concern. But then again, its widespread use indicates that the public is using it, and this should spur researchers on to rigorously test its usefulness. The lack of evidence does not mean they are not useful. It simply means, that there’s a lack of evidence. Studies like mine will hopefully serve to define the usefulness of kMMT, and reduce the chance of the public being misled by “shonksters.”
Dan, safety IS indeed a concern for policy makers and insurers – and more importantly, for patients! The public is becoming more and more aware, is taking more responsibility for their own wellbeing, and is demanding safer, less invasive procedures as a first port of call. To ignore safety shows disregard to the preferences of patients. Bottom line, people will choose what works for them, and THEY decide what’s working and what is not working. People are indeed using kMMT – let’s see what it is really useful for, shall we?
Ilijas, yes, the Ideomotor Effect, I am familiar with the concept, but not the term – thank you. For those reading this, the Ideomotor Effect “has to do with the influence that suggestion has on ... subconscious actions,” and is used to explain things like the Ouija Board and Facilitated Communication. I can see how you would be tempted to use this concept to explain kMMT – however, a direct correlation is not clear, and I am not sure it is applicable afterall. First of all, in kMMT whose “subconscious” is being impacted – the patient’s or the practitoner’s? Or both?? Secondly, in rigorously-designed studies, like mine, the Ideomotor Effect can be controlled for using blinding – which we did – and we still came up with consistently significant results. It’s interesting that you mention the Ideomotor Effect and pointed me to the Wikipedia page – because my first studies were based on a design used to test Facilitated Communication (FC) – which, by the way, failed to validate FC. To these study designs, I have added larger and more diverse samples, and further blinding and other controls – which might have contributed to our positive findings. So, Ilijas, thank you for your comments.
Thanks to everyone for their comments. Constructive critiques, like some of these, serve to further strengthen my arguments – by pointing out possible holes that my examiners might pinpoint. With me currently writing up, it’s been great to be able to hear and address your concerns. If you would like to directly comments to me directly, please use my email address: anne.jensen@wolfson.ox.ac.uk. Thank you all again.

* Not to be confused with the human movement field, also called “Kinesiology”
† We could all have a lengthy debate about “truths” and “beliefs,” which can lead into consciousness and other nebulous topics, but let’s save that for another forum.