Proper Muscle Testing
As one observes many individuals performing manual muscle testing, it becomes obvious that much inaccurate information is obtained by inept testing methods. Manual muscle testing is a tool to evaluate function. As a tool, it is no better than the operator using it. Manual muscle testing can be likened to a stethoscope, which is a valuable tool of diagnosis but is no better than the individual interpreting the sounds perceived by the auscultation. In other words, a stethoscope is no better than what's between the earpieces.
Manual muscle testing must be done with a high level of anatomical and physiological knowledge. Lack of this technical expertise creates a severe handicap for those who are doing manual muscle testing in some of the lay movements that are promoting the procedure. There are even some laypersons who are using manual muscle testing to sell nutrition. It is important that each individual practicing applied kinesiology with expertise be constantly aware of opportunities to educate others about proficient manual muscle testing and how easy it is to obtain incorrect information.
One of the major causes of obtaining improper information from manual muscle testing is that the individual performing the test has a "mind-set" as to the outcome before the test is performed. An example of this is those who believe that white sugar causes everyone to have general muscle weakness as perceived on manual muscle testing. With this "mind-set," the examiner will find that all individuals weaken when chewing white sugar. This adverse effect on the general population is not true when accurate muscle testing is done. In fact, in some cases of certain types of endocrine balance, white sugar will temporarily improve muscle function in an individual. It is therefore important that the examiner not have preconceived ideas of what will take place when doing manual muscle testing. A good indication that the examiner is testing accurately is when the results of a test do not correlate with the expected findings. In other words, findings from the testing procedures are not consistently predictable. If a "mind-set" is used with manual muscle testing, it should be one that is desirous of finding out how the individual functions regardless of the test's outcome. When we are trying to prove something to someone, we are in an extremely vulnerable position to perform manual muscle testing inaccurately.
When we understand that our mental attitude can subtly change the parameters of the test, which include the timing of the test, we are in a much better position to perform manual muscle testing accurately. When one is knowledgeable about manual muscle testing, one can easily observe that subtle changes in the parameters of the testing procedure are subconsciously made by the examiner. These subtle changes can be in the timing of the test, allowing the patient to recruit synergistic muscles, changing the vector of force, and inadequately stabilizing the patient.
Probably the most insidious parameter change is in the timing of the test. It appears that manual muscle testing as performed in applied kinesiology is not testing for actual muscle strength, but rather is testing the nervous system's ability to adapt the muscle to the changing pressure of the examiner's test. A nervous system functioning optimally will immediately adapt the muscle activity to meet the demands of the test. There appears to be a delay in the recruitment of muscle motor units when the nervous system is not functioning adequately. This delay varies with the severity of the nervous system's impairment. A slight timing change in the examiner's application of testing pressure may change the results of the perceived muscle strength.
All who practice applied kinesiology should periodically evaluate their proficiency and muscle testing accuracy. Since the manual muscle test is one of the primary investigative tools in applied kinesiology, the results of the testing procedure depend upon its accuracy.