Our comparison cycle
We took the Creative Cycle, D(3), for comparison (Fire produces Earth, Earth yields Metal, on Metal condenses Water, Water feeds Wood, and Wood feeds Fire). We chose the Creative Cycle on the grounds that in our experience attacking the same meridian or the same element twice, D(0), is often quoted as effective, almost as much as the destructive cycle, D(1), is. D(4) was rejected on the grounds some may see it as being of similar effectiveness as D(1) (the same cycle backwards). Further, on a version of the DSI logic (as we have reconstructed it), striking with the flow of qi consistently (or against it consistently) should lead to the Creative Cycle being MOST effective and the destructive cycle LEAST effective. This is an interesting prediction (whether the DSI subscribe to our reconstruction or not) to be contrasted with the general rule often held in the kyusho jitsu community: A good default sequence under any conditions is the Destructive Cycle. In this experiment, we pressed all points with the flow of qi and with the intent to hurt.
Principles to be controlled
There are other principles, which, for a first investigation, we simply
controlled rather than investigated per se. The other principles we ensured
that we did not use were:
1. The 24 hour (diurnal) cycle
2. The strange flows.
3. The use of tonification and sedation points.
4. The use of bo and yu (i.e. diagnostic and alarm) points.
5. The use of xicleft and horary points.
6. The use of connecting points.
7. The use of points that have an association with a particular element:
i.e. fire, earth, metal, water, and wood points.
8. Quadrant theory. All the points we use will be in the same general quadrant
of the body (upper torso, arm, neck, and head).
The Experiment
The main idea of the investigation was this: We tested a group of people
naive to TCM. One of our club members (call him tori), with some knowledge
of Kysusho-Jitsu but completely ignorant about TCM, pressed on points. He
provided a standard amount of pressure, as best as he could, attempting
to ignore uke's response so that the pressure he gave was independent of
the response. His ignorance of TCM meant that variations in the accuracy
and pressure of the technique were not systematically related to the predictions
of TCM (a very real hazard if anybody knowledgeable of TCM were to act as
tori). On a given uke, tori stimulated a 'set-up point', released it, and
immediately stimulated a 'target point'. The uke gave a pain rating to the
target point on a standardized scale. After this one target attack and pain
rating, a given uke was not tested again for 20+ minutes, to allow the activation
of the stimulated meridians to die down.
These sequences (of set-up followed by target points) differed along various
dimensions, or as we say in the trade, 'variables'. The most important variable
(call it sequence) was whether the sequence followed the Destructive Cycle
or the Creative Cycle. A 'destructive sequence' followed the destructive
cycle; a 'creative sequence' the Creative Cycle.
Another variable was the element of the target point, and there were five
values that this variable could take. For a first go at data collection,
we selected only one target point for each element. Thus, only the tendency
of one single (e.g. wood) point to set-up one single (earth) point was tested.
If the theory is very consistently true then the single point design should
still work. But because this design could not give full vindication of the
theory, it should be seen as an initial step in a more complete study.
METHOD
Participants
The ukes were people participating in karate classes at the University of
Sussex. Twenty eight people were tested on each element.
Design
As they practiced their basic punch, kick etc, Mike and tori walked round
testing each in turn. First of all a given target element was chosen. Uke
was tested twice: once on the destructive sequence and once on the creative
sequence, seperated by at least 20 minutes. Here some 'counterbalancing'
variables came in, the conditions of which each uke were randomly assigned
to: order(half the ukes were tested with the destructive sequence first,
half second); left/right (half the ukes were first tested on the right side
and then the left side; the other half of the ukes were tested first left
and then right). The creative and destructive sequences were applied on
different sides of the body to ensure that there was no residual sensitivity
(possible bruising etc) due to pressing the exactly the same spot twice.
Tori followed destructive and creative sequences in random order throughout
the session because his effectiveness in applying the technique might improve/deteriorate
throughout the session. The process continued in different sessions until
all five target elements had been tested.
Points used
Below is a table of the sequences:
| Sequence |
Destructive setup point |
Creative setup point |
Target point |
| 1 |
Fire |
Earth |
Metal |
| 2 |
Wood |
Fire |
Earth |
| 3 |
Water |
Wood |
Fire |
| 4 |
Earth |
Metal |
Water |
| 5 |
Metal |
Water |
Wood |
This list only contains 7 points: L2, LI10, St14, H2, K26, TW16, GB12
Note that each set-up point occured once in a creative sequence and once
in a destructive sequence. This is a useful design feature because the pain
rating to the target point may be partly determined by contrast to the pain
produced by the set-up point. It is thus important that there is no systematic
differences in pain produced by set-up points between the control and destructive
sequences, and this design feature ensured that.
Instructions to subjects
As I am teaching you, two of my colleagues will approach you in the session
a few times. They are interested in the use of pressure points in martial
arts, and they are testing some theories about how different points elicit
pain. If you don't want to participate that is fine, just say so to them
when they approach you. If you have any medical conditions you should not
participate. They will simply press one pressure point on you for about
a second and then a second point immediately afterwards, also for about
a second. You may not feel anything, or you may feel some more or less moderate
pain for a second or so. You will be asked to give a pain rating to the
second point; just ignore the first point. If you feel no pain, then give
'0' for your pain rating. Now I want you to imagine some time you banged
your shin or ankle, or stubbed a toe. Imagine a time when it was really
very painful, so painful you wanted to sit down. If you can't remember a
specific episode, that's fine, just imagine what it would be like. That
amount of pain we call '10'. I will give you 10 seconds now to choose and
clearly fix in your mind how much pain a '10' feels like .... that's good.
If when you are pressed you feel that amount of pain, then say '10'. If
half that amount of pain then say '5'; if twice that amount say '20', and
so on.
Later in the session you will be approached again for another sequence of
points, and the procedure will be repeated. The results are of great scientific
and practical interest, so I hope you will participate. But please do not
attempt to press any points on yourselves or your partner during this session.
Page 1 - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4
Home ¦ Articles ¦ Calendar ¦ Forum ¦ Journal ¦ Chat ¦ Photos ¦ Clubs ¦ Arcade