Triggerband Web Journal

Typaldos Manual Therapy has proven to be a highly effective set of techniques, outperforming even expensive and intensive orthopedic surgery with only manual application. However, the true strength behind TMT is the fascial distortion model. Its implications are far beyond manual therapy, reforming all medical and surgical approaches to acute injury and chronic pain.

But what enabled Dr. Typaldos to discover this model and develop manual treatments to correct fascial distortions envisioned in the model? It was his way of thinking. His thought processes were superior to the prevailing philosophies in medicine. And he was thus able to single-handedly make advancements that large organizations like the American Heart Association can only dream of.

This should not surprise you. Historically, individuals who were able to view things in a new, better way have made enormous contributions to science and medicine. The inventions of Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, and Leonardo da Vinci put the developments of multinational corporations like GE to shame. Actually, tech companies have a different role in our economy. They take inventions and convert them into usable designs, but rarely do giant corporations make fundamental changes or advancements.

Dr. Typaldos first broke with orthodoxy when he concluded that his medical training was in the form of models and theories – rather than undeniable truths – and they were subject to change in the face of new, conflicting information. Next, he critiqued the models and theories to determine whether they were consistent with what he saw in practice.

The result is a better way of evaluating medical theories and practices. I have “codified” Dr. Typaldos’s greatest discovery of all into Triggerband’s theme: A logical, rational, reasonable approach to medicine. Now let us look at how to apply these analyses to real models:

Chiropractic spinal adjustments. Is it logical to think that by adjusting the spinal column a doctor can make changes throughout the body? Yes, because the adjustments are said to affect the spinal cord itself, and the nerves from the spinal cord regulate functioning everywhere in the body.

Next we can ask, is it rational to say that these adjustments to the spinal column can help cure nearly every disease? Possibly. On one hand, impulses carried by the nerves from the spinal cord do have the ability to bring dramatic changes in every system. On the other hand, however, it is doubtful that merely “adjusting” the spinal column is able to meaningfully alter the functioning of the spinal cord and the peripheral nervous system.

Finally, is it reasonable to claim that spinal adjustments can cure almost any disease? No, this point is where the theory falls flat. Even if adjustments were able to enhance functioning of the spinal cord, it would be impossible to make the minute, complex changes necessary to resolve specific conditions. And if the central nervous system has the power to cure all these diseases, why does it wait until a chiropractor adjusts the spine?

Orthopedic surgery for worn knee cartilage. Orthopedics is a complex specialty, so I chose one specific condition. Is it logical to treat knee pain by replacing cartilage that is worn out? No, it is not, actually. Cause and effect has not been established. Very often, patients who suffer from knee pain in one knee have worn cartilage in both knees. The logical conclusion is that something other than worn cartilage is causing their pain.

For the sake of analysis, let us ask the remaining questions. Is this treatment approach rational? Yes, if the worn cartilage were causing the pain, a knee replacement would probably help. Is it reasonable to believe that this type of treatment can cure a patient’s disability? Yes, a knee replacement is a major anatomical change in the exact region affected.

Hopefully, these examples are giving you a glimpse into how much can be accomplished and reformed without a single new device. And I want to emphasize that Dr. Typaldos was no more intelligent than other physicians. What he had was better mental software. This means that anyone who has enough intelligence to become a skilled healthcare professional can learn to think the way he did.

Alexander Typaldos, JD

It is a well-known fact that America suffers from nationwide shortages of primary care physicians.¹ This shortage has caused headaches for both doctors and patients. However, I have an effective mid- to long-term solution to this problem.

My solution is to federally charter a dozen or so large medical schools that are geographically dispersed throughout the nation. This act of Congress is constitutionally permissible under the commerce clause because employee healthcare is a major concern and expense of businesses who engage in interstate commerce.

There will certainly be enough qualified med school applicants to fill these schools, which could enroll as many as 1000 students per class at each school. Right now, many of our qualified med school applicants are choosing Caribbean schools and osteopathic degrees because there are simply not enough positions for them in U.S. medical schools. Other would-be qualified applicants choose ancillary or altogether unrelated professions because medical school admission is too competitive.

You might think this ultra-competitiveness in U.S. MD schools (and even osteopathic colleges) results in more highly skilled doctors and superior care. If you think that, you would be mistaken. What we end up with is medical schools full of perfectionists – students with college GPAs that approach 4.0 and competitive type A personalities whose drive is fueled largely by fear of failure.

Perfectionists like that might be valuable in a profession such as astrophysics; but medicine is not only complex, it is dynamic and personal. We need doctors who can handle failure and know how to make tough decisions. After all, there is a saying that every doctor kills somebody. They must also communicate with patients and their families on an emotional level. And perhaps most importantly, doctors must admit when their philosophies, procedures, and quality of care are poor and ineffective. This frequently happens, but type A personalities are loathe to be honest and acknowledge their own incompetence, and then make changes and seek solutions.

Pouring thousands of new doctors a year into the marketplace will balance supply and demand. The profession will find relief quickly, like arteries relieved of high blood pressure. Now doctors will have more time to spend with patients and be less overworked and stressed, and their quality of care will improve. And doctors will have to compete for patients, another powerful motivation for them to improve care. Currently, “bad” doctors have as many patients as “good” doctors. Most patients are obliged to take whatever care they can get.

What about the cost? Granted, the venture is costly, but the return is likewise large, even in the short term. New medical residencies will provide inexpensive care for patients and increased revenues for hospitals. The price of office visits and medical procedures will drop as a result of the market economics discussed above. And the cost of insurance programs will subsequently decline, including government-sponsored insurance programs.

If we delay this relief, the situation will continue to deteriorate. Overworked and stressed out doctors tend to provide subpar healthcare. And patients who receive subpar healthcare tend to not recover from their illnesses, so they return to the doctor repeatedly. This exacerbates the problem by further straining schedules and thus leading to even worse care. Where will this downward spiral end? With the patient dying, the doctor quitting, Medicare and Medicaid going bankrupt? I do not want to find out.

Alexander Typaldos, JD

¹Many Doctors Plan to Quit or Cut Back: Survey, November 18, 2008, http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081118/us_nm/us_doctors_usa_survey;_ylt=AsuanTbXtgowlEJGt5xucHXLLJ94.

I took a class in college where successful entrepreneurs came and told their stories. One of them was a man named Sam Caster, founder of Mannatech. Mr. Caster’s presence screamed VIP. And he spoke in a way that was friendly yet commanded attention. He told us how his business got started and grew, and displayed a passion that was contagious.

Mr. Caster then described Mannatech’s main product, Ambrotose, in great detail. He told of marketing strategy and patent applications, and what Ambrotose is able to do for people who take it. The benefits of this one supplement were astounding! By the end of the lecture we all felt as though our lives would be incomplete until we had some.

Honored to have such an important businessman take the time to share his story, we little understood that our guest salesmen had just made a sale. My professor soon purchased some Ambrotose (which is not cheap, I should mention). I asked him how he felt after taking it. He said he felt a little better in one specific way; maybe he slept better or had more energy, I can’t remember. And he was still very pleased to have discovered Ambrotose.

How Ambrotose works

Ambrotose supplies the body with all of the eight necessary glyconutrient saccharides. According to Mannatech, the average person’s diet only gives them two of these monosaccharides. And all eight are required for cellular communication and glycoprotein structure. Mannatech claims that these molecules help the immune system communicate, so without them a person could develop autoimmune disorders. But if they take Ambrotose, they might recover. Of course, Mannatech cannot come right out and say that or Ambrotose would legally be considered a drug and subject to FDA regulation.

Mannatech suggests that every person on the face of the earth take a dose of Ambrotose every day for the rest of their life. Before I thank Mannatech for their life-changing discovery and service to humanity, let me ask a few questions. Where did Mannatech find these glyconutrients? The answer: plants. Their argument is that “primitive” humans ate more raw fruits and vegetables, thus receiving a full dose. But “modern” humans eat a lot of refined foods, and are thus depleted in glyconutrients.

Their argument is logical; however, I come to a different conclusion. Eat more raw, organic vegetables. The body digests, absorbs, and utilizes nutrients in natural form more easily than altered supplements found in capsules or powders. We know that Mannatech alters the nutrients in Ambrotose because it has a patent for the substance. You can’t just put some aloe gel in a capsule and apply for a patent. There has to be a chemical alteration.

That brings me to my next question. If Mannatech is so interested in the greater good, why does it have a total of 45 patents all over the world? This is no mere formality. Mannatech has a record of bringing suits against smaller companies it suspects of patent infringement, with mixed outcomes. Sounds like big pharma tactics to me.

Finally, if Mannatech has such great products, why do they resort to multilevel marketing to get their products out? The answer is that the validity of their products is based purely on testimonials, not scientific research. I for one am not going to discount the value of personal testimony. But when I put all the facts together, Mannatech starts looking like another pyramid scheme from Texas (where it is headquartered).

The bottom line

We do need all eight glyconutrients, but we can get them by eating a balanced diet rich in raw, organic vegetables. If you have had a bad diet for a long time and don’t want to change, you could benefit from a glyconutrient supplement. Though, your health is unlikely to improve dramatically. And any brand of glyconutrient saccharides will suffice. It doesn’t have to be Ambrotose.

I do believe that occasionally people who take Ambrotose are cured of debilitating diseases like lupus. However, people who play the lottery occasionally win. That does not make it an effective strategy for accumulating wealth. So let’s stop playing the lottery with our health, start eating a healthier diet, and foil Mannatech’s wealth-generating scam.

Alexander Typaldos, JD

Health practitioners generally fall into one of two categories. One says that if drugs can’t fix it, then it can’t be fixed. The other says herbs and nutritional supplements can accomplish far more than drugs without the bad side effects.

You probably expect me to take sides; but I’m not going to. I am logical, rational, and reasonable, and it would be unreasonable to take either extreme position. Drugs have their place, and so do herbs. Thus, I advocate a tiered approach.

The first tier is a healthy lifestyle and sanitation. Once disease takes its toll on the human body, rarely will health return a full 100 percent. Furthermore, prevention is the least costly of all remedies. As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. And a doctor who is a friend of mine said, “If you can’t find time to exercise, you will have to find time to be sick.”

Tier two is herbs and natural remedies. Healthcare practitioners emphasize remedies you can take by mouth, such as nutritional supplements and herbal teas. However, I include in this category mechanical treatments such as physical therapy, hydrotherapy, and manual therapy.

Natural remedies are definitely preferable to medications if they can get the same result. But I will tell you from experience that even supplements and hydrotherapy can wear out the body over time. So be rational and use common sense when approaching tier two options.

Only when natural remedies fail, or are clearly insufficient, should healthcare practitioners move on to drugs and surgery. These remedies are powerful but risky, abounding in side effects and long recovery times.

And there is another reason to save drugs for last. They rarely resolve the underlying condition. Pain medication, insulin, hormones – these are patches that allow patients with debilitating illnesses to live normal lives until things resolve on their own. If a condition never resolves, then a lifetime of medication is all tier three has to offer.

This tiered system does combine standard and complementary medicine, but does not fall into another extreme, that of all-inclusiveness. Too many healthcare practitioners turn continuing education into a show-and-tell for new treatments. We need to be discerning, rather than ideological or frivolous. This is not a game. Millions of people are living in continual pain and disability. They need mature, honest, compassionate physicians who will take ownership of their cases.

And, yes, they need doctors who are logical, rational, and reasonable. If these qualities sound out-of-place in medicine, it’s because they are. Shotgun techniques and religious adherence to the tenets of one’s healing philosophy – practices that would never be tolerated in a field such as engineering – are commonplace in medicine.

Granted, the human body is enormously complex and dynamic, which makes the practice of medicine art as well as science. However, this very fact demands that doctors be even more logical, rational, and reasonable, not less so.

Alexander Typaldos, JD

There is a lot of talk these days about how Medicare and Medicaid will bankrupt the federal government in a few decades or less. Likewise, the rising costs of private health insurance are placing an ever-increasing burden on families and small businesses. Furthermore, businesses of all sizes are becoming so overwhelmed with worker’s compensation costs, it is no wonder many of them are moving operations overseas to remain competitive in world markets.

What will it take to solve the current healthcare crisis and prevent this looming calamity? The most common suggestion put forth is national health insurance, European style. There is ongoing debate on this topic, and what I gather is that national health insurance will solve problems while creating new ones.

Ultimately, the plan will simply move the impending budgetary disaster to a new location, rather than solving it. But what about the lower costs of healthcare in Europe? Well, those savings presume that Americans are as healthy as Europeans, and they are not. Americans will use more healthcare services than their European counterparts regardless who pays for them.

For all the discussion about healthcare’s problems – going around in circles debating the same tired arguments – you would be surprised that the solution is an elephant in the room. It is that the medical treatments and healthcare services themselves need to improve. There is no other way to solve the healthcare crisis. It is not okay, to give you an example, for a doctor to tell someone they have arthritis and place them on potent pain killers forever with no hope of recovery. It is unacceptable to have cancer treatments that compete with the cancer itself in trying to kill the patient.

We assume that educated, hardworking, intelligent doctors and researchers will find and use the best treatments possible. That is simply not the case. There is as much corruption in the medical profession and healthcare system as Wall Street or anywhere else. I really believe that the only reason no one does anything is because no one understands the healthcare system. True, people understand parts of it, enough to keep things going. But no one really understands the system as a whole and recognizes that waste, corruption, and deceit are rampant.

Does this mean we need to work harder and develop better treatments? Yes and no. Technology allows for far better treatments than are currently available. Treatments can improve dramatically without any new advances in medical technology. Case in point: Researchers recently discovered that small doses of antibiotics can slow the progression of multiple sclerosis.¹ What is needed now is an effective system for implementing the practical changes this discovery demands into the medical profession worldwide, quickly and effectively. Such system does not exist, and this discovery will likely be in vain.

More important than working harder (and, believe me, healthcare professionals work hard) is the need to work smarter. Pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars a year promoting their medications to patients and doctors. If this money were spent creating better medications, and non-commercial professional organizations were left to evaluate the new medications and pass that information along to doctors, we would make more progress with the same resources.

Other areas of great waste are within the booming market for alternative medicine. Certain forms of alternative medicine are definitely legitimate, but others are, well, crazy. Acupuncture, magnets, crystal therapy, Reiki, chiropractic spinal adjustments – practitioners who perform this nonsense are often intelligent, hardworking, and otherwise competent. But their time and skill is sadly being wasted on treatments that are similar in nature (albeit more technologically oriented) to those found in primitive animist cultures.

I realize I am stepping on toes by saying some of these things. Nevertheless, I have a solution to healthcare’s problems at a time when Americans desperately need one. Eliminate waste, stamp out corruption, establish a universal standard by which treatments are evaluated and a centralized organizational network by which new treatments are disseminated – these are merely a few of the policy recommendations I have to save the life of a critically ill system.

Alexander Typaldos, JD

¹See BBC news article at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7136088.stm.