George Goodheart, D.C., created Applied Kinesiology in the early 1960’s.  The son of a chiropractor, Dr. Goodheart had become interested in methods of acquiring Data from the patient’s body.  He studied Osteopathy, Chinese Medicine and Biochemistry, as well as Chiropractic.  The result was a cogent, organized method of evaluating muscle strength and function that revealed the underlying sources of the patient’s health problems and, in revealing the source, indicates the therapy that will have the best results.

Dr. Gunter has studied Applied Kinesiology since 1983.  While constantly amazed at the complexity and depth of the information exposed by this method, he has modified some of its techniques to better define the problem.  As a tool for getting to the bottom of the problem, there are few non-invasive modalities that offer the richness and detail provided by AK.

Applied Kinesiology is performed with muscle testing.  This requires testing all of the “Indicator Muscles” involved in the region that is experiencing pain or dysfunction.  An indicator muscle is one that shares most of its nerve support with an organ.  For example, the muscle Subclavius, which lies under the clavicle, shares most of its nerves with the lung.  This is reasonable because it is right next to your lungs.

So, as an example, one can have a subclavius problem which will alter the movement of the clavicle (collarbone) and, since the clavicle is an important hinge in the movement of your arm at the shoulder, result in shoulder pain and dysfunction.  Now, you can treat the shoulder until “the cows come home” and not get complete improvement unless you can strengthen the subclavius muscle.  If it is weak because you have a lung weakness, it will heal more quickly if you can find a method for strengthening the lung.

While there are several different methods of “Muscle Testing”, they all have biases and paradoxical results.  It is my belief that only Applied Kinesiology is inherently free of these complications due to the nature of its testing protocol.  If one is testing each individual muscle on both sides, one is more likely to arrive at a fuller insight with less possibility of “Practitioner bias”  than simply using one muscle and inferring the answer to the problem from that one source of information.

The efficacy of AK is apparent in our statistics of returning people to full healthy function.