Muscle testing is one of the most popular methods used for determining if a product or supplement works. However, there are some concerns about it. One of them is whether it’s really effective at all. Another concern is that the results may not always be accurate. A third concern is that the tests are sometimes unethical. There have been several studies done on muscle testing and its effectiveness. Some of these studies were published in scientific journals, but others were self-published and/or presented at conferences without proper peer review (i.e., they didn’t get published).
So what do the studies say? Are muscle testing effective? Do they tell us anything useful about how to use a particular product? How reliable are the results? What does “effective” mean when it comes to muscle testing?
Let’s take a look at each of those questions. 1)
Does Muscle Testing Work? The first question to ask is: does muscle testing actually work? Does a weak muscle actually mean that you are sensitive to a particular allergen or toxin, or that you’re lacking something in your diet? Do you need more of something or less of something else?
The answer is no, not really. This means that if you test weak to something, you shouldn’t automatically take it or avoid it. Let’s say you test weak to eggs. This doesn’t necessarily mean you’re going to have a bad reaction to eggs or that you should avoid them. Maybe you tested weak because you already eat plenty of other sources of protein and don’t need eggs. Maybe your body is getting all the protein it needs from eggs and doesn’t “like” the rest of the ingredients in eggs so it’s signaling that you’re sensitive to them. Maybe you tested weak because you’re sick and everything tastes bad and you’re not really allergic to eggs at all! Muscle testing is basically a crapshoot. Even if there is validity to it (and there isn’t), you can’t tell which scenario applies to you. You may really be sensitive to something or you may not be. It’s just a 50/50 guess and following recommendations based on that guess is a recipe for failure. A lot of times people with allergies or sensitivities also have an impaired digestive system. If their bodies are broken in this way, they may not be able to break down certain nutrients which is why they are “allergic” or “sensitive” to them. However, if their digestive system was operating optimally, they could digest these nutrients properly. This is why many people feel better after taking digestive enzymes. They aren’t really allergic or sensitive to the food, it’s just not getting broken down and absorbed properly. If you muscle test weak to an item and eliminate it from your diet for several weeks and then reintroduce it, you may be able to eat the food without a problem. For example, let’s say you muscle tested weak to apple. You might eliminate apples for a few weeks and still feel fine. If you reintroduce apples into your diet, you may be able to eat them without any problems. This indicates that you weren’t really allergic or sensitive to apples, your body was simply not digesting the nutrients properly. Sometimes digestive enzymes are all that’s needed to resolve the issue. Muscle testing doesn’t address this possibility and could lead someone to unnecessarily avoid certain foods. The bottom line is, if you’re concerned that you may be allergic or sensitive to something, see an allergist or immunologist to get tested. And if you’re going to rely on muscle testing to tell you whether or not you’re sensitive to a particular food, don’t bother seeing an allergist because it will just be a waste of money! 2)
Are the studies valid?
I’ve looked over the studies that were done on the adrenal fatigue syndrome and have major issues with them. In fact, I don’t consider any of them to be valid. The first problem is that there are only three studies on it! Three! In scientific research, this is a terrible number because such a small sample could yield inaccurate or inexplicable results. For example, if I was testing whether or not drinking orange juice affects energy levels, I would get a lot of samples much larger than three. Say I got three people to drink orange juice and they all had increased energy, I can’t conclude that orange juice gives you more energy. Maybe the three people I got to test it were all already energetic people or for some other reason the results were inaccurate. Maybe they didn’t drink enough orange juice or maybe they had some other external factor that increased their energy. We also have no idea who these three people were.
Were they male? Female? Young? Old? Did they have a history of drinking a lot of orange juice?
There are so many variables and we have no idea what any of them are! Now, let’s say I got three people to test something else, like coffee. Let’s say that all three felt more tired after drinking it.
Does this mean coffee makes you more tired?
Maybe one of those three people had just slept badly the night before and hadn’t realized it. The day they drank coffee they felt more tired because they finally felt the full effects of not sleeping well.
Does this mean coffee makes you tired?
Of course not! We need much more data than this! In the studies on the adrenal fatigue syndrome, only three people were given an injection of a substance that was suppose to cause the immune system to attack the pancreas (or adrenals in one of the studies). Let’s just say that all three had their immune systems attack the pancreas (or adrenals) for the purpose of this example. We have no idea what those three people had eaten before the injection or if they had been under any kind of emotional or physical stress recently. We don’t know any of their other vitals such as blood pressure or heart rate. We don’t know what food they ate before the injection. We don’t even know their names!
So, how can we trust these findings?
A much more likely explanation for this finding is that one, some or all of those three people just had a bad day. Let’s take it a step further. Let’s say those three people had a bad day and accidentally cut themselves with a knife.
Could these findings be due to the person’s immune system attacking the area where they cut themselves?
Let’s say one person washes the knife right after using it and the cuts his hand. The next person uses the same knife and doesn’t wash it first and gets the same result. The last person also uses the same knife but washes it first and doesn’t get the same result. We now have three people who had a bad day, but due to different external factors had different results in their immune response. These findings would seem to be valid based on the studies done on the adrenal fatigue syndrome! There are so many factors that could have led to the three people having their immune systems attack their pancreases or adrenals!
Maybe they drank coffee before their injections? Maybe they had eaten a lot of sugary food the day before? Who knows?
There are so many variables that we can’t possibly know. Real science requires replication and back up experiments to be sure of your findings. This has neither! Maybe two people had their immune systems attack their pancreases but only because a mosquito had bitten them a couple of days before and injected malaria into them. When one person has malaria, they have an immune response similar to other illnesses. The fourth person may have had their pancreas attacked due to a food intolerance they didn’t know they had! There are so many other factors involved that we can’t possibly take this seriously!
Yes, you can test the effects of coffee on your own health. Here’s how to do it.
Drink coffee for a week and see if you feel more tired after drinking it. If you do, then you have some idea that coffee may make you tired.
Make sure that the week is in the middle of a time period where you are experiencing a lot of stress at work or home. This is very important since stress is a factor that can make us feel more tired.
If you feel more tired after a week of drinking coffee then you have some evidence that coffee may make you tired. The problem is that there are so many other factors involved that we can’t possibly take this seriously! The thing is, there are numerous claims out there about foods, drinks, vitamins, supplements and other similar things that have very little scientific backing. Some of these things may actually be true while others are false.
It’s nearly impossible for us to tell these things apart. Let us look at a few of these claims to see what the problems are with these types of studies.
There is some evidence that coffee may actually be good for your heart even if it does make you feel more tired. This isn’t really that hard to believe since there are numerous things that can have different effects in our bodies. One person may drink coffee and it keeps them awake while it makes another person sleepy. One person may eat chocolate and be hyperactive while it makes another person sleepy.
Some people may be allergic to coffee but it has no effect on others. The problem is that many of these studies are done by supplement companies that have a direct interest in promoting the positive effects of their product. It isn’t that they are intentionally lying, it’s just that they are only publishing the studies that show their product in a good light. There are countless studies that get ignored because they had different results. This isn’t fraud, it’s just science. There is no way that we as humans can account for all of the variables.
The best we can do is take an educated guess based on the evidence that is available. It isn’t a bad thing to drink coffee. It probably won’t hurt you and it might even help in some small way. If you don’t like the taste, don’t drink it.
If you have a coffee maker at your office make sure to clean it once in a while. If you really don’t want to drink coffee then try one of the many substitutes that are available. The main thing is to make sure that you aren’t believing something just because you want it to be true.
Sources & references used in this article:
Weed Land: Inside America’s Marijuana Epicenter and How Pot Went Legit by P Hecht – 2014 – books.google.com
Whole body vibration does not enhance muscle activation by SS Colson, PD Petit, L Hebreard… – … journal of sports …, 2009 – researchgate.net
Entry-Level Education by M Linder, E Aubert, MA Morrison, DN Bessie – Physical Therapy, 1982 – academic.oup.com
Laryngeal muscle activity and vocal fold adduction during chest, chestmix, headmix, and head registers in females by KA Kochis-Jennings, EM Finnegan, HT Hoffman… – Journal of Voice, 2012 – Elsevier
Secret from muscle: Enabling secure pairing with electromyography by L Yang, W Wang, Q Zhang – Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference …, 2016 – dl.acm.org
Preliminary study on the ability of trained singers to control the intrinsic and extrinsic laryngeal musculature by J Lovetri, S Lesh, P Woo – Journal of Voice, 1999 – Elsevier
Correlates of the belt voice: a broader examination by A Lebowitz, RJ Baken – Journal of Voice, 2011 – Elsevier
Bizarre behavior during intracarotid sodium amytal testing (Wada test): are they predictable? by L Paola, MJ Mäder, F Germiniani, P Coral… – Arquivos de neuro …, 2004 – SciELO Brasil
Gender verification testing: Balancing the rights of female athletes with a scandal-free Olympic Games by PB Fastiff – Hastings Const. LQ, 1991 – HeinOnline
