Skip to main content

Appendix B: Peeling the Onion of Applied Kinesiology

Additional Reading

Applied kinesiology is an alternative medicine diagnostic procedure commonly used in chiropractic consultations. Practitioners claim it can, among other things, test the human body for nutrient excess or deficiency. A practitioner first asks a patient to hold a concept in mind or a physical substance in hand. This may be a certain vitamin or a particular food. The practitioner then tests the muscle strength of that patient using various physical assessments. If muscle resistance is strong, the imagined or real substance is said to be beneficial to that patient. If muscle resistance is weak, the substance is said to be harmful to that patient. The degree of muscle resistance determines the amount of that substance, if any, the practitioner will prescribe. On the surface, applied kinesiology seems harmless enough; however, it takes an unexpected philosophical turn when we dig below the surface into the mechanics of how advocates claim it works. Testing the body for nutrient levels using applied kinesiology fundamentally depends on two related concepts: vitalism and Innate Intelligence.

Vitalism is the belief that a living organism has an unseen force governing its bodily functions in addition to the more readily observed physical and chemical forces. This is said to be the primary difference between something living and something dead. “To the Hindus it is called prana, to the Chinese qi, to the Japanese ki, and to the Hawaiians Mana.”1 Aristotle is said to have developed the first formal expression of vitalism; the centuries following Aristotle “saw the emergence of the shaman, a village leader who served as physician, priest and wise man. The shaman operated on supernatural methods of spiritually intervening in human life processes. Using supernatural methods he would arrive at a diagnosis of a patient’s illness and apply a suitable treatment.”2 The “cosmic fluid” or “energy” that vitalism posits is said to be critical to our health. According to this philosophy, any imbalance in vital energy results in disease.

Innate Intelligence is an idea originally developed by D. D. Palmer, the founder of chiropractic. In some respects, Innate Intelligence is a variation on vitalism. Palmer began his career as a “Magnetic Healer” and later “professed an interest in ‘Christian Science, Faith Cure, Mind Cure, Metaphysics, Magnetic and Osteopathy’, having studied all of these” in addition to phrenology.3 These various practices had an outsized influence on Palmer’s medical philosophy, eventually coalescing into his idea of Innate Intelligence. In a strong parallel to New Age and pantheistic beliefs, Palmer described Innate Intelligence as “a segment of that Intelligence which fills the universe, this universe, all wise” and fills each individual with itself to promote vital function and good health.4 This force is said to be a unique personality with physical and spiritual components inhabiting the human body and yet existing as a separate entity than the soul. Palmer claimed Innate Intelligence “runs the body’s physiological functions with a perfect knowledge of how to do so. Using the nervous system it sends controlling mental or nerve impulses to the tissues.”5

These two concepts—vitalism and Innate Intelligence—come together in applied kinesiology. Substances and thoughts of substances are said to interact with the body’s vital force (vitalism). The body is also said to know what it needs (Innate Intelligence). The tested substance attracts or repels vitalistic energy, and the body expresses a diagnosis through muscle resistance. A practitioner then assesses the degree of resistance to determine the amount of substance to be added or removed from a patient’s diet. Alternatively, an individual can conduct a self-assessment and is said to be pushed backwards or pulled forwards by the same metaphysical interactions. Applied kinesiology practitioners sometimes describe this push and pull effect in electromagnetic terms rather than vitalistic terms, but the root philosophy is the same.

What is a Christian to make of all this? Starting with the science, a recent double-blind, randomized study intended to assess the validity of applied kinesiology as a diagnostic tool demonstrated no useful results. Quite often, the results of these trials were no better than chance. The medical journal EXPLORE concluded that the “research published by the Applied Kinesiology field itself is not to be relied upon, and in the experimental studies that do meet accepted standards of science, Applied Kinesiology has not demonstrated that it is a useful or reliable diagnostic tool upon which health decisions can be based.”6

Vitalism may be seen to have a weak correlation to the Christian idea of the soul in that a soul may be seen as the animating force of the human body. But Scripture never teaches “soul energy” as a concept, nor does it teach that the soul can be a means to both diagnose and heal the physical body. This idea is entirely the domain of non-Christian religions and practices such as Hinduism and Chinese traditional medicine. The Bible is the Christian authority on spiritual truth, and if there is no hint of vitalism found in the pages of Scripture, there is no philosophical support for Christians.

Innate Intelligence fares no better. Palmer, who was influenced by many ideas originating from mysticism and occultism, argued that Innate Intelligence not only inhabits the human body as an external force but is also responsible for keeping it alive. This assertion is problematic because the presence of a vitalistic force is unmeasurable, unquantifiable, and unobservable by any means known to medicine. Palmer argued that the absence of Innate Intelligence results in death. This suggests that any part of the human body separated from Innate Intelligence dies because the vitalistic force no longer sustains it. But hospitals across the world routinely reattach severed limbs; these limbs regain function. Hospitals routinely transplant organs from deceased bodies to living people; these organs work just as they did inside the previous body.

Chiropractic research does not show Innate Intelligence offers any practical difference from any other competing vitalistic philosophy nor is it “any more measurable, beneficial, or meaningful” than the opposing vitalistic philosophies found in certain branches of chiropractic, all of which use radically different treatment modalities.7 The stark differences between these competing philosophies, which all attempt to describe similar forces, suggest that none of them, including Innate Intelligence, are sound. In fact, Innate Intelligence has much in common with the pantheistic idea of god—everything in existence forms god, is god, and sustains us as god. This idea is utterly opposed to the Christian concept of God.

For those who see real results from applied kinesiology—and there are people who have—how might we explain this when mainstream, peer-reviewed science journals discourage the practice? There are several possible explanations: the scientific research is flawed; random chance led to a beneficial outcome; a placebo effect resulted in patient improvement; or, from a spiritual perspective, a supernatural element is at work.

Regarding the research, randomized double-blind studies are intentionally designed to eliminate research bias. Neither the researchers nor the patients in the cited study knew who received a vial with saline nor who received a vile with a toxic solution. Patients were tested in three different trials by two different kinesiologists and with no kinesiologist present. Researchers tightly controlled all factors in this experiment. Furthermore, other studies testing the merits of applied kinesiology, along with research results external to the groups advocating for this practice, are all consistent: mainstream, peer-reviewed, scientific research shows that this practice provides no noteworthy clinical improvements for patients. The research does not appear flawed.

What about random chance? There is a certain probability that every prescribed or prohibited substance a kinesiologist recommends to a patient will be a beneficial suggestion. If these suggestions are no better than a fifty-fifty chance—as the research study indicates—a single recommendation will result in a health benefit only half the time. The more recommendations a practitioner gives, the smaller the chance a patient will realize a health benefit. Many different suggestions reduce the probability of a significant health benefit down to a very tiny yet non-zero probability. Random chance may be a valid explanation for why some individuals see a health improvement through applied kinesiology practice, but we could also say that randomly choosing nutritional supplements off a store shelf statistically produces a similar result. A tiny probability of a successful outcome is possible; yet given the incredibly unlikely nature of this, random chance is an unsatisfactory explanation for why certain individuals see significant benefits using this practice.

What about placebo? While this may explain minor improvements in health, it does not explain major improvements. Placebo interventions have no important clinical effects in general; however, “in certain settings placebo interventions can influence patient-reported outcomes, especially pain and nausea, though it is difficult to distinguish patient-reported effects of placebo from biased reporting.”8 A major improvement in health due to placebo cannot be demonstrated in a clinical setting. Like the other possible explanations, placebo does not explain significant health benefits derived from applied kinesiology.

That leaves supernatural influence as the remaining explanation. Think back to the earlier discussion concerning how a paranormal ability like telepathy might work.9 For that ability to exist, either God or Satan would undoubtedly be the empowering force behind it. The same conclusion also appears to hold true in this context. Because the underlying philosophies found in applied kinesiology contradict foundational Christian teaching, a satanic incentive exists for supernaturally empowering its vitalistic philosophy. Therefore, major health improvements attributed to applied kinesiology are most likely empowered by a demonic source, particularly when the philosophies at play can lead some people to accept these as the truth while rejecting Christian beliefs.

Why did we spend so much time peeling back the layers of this alternative health diagnostic? To show how devious evil can be. This is a practice said to heal and improve health, and some people claim to have experienced dramatic benefits. That is why demonic miracles deceive so easily—they often come disguised as something good from someone who seems virtuous (cf. 2 Cor 11:14). Even a consummate liar like Satan may occasionally reveal the truth (or a partial truth) when it serves an evil purpose.

But are there times when we could also credit God with miraculous healing through this technique? Should a scenario exist where God would choose to involve Himself in an unchristian practice, we must continue to be wary of what we accept as truth or else we risk becoming “captive through philosophy and empty deception in accordance with human tradition, in accordance with the elementary principles of the world, rather than in accordance with Christ” (Col 2:8 NASB). That is never an outcome God endorses. From a Christian perspective, applied kinesiology is an empty philosophy that has nothing in common with Christian beliefs.

  1. Lon Morgan, “Innate Intelligence: Its Origins and Problems,” JCCA 42.1 (1998): 36, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2485333/.↩
  2. Morgan, “Innate Intelligence,” 36.↩
  3. Morgan, “Innate Intelligence,” 37.↩
  4. Morgan, “Innate Intelligence,” 38.↩
  5. Morgan, “Innate Intelligence,” 38.↩
  6. Stephan A. Schwartz et al., “A Double-Blind, Randomized Study to Assess the Validity of Applied Kinesiology (AK) as a Diagnostic Tool and as a Nonlocal Proximity Effect,” EXPLORE 10.2 (2014): 99–108, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550830713003418.↩
  7. Morgan, “Innate Intelligence,” 39.↩
  8. Asbjørn Hróbjartsson and Peter C. Gøtzsche, “Placebo Interventions for All Clinical Conditions,” CDSR.1 (2010): 2, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20091554/.↩
  9. See Appendix A to read more about how paranormal abilities might work in the real world.↩