WHY IS THERE SO LITTLE UNDERSTANDING OF THE ROLE OF CONNECTIVE TISSUE IN CAUSING PAIN?
How do I know that this concept of Connective Tissue Related Pain is not well understood by your other practitioners? Because I know when, and where, and by whom, this theory was first proposed in medical literature. I first proposed this theory in print in 2009 in a medical journal that was not widely read by those outside the Prolotherapy community. This theory has yet to be widely disseminated, or to be confirmed by pathologic biopsy studies. But it does fit nicely with reality. It is the only plausible explanation for why Prolotherapy ‘works’, and for dozens of clinical phenomena that I see in my office every day. The medical community and medical training, remain tethered to theories like ‘inflammation’ in structures—tendonitis, etc.—which came from the 1950’s and were discredited by medical research over a decade ago. The notion that ‘everything worth knowing’ can be diagnosed on films’ is not implausible, given how beautiful, detailed, and expensive some of these films are, but this notion is simply incorrect. Imaging for diagnosis, and imaging for guiding of treatment, suffer from the same problem: you cannot ‘see’ symptomatic damage in many structures on any kind of film. You can, however, easily demonstrate it on a quick, and ‘free’ physical examination.