(c) This digital image was created by Sam Fentress, May 7, 2005.
I like anomalies that challenge my thinking. I don't have to agree with the anomaly. I just enjoy challenges to my conventional side. I guess that is why I first explored reflexology. I didn't really "believe" in it until much later in my exploration.
Skeptics like to think we, reflexologists are a gullible lot that accept anything weird and out of the ordinary. But in fact I come from a scientific family and know the value of logical thinking. However I also know that scientist cling to their "beliefs" with as much fervor as anyone else. They know what is true and what is false often at times without the inconvenience of research. They can be just as guilty of clinging to belief as those they point fingers at.
Even with all the research that has been done with reflexology the scientific community has been able to discount all the positive research while touting the negative evidence as flawless. This was evidenced by a recent BBC program.
Everything was discounted as a placebo effect or touchy feely types of reactions. There is really no connection between the feet and the rest of the body. The feet are not integrated into the internal organs and they cannot effect our bodies since they are seemly like a set of wheels on a cart. No connection whatsoever.
Yet we, reflexologists, are witnesses to events that simply do not fit the scientist view of the relationship between the feet and the rest of the body. These events can't be explain away by placebo effects and simple tactile stimulation.
The other night I watched a program on the History Channel about the Loch Ness monster. Again I like anomalies that challenge my thinking. It was a very well balanced program that showed both sides of the debate and to be honest I can't really say what is out there.
What struck me was not whether or not the Loch Ness monster exists or not. Some of the evidence was quite compelling. There was also compelling evidence that pointed that there were troubling questions to answer.
What struck me was what a very educated researcher who was a lawyer had to say. He said that you can discount some of the witnesses but not all of them.
He pointed to our judicial system. While our judicial system may be flawed it still works rather well.
And there are enough witnesses to some anomaly in the Loch Ness to point to a more than reasonable assumption that something is there. There are too many witnesses over too long a time.
We are witnesses to the workings of reflexology. We have seen too many events to be dismissed. We are too many of us.
What is patently clear is that here is an extremely important relationship between the feet and the rest of the body. It is integrated directly with our internal organs and our brain. We can use pressure to effect the internal organs in very profound ways.
And this relationship that is shunned by the scientists is much clearer than the Loch Ness monster. It is sitting in plain sight.