Many people assume that Western medicine’s approach to the human body is somehow more "objective" because it was arrived at through scientific inquiry and research.

However, the Western anatomical map of the body—the one that, for example, depicts the heart as an electrically managed muscle that pumps blood, and that describes the fibers in the upper arm as the biceps—is just one way of seeing the body.  In fact, the Western lens of the body has been heavily influenced by centuries of religious and political biases.

Did you know that in the 1600s, when intellectuals such as Rene Descartes and Galileo were making pivotal claims about human physiology, the Church forbade scientists from making observations that pertained to human emotions, the spirit, or the soul, instead claiming those aspects of the human form to fall strictly under the domain of religion.

The repercussions of these restrictions on scientific observation are far-reaching. 

For one, anatomical studies involved only material, solid findings since emotional correlations were considered direct challenges to the Church. As an example, observations that noticed simultaneous relationships between gesture, emotion, and physical form were not permitted.  (No wonder so many Westerners perceive our mental, physical, and emotional health as distinct and separate from one another.)

Furthermore, Western reductionism favors understanding reached by breaking things down into smaller and smaller parts.  From this perspective, describing distinct muscles, bones, and organs was preferred over studying interconnecting tissues, fascia, and inter-relationships.  

If you’ve ever had an ankle sprain and noticed how quickly the change in your gait begins to tug, pull, and affect both neighboring and distant tissues, you might agree that seeing the body as a system of discrete structures doesn't reflect the way the body actually is. 

So, if “it’s all connected,” how exactly does it go together?  

More recently, studies of human anatomy have been conducted differently.  Fascial researchers curious about tissue interconnectivity (not just separation) approach dissection looking for places of intersection and relationship .  As it turns out, approaching our anatomy from this vantage point reveals fascial tracts or sinews that preferentially hang together in patterns.  When compared side-by-side, these dissected fascial patterns of interwoven tissues correlate highly with meridians and acupuncture channels seen in East Asian medicine. Further, the findings from these fascial studies are consistent with how our tissues develop embryologically: scientists know that our bodies are not so much assembled part-by-part, but rather our tissues develop, differentiate, and remain fluidly connected as we grow—both in and out of utero.  

Why do these different ways of viewing the body matter?

This may be beyond the scope of this short article, but I’m delving into this topic because I’m asked to provide Western scientific validity for the existence of acupuncture meridians, which are knowledge systems unto themselves that have existed for millennia.  I’m excited to provide a bit more historical context to help answer that question.  At the same time, it bears mentioning that it would be equally valid to ask why Western anatomists didn’t observe acupuncture points and meridians in their centuries of study until recently.

I’m suggesting that there is always a cultural bias behind the microscope.  Acknowledging how Western cultural bias has influenced its study of the body can help us better understand ourselves and our bodies in so many ways.

This is fascinating because it helps us:

• Revise our idea about what 'objectivity' means in Western scientific heritage. 

• Reimagine a body paradigm that includes our emotional and spiritual experiences as inextricable from physical ones.

• Change our mindset about our injuries from a parts to a whole model.

• Illustrate pathways of connection that describe coordinated movements across multiple joints.

• Describe an anatomical viewpoint consistent with acupuncture meridians 

• Establish a basis for bodywork, manual therapy, and other treatment modalities informed by fascial continuity.

References:

❍ Myers T.  The anatomy trains.  Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies 1997; 1(2):91-101.
❍ Langevin HM, Yandow JA. Relationship of acupuncture points and meridians to connective tissue plants.  Anatomical Record 2002; 269;257-265.
❍ Kuriyama S. The Expressiveness of the Body and the Divergence of Greek and Chinese Medicine. Zone Books. 2006.