Talk:Trager approach
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Biased references?
[edit]There's interesting content in the article, but it seems that all of the references are from official Trager sources (and one or two books on the method). Are there any peer-reviewed scientific papers by researchers with no connections to the Trager Institute/Association/etc?
- Destynova 16:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed. This seems to be just the kind of page to have a section "Criticism". Without it, I'd approach it with lots of caution. Hexmaster (talk) 11:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- This is a fairly established form of bodywork (though I think it was more popular decades ago than now), so I'm certain there are secondary sources - especially books that review and summarize a dozen or so modalities - that discuss it. I will add a couple of sources give the article have a bit more grounding. I'm not sure that anyone currently cares enough about it to write much "criticism" in the sources, but it would be appropriate to state that it (probably) doesn't have any science specifically supporting it (once someone has checked the various channels to ensure that's true). --Karinpower (talk) 22:36, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- Indeed. This seems to be just the kind of page to have a section "Criticism". Without it, I'd approach it with lots of caution. Hexmaster (talk) 11:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Fringe theories tag
[edit]I don't see any theories being presented in this article - proponent's claims are marked as such without the article positing any efficacy. Are there any specific objections to this tag being removed? SympatheticResonance (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:40, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Well, there's
"Trager wanted western medicine to appreciate the mind-body connection in healing challenging conditions such as postpolio, Parkinson's, and other neuromuscular conditions."
--tronvillain (talk) 02:35, 25 March 2017 (UTC)- Right, that was his aspiration. And the next sentence:
"Doctors referred patients to him and were pleased with the results, but the medical approach to these conditions did not fundamentally shift away from medication and surgery as he had envisioned"
- physicians did not validate his position. This sounds consistent with what the scarce well-designed studies of this approach suggest (e.g., http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475402000271): a noticeable short-term reduction of inflammation in the local tissues that were treated. Probably feels good for someone with chronic spasticity and no doctor's going to suggest you do this for Parkinson's instead of taking levodopa. The article reflects that pretty clearly. Why keep the tag? SympatheticResonance (talk)- I've given the article a few tweaks. Really, it needs more, but it might be enough to remove the tag. --tronvillain (talk) 22:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
- Right, that was his aspiration. And the next sentence:
"The Trager® Approach" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The Trager® Approach and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 2#The Trager® Approach until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 20:03, 2 April 2022 (UTC)