Talk:Alexander Technique

Accusations

Accusing someone else of attacking you is inappropriate behavior on any article talk page. Either bring it up (with evidence in the form of diffs) on the user's talk page or file a report at WP:ANI. The next time I see this behavior on this page I will give the person doing it a final warning, and the next time after that I will file an ANI report. Knock it off, all of you. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:06, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Roxy the dog is harassing the page it looks like 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:47, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Continued accusations like that may result in a block or ban. --Hipal (talk) 15:28, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Use of Twinkle to revert changes to Alexander Technique Article

Hello, I am new to the world of Wikipedia editing and thought to improve the content of the Wikipedia entry on the Alexander Technique as it has numerous deficiencies -- lack of clarity and lack of context among them. I noticed that not one half hour after making my initial edit, an editor (see history to learn whom this was) reverted all of my changes. This editor's wholesale and extremely rapid action seems to violate policies on Wikipedia. For instance under Twinkle it says "If a change is merely "unsatisfactory" in some way, undoing/reverting should not be the first response. Editors should either make a reasonable attempt to improve the change, or should simply leave it in place for future editors to improve." This was clearly not done.

The justification for the wholesale elimination of my edits given was "Changes to lead unsupported by body text." That is false, and not only based on the fact that the editor could not have discerned such a reason/basis in so short a time. In any event, the remainder of the article is also in need of clarification and refinement, and it is my intention to edit the body text as well. This is a multi-step process and it is too big to do in one go, so I began at the beginning with the intention of continuing shortly to the remainder of the article.

Before I revert the editor's reversion, I would appreciate some explanation of their conduct as an editor in this instance. I thank all readers of this posting, most of whom will be more experienced than myself, for their assistance and consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chih Lo Lou (talk • contribs) 00:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Twinkle is just a tool for making edits to the project easier, I would have made the same change, i.e. reverted your edit, using any of the editing tools available. The editor who makes changes takes responsibility for them no matter what editing tool, or indeed none.

My edsum, copied here - "Changes to lead unsupported by body text. see WP:LEAD" - explain my edit. I'd further explain as follows - WP:LEAD instructs us that the Lead is supposed to be a summary of the most notable points of the body text of the article. Your change, a WP:BOLD insertion of unsourced and unsupported text into the lead, is not acceptable.

The next step of the editing process is Discussion per the D of BRD WP:BRD Which is where we are at now, thanks to you opening this discussion here. Thanks btw. -Roxy the dog. wooF 16:54, 26 November 2021 (UTC) -Roxy the dog. wooF 16:54, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the constructive tone of your notes. I will attempt to begin the revision of this article through discussion here, and we will see how that goes. One of the big problems with the article is that it labels the Alexander Technique ("AT") as an alternative therapy. It makes this mistake in the lead ("...is a popular type of alternative therapy....[1]") and also in the body ("Alexander did not originally conceive of his technique as therapy, but it has become a form of alternative medicine.[1]") Both of these mistaken characterizations rely upon the same source [1] by Edzard Ernst, who is not a teacher or even a student of the AT.

As I tried to say in my revision to the article, the AT is an educational process (or learning method) that teaches people to inhibit habitual postural faults that are thought to cause problems such as back pain. Back pain can be lessened or eliminated by study of the AT not because the AT is a therapy, but because people learn to stop doing things that are harmful to their own well being. Therapy is curative, direct and specific; AT is preventive, indirect and general. Alexander himself called AT "the study of human reaction." STUDY.... not treatment.

No certified teacher of the AT would call their teaching therapy, although they would admit that STUDY of the AT is often beneficial to STUDENTS. AT students often do feel less pain because they learn to inhibit their faulty postural habits with progressively greater frequency and accuracy. Their posture often becomes more upright without strain. And there are sources to document these results, such as the BMJ study which is cited in the article in a completely inappropriate location to do with training rather than the AT's potential benefits (footnote 20).

Just because of Ernst's book -- and there are many books one could cite that do not make this same mistake -- the whole article is off target from the start. One does not have to abandon skepticism about the AT to at least describe it correctly. I welcome the skepticism, but abhor the inaccuracy. Can we start with this, please? Chih Lo Lou (talk) 00:14, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Chih Lo Lou as you are new to editing I would advise you to not start with a page such as this. There is a lot to learn and it's best learned in small bite size bits, even better if not on a page like this. Pick butterflies or a music group or something to hone your skills. I understand that you want to make a lot of changes, and yes you can't start in the lede and then assume that other editors are psychic and know that you are someday going to make changes to the body to support the lede. Start with the body. Also you can work on larger changes in your sandbox, then when ready copy/paste the text into the article. With this said, I seriously suggest not starting with a page that is considered fringe. The rules are more difficult than a page on a historical marker in your town or something. You are going to have to back everything up with citations from reliable sources and not your opinion on the matter. From what you wrote above it sounds like you are closely associated with AT and that already worries me, you say "no certified teacher" which means you are starting out by telling us your opinion. Wikipedia does not work that way, it is an encyclopedia and not an extension of your classroom. In the spirit of whatever season you want it to be, I'm suggesting that this is going to be a time sink. Sgerbic (talk) 06:12, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

I heartily endorse Sgerbic's comments here, You have picked a difficult page to start your wiki career. If you look a little more carefully, you will find that the article is written based upon WP:RS (reliable sources), and despite your assessment, Edzard Ernst is one of the worlds experts on Alt-Med, and wikipedia rightfully treats his writings as very reliable. We will not be dismissing Ernst so easily. Good luck. -Roxy the dog. wooF 19:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

@Chih Lo Lou: Firstly, I agree with the above editors that a controversial topic, where many people have vested interests to push, is a difficult one to start with. But the choice is yours, of course. If you decide to push on, you will have to make your points based on reliable sources, preferably that are independent of the subject (or at least don't have a conflict of interest). For example, the explanation you gave above of your own personal understanding is not something we can use on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not about any editor's personal understanding; it is about summarizing what the best available sources have to say.

Be especially careful of making sweeping statements such as "No certified teacher of the AT would call their teaching therapy" unless you can provide very solid evidence to show that somebody has surveyed every single teacher. In my own city I just did a very quick Google search and found three who talk about AT therapy and another two who talk about AT as "treatments". Reading through their web sites, they describe it very differently - some of them echo your description ("learning to move mindfully" or "rediscovering natural balance and poise through thinking in activity"), while some sound like different words for "treatment" ("an intelligent way to solve body problems" or "manage and overcome pain and injury" or "relieves problems such as back pain, neck ache, sore shoulders and other musculoskeletal problems"), some define it in religious terms ("in harmony with how we were designed"), some are just weird New Age / life coaching stuff (“a way to transform stress to joy” or "every thought we have registers somewhere in our muscles, so the way we think about ourselves is a vital element"), and some also claim to treat psychological disorders such as anxiety and depression. So is it possible that your understanding is not shared by all AT practitioners? The answer is: it does not matter, because your views (or mine, or any editor's) don't matter. Only the sources matter. Provide sources to support the change you would like to propose.--Gronk Oz (talk) 08:56, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

@Chih Lo Lou I see you are making changes to the article - you say as your reason for the edit that you will "provide greater accuracy in describing the way Alexander lessons proceed" and you are tweaking the wording. Are the changes you are making because that's what the citation says or is this based on your teaching experience? Because one of those two is going to get a revert if true. So speak up soon I don't have a copy of the book and have not read that journal article. Sgerbic (talk) 02:32, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to reply to the comments that have been triggered by my efforts to improve the Alexander Technique article on Wikipedia. Please note the following: 1. There seems to be a pervasive fear that I am trying to bias the article and make it a sort of "puff piece" rather than an information source. That is not true. If my fumbling early attempts have given you that impression, that impression is not consistent with my intent. 2. I am attempting to edit this article because it is a subject that interests me, a subject that I know something about, and it is an article in which I see problems that have mainly to do with accuracy. Those who have so righteously commented on my efforts are also ostensibly interested in accuracy, so I wonder "why all the combativeness and, sometimes, condescension?" 3. Just because someone is interested in a subject and knows something about it does not automatically make them an adversary of objectivity or of science -- or an adversary of you personally. I'm not claiming to be free of bias, but I am aware of my bias and am not trying to inject it into this article. I'm not sure I see that same level of awareness of bias in those who are critiquing my efforts so liberally without any hint of self examination in their comments. 4. The book that was cited as the source for the section I most recently edited (that section is the first paragraph of the "Method" section) does not appear to offer especially relevant support to the content of that section before I edited it. That is, the source appears to me to have always been lacking. I made modest edits to the text that I believe make the paragraph more accurate, but left the source unchanged. Since this has raised hackles I will clarify matters by changing the source as well to one that is more relevant and also compact, the NHS page on the Alexander Technique. Since the NHS is a reputable source, and since the text is more relevant to this section of the article, I hope that it resolves the concerns. Chih Lo Lou (talk) 18:58, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@Chih Lo Lou: - I think you're right; this topic has in the past sometimes been a battle ground so people might be a bit quick to bite - sorry for that. Keep responding in good faith and you will find they come around to working together to build the best possible article. In general, you should not remove material that is properly referenced. By all means add new material referenced to new, good sources. If you think the article does not properly reflect the source, it would be good to make the suggestion here first because sometimes there is a history of debate about the point which you won't have seen.--Gronk Oz (talk) 03:08, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Ah - my concern is that you have never edited Wikipedia before and have decided that this is the page you are going to start with, just because you are interested. Hummm Also, you keep making edits to the article and marking them as minor edits. The last change you made was over 2K characters, that's not a minor edit. Trust me you will not end up with a puff piece. Your second edit on Wikipedia was to @Roxy the dog on his talk page accusing him of reverting your edit using something called Twinkle. So yeah, red flags are a waving. You said you know something about this practice and are trying to make it accurate, stick to the RS and we should be fine.Sgerbic (talk) 05:07, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

So can we get some help incorporating the requested changes? 68.129.197.221 (talk) 05:36, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Alexander Technique: Therapy or Education?

Hello everyone, I wish to return to a controversial topic that is of fundamental importance to any discussion of the Alexander Technique (AT). This topic is how the AT ought to be classified.

Currently, Wikipedia classifies the AT as "alternative therapy." As I have already noted, Alexander himself -- the person who created this discipline and taught it for 60 years -- did not portray his Technique in that way. If the innovator himself does not express it that way, it is inaccurate for the Wikipedia article to label the AT as "therapy" without, at the very least, noting that Alexander classified it as "education" or "re-education." In Alexander's seminal work, "The Use of the Self," the word "education" appears 12 times while the word "therapy" never appears. John Dewey, a pioneering thinker in education, wrote of the AT "But the method is not one of remedy; it is one of constructive education." Alexander himself addresses the intersection of his Technique with the medical field at the start of Chapter 5 of The Use of the Self:

"For many years medical men have been sending their patients to me, because they know that I am experienced in examining conditions of use and in estimating the influence of these conditions upon functioning. I would say at once that I do not receive these cases as patients, but as pupils, inasmuch as I am not interested in disease or defects apart from their association with harmful conditions of use and functioning."

The phrase, "I would say at once that I do not receive these cases as patients, but as pupils..." clearly expresses Alexander's view of his own discipline. Pupils are engaging in a course of study to potentially alleviate health problems, but that doesn't make them "patients" or their course of study "therapy." Moreover, Alexander writes that "The real solution of the problem lies in the wide acceptance of the principle of prevention instead of 'cure,'..." Note that Alexander put the word 'cure' in quotes, and I would assert that prevention is not "treatment" or "therapy" but rather a strategy to avoid having need of treatment/therapy.

I could continue quoting Alexander or his most prominent successors, Walter Carrington and Patrick Macdonald, but I won't belabor the point that the current categorization of AT as "therapy" runs completely counter to its founder's viewpoint. I believe that viewpoint must be represented here in some manner for the article to be accurate, so now I turn to how this might be done.

There are two ways to address the article's inaccurate categorization of the AT. One is to recategorize the AT to put it under a more appropriate label. The categories [[1]] shown for Wikipedia entries include two more relevant possibilities. There's Education (under "Human Activities") or "Self Care" (under "Health and Fitness"). The self care category aligns well with how Walter Carrington explained the AT (see here), calling it "a method of self help."

The other way to address the issue is to, at minimum, include a section that makes the viewpoint of the founder and his leading disciples clear. This would at least permit the reader of the article to know how the AT was categorized by the most authoritative sources, i.e., those with the most experience and expertise in teaching the work.

My efforts to improve the Alexander Technique Wikipedia posting have attracted hostility and suspicion, but I hope those reading this note will at least allow for the possibility that I am making good-faith efforts to improve the article and not to harm it. Clumsiness and inexperience are not mortal sins, and they do not call for the permanent assumption that I am acting in bad faith. Nor is it a crime that I am paying attention to what interests me on Wikipedia rather than seeking to generalize my efforts and spend time on subjects that do not interest me. If you quickly and persistently ascribe bad faith and bias to me, please consider and tend to your own biases. Chih Lo Lou (talk) 23:27, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I've been doing this a bunch of years Chih Lo Lou and Every Single Time when a brand new editor who only edits one page that says "this is what interests me" and "I just want to start with this page because I like it" and "I'm not closely associated with this page I'm focused on" they turn out to be closely associated with the page. Either they were hired, they 'are' the person, they are closely associated with the person, they practice the alt-med or pseudoscience. When I point out that maybe they should learn to be a better editor by editing one of the tens of thousands of other Wikipedia pages that are also interesting and in need of help, they oddly never take that advice, they double down and continue insisting that this page is the only Wikipedia page they want to edit. Maybe you are the exception, time will tell, but already here you are on the talk page trying to tell us that the Alexander Technique should not be called alt-med because ... the person who created it didn't call it alt-med. Oh Boy, as we keep explaining to you, it does not work like that. That would be a primary source, we are looking for secondary sources that will talk about it in reliable sources ... like Edzard Ernst does. Again you are pulling quotes out of a book, "at the start of Chapter 5 of The Use of the Self" you just happened to have a copy of that book on your shelf? Is that a normal book to have lying around? We like books, don't get me wrong, it's just odd that you would have that book around and yet not be closely associated with this practice. Cult leaders don't call their religion a cult, cancer quacks don't call their cancer clinic a quack clinic, pseudoscience nonsense originators don't call their practice pseudoscience, grief vampire psychics don't call themselves cons, and alt-med practitioners don't call their medical technique alt-med. It is for notable secondary sources to decide how to define the practice and person. Otherwise we would all be what we claim to be, beautiful, funny, amazing human beings. Sgerbic (talk) 01:28, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

There is intense hostility from some editors that evaluate this page to be about as legiatment as scientology; sadly their biases are extreme and understandable with the label of alternative medicine put on this Wiki; the situation has been bad for years now on this wiki and doesn't seem to have any improvement in sight. There is no problem highlighting medical criticisms but editors are ignoring the fact that the AT is being taught at many performing arts institutions in a variety of fields other than medicine (it's primary application if performing arts) and the editors of this page are bogged down with validating the most simple things but let inaccurate statements about who is teaching the AT in these instructions (for example the article says AT is taught by music teachers but only certified teachers can hold positions at university). I think the editors don't want to change the article unless it reflects negatively as it's been marked for wikiproject skepticism 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I have not replied on this talk page for quite some time, hoping that more people would express their viewpoint on the question I raised. Unfortunately, there has been little "talk" in response to my proposal, and the lone reply is a rehash of why people with certain characteristics (like having access to relevant books!) should not bother to edit Wikipedia pages. Wikipedia doesn't exclude anyone from editing, and I'm not going to be excluded. And believe me, no one is paying me a penny for wading into this morass.

As for the subject matter of the article, which is the point of this "talk," very little has been offered in objection to what I wrote other than that the sources I cited were "primary" and that these therefore were unsuitable. So if "secondary" sources are the holy grail here, then I have one to offer. Please look at the NHS page on the Alexander Technique. The NHS page has over a dozen occurrences of the words "teach" and "teacher" and not one occurrence of the word "therapy." The word "lessons" also appears over a dozen times, and that is the correct term for the appointments students make to be taught by Alexander teachers. The NHS page also clearly, and appropriately, notes that most Alexander teachers "aren't medical professionals," correctly separating Alexander teaching from medical consultations. Thus, the NHS explanation of Alexander Technique is perfectly consistent with what F.M. Alexander himself, as well as his leading successors (Walter Carrington and Patrick Macdonald) wrote and taught.

It is wrong to treat the notion that Alexander Technique is "therapy" as a settled matter based on one single source when there are other credible sources categorizing Alexander as an educational process. I will draft a section that discusses the issue of how to categorize the Alexander Technique and post it here for comments before adding it to the article. Chih Lo Lou (talk) 23:35, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't think you are understanding, sorry if I haven't been clear. Yes I am suspious because you just happen to have these obscure books handy and the fact that the only page you have edited since opening this account November 24, 2021 is the Alexander Technique page (other than the time you posted on Roxy's talk page accusing him of something). Of course we want people with books to edit Wikipedia, I'm surrounded by books and probably most editors have also. What the issue is, is that Wikipedia editors can't do original research. Like when you said that we should look at the NHS page (which is kinda a primary source itself) and look at the 'occurrences of the words "teach" and "teacher" and not one occurrence of the word "therapy."' That is doing research and extrapolating information from a primary source. You are asking a Wikipedia editor to test something, something that will have an outcome that you already want the result to be. You want that result so you are looking for ways to find that result. That's not even a good test, that's not how science works, and Wikipedia editors DO NOT DO tests, science or otherwise.

What you are looking for is information from secondary reliable sources (something with journalist integrity is the way I explain it best) that is writing about AT from an "expert" view. Then you cite that. I understand that this is probably frustrating for you as it looks like I keep putting up fences. Which is why I keep telling you that you should put this page to the side, and go to other pages and learn how we do things here on Wikipedia. It isn't as easy as just getting information out of books and typing the content on the page and hitting save. Sgerbic (talk) 03:05, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Even Edzard Ernst writes Alexander "developed an educational programme". Full quote: "he developed an educational programme aimed at avoiding unnecessary muscular tension. Even though Alexander did not envisage his approach to become a therapy, it has in recent years become a popular alternative treatment". So to summarize Ernst's view: it was an educational programme/approach that has recently become a popular alternative treatment. That's from the Ernst source cited in the article. The "educational programme" bit is not, at the time of writing, used by the article, LOL!

If you value Ernst's take, note he writes in the same source "Alexander teachers closely observe their students, show them how to move with less strain and correct their posture". Therefore, if that is correct, it is an educational process, an educational modality, (which may have therapeutic benefits).

I would say education and therapy, in the case of Alex Tech, is a false dichotomy. In the same way that, in the case of physiotherapy, exercise and therapy is a false dichotomy. If the "origin story" of Alex Tech is to be taken at face value, then Alexander's procedures were therapeutic for his voice! So, Alex Tech has been used for therapeutic purposes since its purported origin.

To summarize, with Alex Tech, education and therapy is a false dichotomy, but its method is, if we credit Ernst, educational.

[All that said, the Ernst source is problematic in itself, as much of it is cribbed from this article. It should only be used with great care! I am using it here, to respond to the editors that highly esteem it].Aliveness Cascade (talk) 14:21, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Ernst, of course, looks at Alex Tech through a therapeutic lens. As another editor has repeatedly pointed out in these talk pages, Alex Tech is commonly used in performance schools (acting, dance, music) to teach students a better command of themselves in performance. So it is problematic to label Alex Tech simply as "therapy" (alternative or not), for these reasons too. Therapeutics is simply one application of Alex Tech. Now, whether what Alex Tech teachers teach is correct, and their educational endeavors are successful, are other questions. But the fact remains that therapeutics is one application of Alex Tech, not what it *is*. Aliveness Cascade (talk) 15:20, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Hahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahaha. cribbed from here?????? Mwahahahaha. -Roxy the dog. wooF 16:20, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Okay I'm totally lost now. Is @Aliveness Cascade saying that Ernst has written an article about AT calling AT an "educational programme" so based on that the AT Wikipedia page should be changed to say that Ernst says AT is educational. BUT Aliveness is also saying that Ernst plagiarized the AT article to write his book? And that we can't use Ernst's book because it is a copy from the Wikipedia article? My head hurts, not getting it. Sgerbic (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm using Ernst because several editors here highly esteem him. The Ernst source cited in the article has been used selectively - to support "alternative therapy" - whilst the "educational process" bits have been disregarded in the current edit. Yes, unfortunately that particular Ernst source ("Alternative Medicine", Springer 2019) does seem to have used some material from this article. But how about this, an article from Edzard Ernst for GPonline, which certainly seems independently researched, and lists 7 academic references:

The Alexander technique is a process of psychophysical re-education to improve postural balance and coordination in order to move with minimal strain and maximum ease. ~ Edzard Ernst

Here's a recent academic quote, from different authors:

The Alexander Technique (AT) is an educational self-management approach which aims to provide people with the skills to recognise, understand, and change habits primarily impacting movement and posture

My own point, regarding the actual question that is the topic of this section, namely "Therapy or Education?", is that is a false dichotomy in the case of Alex Tech, just as "Therapy or Exercise?" would be a false dichotomy in the case of physiotherapy. I make the further point, that the article as it stands is misleading as pronouncing that Alex Tech is "alternative therapy", when therapeutics is only one application of Alex Tech. It is commonly used at performance schools (acting, music, dance) to help enable performers give better performances. For example: An Acting Teacher’s Take on What the Alexander Technique Can Do for You:

[Alexander Technique] is an extremely powerful practice of body-mind integration that pays dividends for actors on many levels.

... that's one of the most valuable things that the Alexander Technique can offer an actor: the ability to consciously promote physical openness and receptiveness, which go hand-in-hand with emotional openness and vulnerability.

Several seasoned editors of this article are very keen on positioning Alex Tech as "alternative therapy". They have their sources, and they are citing them, and that's all good. But there are other sources which tell a different story! The larger picture shows that therapeutics (successful or not, well-founded or not) is only one application of Alex Tech. And this fact has been flagged again and again by multiple editors. ~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

The Alexander Technique is an educational method that helps individuals learn to correct inefficient or faulty movement and postural habits, reducing potentially harmful tension accumulation by changing how one conceptualizes and responds to the stimulus of movement; the AT is not a passive treatment but a method known within the AT community as mind-body re-education. Movement is a focus in learning the AT, however, the AT is generally taught as an educational system rather than movement therapy.

Williams, Angela The Alexander Technique, Complementary and Alternative Medicine Sourcebook, 6th Edition July 2018 978-0-7808-1632-9 pages 439-441

Woods C., Glover L., Woodman J. An Education for Life: The Process of Learning the Alexander Technique Kinesiology Review Volume 9: Issue 3 14 Aug 2020 https://doi.org/10.1123/kr.2020-0020 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and there's this from Taber's medical dictionary online: "a form of bodily training that promotes postural health, esp. of the spine, head, and neck". [2]Aliveness Cascade (talk) 23:35, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and there's this from the UK's Advertising Standards Authority: "The Alexander Technique is an educational method intended to support self-management of conditions such as back pain by improving posture through psycho physical re-education. ~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 00:01, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and there's this from Onstage Synergy: Integrative Alexander Technique Practice for Performing Artists by Cathy Madden: "An educational method used to improve performance, the Alexander Technique teaches people to replace unnecessary muscular and mental effort with consciously coordinated responses, maximizing effectiveness while also relieving, if necessary, any chronic stiffness or stress.".~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 17:09, 24 January 2022 (UTC) (Including this one as it's a neat description of Alex Tech's purpose, and its application in the performing arts. Not as a source for its efficacy!).~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 17:50, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Editors showing bias in regard to this article 68.129.197.221 (talk) 16:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Given the lack of response to Aliveness Cascade's post, I propose the first paragraph of the lede be re-written along the following lines:

"The Alexander Technique, named after its developer Frederick Matthias Alexander (1869–1955), is an educational method which aims to improve movement and posture through improved body awareness. It is claimed to improve performance in activities that require skilful coordination such acting, and to offer therapeutic effects through facilitating the self-management of conditions such as back and neck pain."

Your thoughts?

References

86.7.62.124 (talk) 10:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Seems like a WP:LEDEBOMB. tabers.com and backstage.com are very weak sources; the lede is meant to summarize the body. Alexbrn (talk) 10:53, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

This is an accurate description, at least the first sentence is more accurate than the article description. Editors take note. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:14, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hard to see how the suggested paragraph is a lede Bomb. It summarises what is in the text and does so more comprehensively and accurately than the one it replaces.

In relation to the main article it refers directly to:—

• Section 1: Uses (in which Alex Tech's use in acting and musical performance is prominently noted)
• Section 2: Claims with regard to health effects
• Section 3: Method (in which Alex Tech is clearly described as an educational process throughout)
• Section 4: History

The Tabers quote doesn't seem to be essential, and I would say could be omitted. I was under the impression, though, that Tabers is a reputable and well established medical dictionary. Happy to be enlightened if this is not the case.

Agree Backstage is not great. There are other references that could be used to show use by performers, for example: this from BMC

Finally, Section 1 of the main text needs expanding, I suggest an Template:Expand_section is inserted for now to make that clear.

Rastalked (talk) 14:40, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

What is "Alex Tech"? It appears to be a kind of electrical wiring conduit. Is the same person (with this unusual wording) using multiple accounts (and IPs) here? Alexbrn (talk) 14:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

This is the second time I have posted. I posted earlier today from my phone and hence not signed in. Please respond to the points raised, which were offered in good faith. Rastalked (talk) 15:04, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

I see. Articles should be based on secondary sources. I think per Cochrane/Aetna/Aus Dept. of health we need to continue call this a therapy. The lede also has to mention the lack of evidence supporting the claims made for AT, to be neutral. Alexbrn (talk) 15:17, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

I was not intending to replace the whole lede, just the first paragraph leaving the rest as is.

I think there may be a sensible compromise to be had about the 'alternative therapy' versus 'education' question which might put it to bed for good, which would be to everyone's advantage! It seems to me that reasonable references have been found to support both positions. Clearly some sources describe it as alternative therapy while others say it is an educational approach (sometimes the same person says both in different sources, e.g Ernst). Also the way that Alex Tech is described in the body of the article is as 'something that is taught and learned and put into practice' (education) rather than 'something that is done to you' (therapy), so the article seen as a whole currently reads in a bit of an odd and inconsistent way.

Given the apparently irreconcilable difference of opinion about which sources to go with, perhaps this conflict should be acknowledged and addressed head-on thus:—

"The Alexander Technique, named after its developer Frederick Matthias Alexander (1869–1955), aims to improve movement and posture through teaching principles related to posture, movement and attention which can then be applied in daily life. It is claimed to improve performance in activities such as music and acting, and to offer therapeutic benefits through facilitating the self-management of conditions such as back and neck pain. It is generally taught in a series of one-to-one or group lessons, and is therefore described by its proponents and others [references here] as an educational method. However some experts [references here] point to claims as to the therapeutic benefits of the practice and have therefore classified it as a form of alternative therapy."

This replaces only the first paragraph of the lede, the rest stays as is

That's just a rough draft, but as a concept?

Rastalked (talk) 16:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

It sounds rather promotional. Please be aware of WP:COI/WP:MEDCOI and make any necessary declarations. Alexbrn (talk) 16:33, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

I teach the Alexander Technique, so yes I have a bias, happy to acknowledge that. To be honest I don't read it as promotional, but I may well be missing it, so happy to tone anything down if you could point out what it is that concerns you. I'm sure that the basic sense could be kept in a neutral, non-promotional way. Rastalked (talk) 16:40, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

The issue is it's like a pitch, and it airs a lot of benefits when it seems the consensus in reliable sources is AT isn't really effective for improving human health in any way. Alexbrn (talk) 16:48, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

OK, I propose moving a line about the lack of evidence from the third paragraph of the lede up to this new first paragraph, and have removed as much extraneous explanation as possible. I have used 'claims' rather than stated things as facts where there is insufficient evidence to do so. So the Lede as a whole would now read:—

"The Alexander Technique, named after its developer Frederick Matthias Alexander (1869–1955), is a practice which aims to improve postural balance and coordination. It is used in the fields of music and drama education, and is also claimed by its proponents to address a variety of health conditions, but there is a lack of research to support the claims.[5][6][5][6]. It is taught in one-to-one or group lessons and is therefore described by its proponents and others [references here] as an educational method. However some experts [references here] point to its claims to offer therapeutic benefits and have therefore classified it as a form of alternative therapy."

Alexander began developing his technique's principles in the 1890s[3] in an attempt to address his own voice loss during public speaking.[2]: 34–35  He credited his method with allowing him to pursue his passion for performing Shakespearean recitations.[4]

As of 2021, the UK National Health Service cites evidence that the Alexander Technique may be helpful for long-term back pain and for long-term neck pain, and that it could help people cope with Parkinson's disease.[6] Both the American health-insurance company Aetna and the Australian Department of Health have conducted reviews and concluded that there is insufficient evidence for the technique's health claims to warrant insurance coverage.[5][7]"

Rastalked (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

I think this latest proposed text by Rastalked is a good change, and much better and more accurate and informative than the current lead. However, I would change the last sentence of the first paragraph to: "Nevertheless, as individuals undertake lessons for purported health benefits, it is also characterized and treated as an alternative therapy." [refs here] ~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 18:07, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Propose this because it's not just "some experts" who categorize it thus: the scientific and medical communities generally tend to do so, and this is the reason.

Propose tweaking this further, so it is explicit that it is only a proportion (all be it a good proportion) of people that use it for health benefits: "as many individuals who undertake lessons do so for its purported health benefits" ~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 20:05, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

I would also delete the "therefore", as that seems like original research (and inaccurate). So simply: "It is taught in one-to-one or group lessons and is described by its proponents and others [references here] as an educational method." The article itself should take into account sources which call it a technique of education, specifically sensory-motor education, which is used with the intent of giving a person an heuristic experience of better coordination. My point is it is not called "education" because it "it is taught in one-to-one or group lessons". It would be "education" because (some sources say) it is used to teach better coordination, and how-to work to improve coordination on one's own.~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 18:46, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Rastalked: for your proposals and endeavors to improve the article.

For convenience, here are my proposed edits to Rastalked's proposal put in place:

"The Alexander Technique, named after its developer Frederick Matthias Alexander (1869–1955), is a practice which aims to improve postural balance and coordination. It is used in the fields of music and drama education, and is also claimed by its proponents to address a variety of health conditions, but there is a lack of research to support the claims.[5][6][5][6]. It is taught in one-to-one or group lessons, and is described by its proponents and others [references here] as an educational method. Nevertheless, as many individuals who undertake lessons do so for its purported health benefits, it is also characterized and treated as an alternative therapy. [refs here]" ~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 20:05, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

But I dispute the phrase, taken from the current article, "is also claimed by its proponents to address a variety of health conditions". My issue is the phrase "address". I would replace it with "help". Alex Tech teaching does not address "a variety of health conditions". It is a technique intended for the teaching of better coordination, and my understanding is that this is what an Alex Tech teacher principally does: they address their pupils' patterns of coordination, and endeavor to give them an experience of better coordination, and also build a pupil's skills to consciously direct their activities with improved coordination. If their pupil develops an improved standard of coordination and this happens to help some health complaint they have, that's a benefit of their improved coordination, but the health complaint is not what an Alex Tech teacher addresses (as I understand it). Hence I would change "address" to "help", and add "by improving their coordination". At the very least I would change "address" to "help". As it is now, "address" badly mischaracterizes what Alex Tech teaching is held out to be. ~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 20:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

A proposed re-edit to address both the above concern, and the fact that is also called a self-help tool:

"The Alexander Technique, named after its developer Frederick Matthias Alexander (1869–1955), is a practice which aims to improve postural balance and coordination. It is used in the fields of music and drama education, as well as being available privately as an alternative healthcare practice. Its proponents claim that good coordination, taught by Alexander Technique, can help a variety of health conditions, but there is a lack of research to support the claims.[refs] It is taught in one-to-one or group lessons, and is described by its proponents and others variously, as an educational method,[refs] or self-help tool.[refs] It is also classified as an alternative therapy,[refs] as many individuals who undertake lessons do so for its purported health benefits."~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 21:56, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Have to agree here, AT is miscategoized as alternative medicine 68.129.197.221 (talk) 05:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Pertinent advice

These all have useful advice:

• WP:OVERSIMPLIFY
• WP:Oversimplification
• WP:CONFLICTING
• WP:These are not original research#Conflict between sources

~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 22:44, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Honestly, I think it would be better to see if some kind of agreement can be reached around the basic concept before splitting hairs about the details ...

Rastalked (talk) 01:00, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

I present my take. That's what I do. I thank you again for your proposal, I agree with its basic outline, and I did my best to explain reasons for my proposed tweaks so they can be assessed on their merits. If I thought any of them were "splitting hairs" I wouldn't have spent the time presenting them and explaining them. Agreement cannot be reached around "the basic concept" of "Alexander Technique" itself, because there is no definitive definition of "the Alexander Technique" - the man himself didn't make one - and both its proponents today and investigative scientists speak of "Alexander Technique" in different ways - so the different substantiated uses of the term, e.g. education, self-help method, alternative therapy, need to all be presented (as per the advice linked to above). ~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 02:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

None of those are policy. Probably the best bet is to give most weight to the WP:BESTSOURCES. What, for example, does Cochrane say? Alexbrn (talk) 05:40, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

I have brought multiple actual citations with quotes to this discussion, which enables discussion. Please do likewise! "What does Cochrane say?". Please bring a citation and quote so yourself! It seems to me disruptive to repeatedly emphasize sources, without actually bringing them! "What does Cochrane say?" - you say it like it's some authority, rather than one site where academic research papers are posted, like many others. "Cochrane" says nothing itself, it simply hosts papers on systematic reviews. I can see one paper on Alexander Technique there, and I can see no reason whatever to elevate its "intro description" of "the Alexander Technique" above any other academic paper! But for what it's worth, here it is: "'The Alexander technique' is a taught form of therapy involving a series of movements designed to correct posture and bring the body into natural alignment with the object of helping it to function efficiently, and is reported to aid relaxation." So it's just another one that supports both sides of education/therapy question. But to re-iterate, it's only one of many "intro descriptions" in academic papers, and has no weight more than others. Plus all of these "intro descriptions" in academic papers reporting research into health outcomes demonstrate a high-tendency to see "Alexander Technique" through a therapeutic lens, no doubt because that is what they are looking at. As already established, Alexander Technique is used educationally in performing arts schools.~ Aliveness Cascade (talk) 10:28, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

References

Cochrane reviews are golden sources so it does have more weight than various lesser sources, and as WP:BESTSOURCES says, a way to avoid POV is to lean on the best quality sources. Following policy is always a good idea. "Taught form of therapy" then. I see the other very strong secondary source (the Aus review) has "Alexander technique is a type of taught physical therapy ...". Alexbrn (talk) 10:39, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

This is better but still leaves unaddressed the fact that Alex Tech is often used in non-therapeutic settings, and for completely non-therapeutic purposes--for example to help someone play the violin better, or learn to juggle, or to improve their swimming.

The difficulty, I think, is that medical sources will obviously speak to therapeutic applications. But a medical writer may be completely unaware that this other aspect even exists. How to acknowledge this other aspect?

Rastalked (talk) 17:26, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Musician use is covered by some academic literature. PMID:25344325 is not the greatest source, but could be usable with attribution, for example. Alexbrn (talk) 18:48, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Please see my post below "Suggested Rewrite of Entire Page" for peer-reviewed sources on musician use. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 03:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Cochrane reviews found evidence in support of AT in other areas than asthma https://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a884.short 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:45, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Misrepresenting the Alexander technique

I am very concerned that after reading the article on the Alexander technique it is being misunderstood and misrepresented. I read some of the arguments put forward by someone on this discussion page who sounded well informed on this subject being prevented from editing this article by people who sound uninformed but determined to control this page at any cost. Philip6061 (talk) 18:53, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources, which is what we build our articles on, that support your point? Sources must meet WP:RS and WP:MEDRS for biomedical information? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 19:11, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I have attached please of sources, please don't ignore them admins. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 02:30, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I have tried to make the appropriate changes (anyone involved in AT knows it's not a therapy at all) editors don't seems to care. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 05:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Your question is about sources. So I read your first paragraph that claims the Alexander technique is about posture. The source that can show you that this is false is every book written by FM Alexander himself. Posture is a fixed idea. The technique is about balance, breathing, and in the words of Walter Carrington it is about poise. Poise is not posture. Poise is not a fixed shape or position like posture. Philip6061 (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

You talk about sources but there are sources that are either plain wrong or who are wrong about the technique or who the writer of this wiki page can’t understand. Moving on to paragraph number 2. You talk about his method in the 1890’s. This so called method was not something you do because it was and still is about non doing. Is that paradoxical. Yes it is. Like everything about the technique. It still is years ahead of its time and you don’t get this. It is wholism and he said you can’t separate the mind and the body in an action. That’s in a book called the use of the self by fm Alexander that I don’t have to check as a source. I have experienced lessons and read all his books many times and you haven’t done either. You quote people about something and you don’t understand what are writing about. You think you win arguments by quoting sources but you are in fact undermining the legacy and thought of someone who has left behind important knowledge. You think the use of the self that is about non doing and poise is about a technique and method of doing something about posture. It’s not . It’s mind and body and balance and breathing and awareness and poise and thinking in activity in activity. But you don’t do any thing and that’s a paradox that you don’t understand. That’s paragraph 2. Philip6061 (talk) 23:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

You want sources about a biological medical model. You have got to be kidding me! If this technique does not fit what doctors already can find in their textbooks then for you it’s irrelevant. The whole point of this wholistic technique is that it does not separate mind and body. That’s just about as different from the medical scientific view as you can get. There was a long list of doctors who in spite of their training in medicine were broad minded enough to let Alexander cure patients of breathing illnesses. The technique is something you experience and learn about from a teacher. It is knowledge anyone can benefit from. This article you wrote would gain credibility if you considered the shortcomings of viewing the world through your medical scientific perspective. Philip6061 (talk) 23:15, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

A systems thinking view of the world would allow you to see why one perspective misses the connections between one thing and another. In the words of Gregory Bateson the anthropologist their are patterns that connect. We ignore these patterns at our own peril. Philip6061 (talk) 23:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Here we go . Your 3rd paragraph. I am not a teacher or a proponent of the Alexander technique. Philip6061 (talk) 23:25, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

I am a pupil of a variety of Alexander teachers. I have had about 80 lessons over the whole of my life. I love reading Alexander technique books by fm Alexander. I enjoy the complexity and mysterious qualities in his writing. I would like to dig deeper into how he developed his ideas . In short I am fascinated by this whole subject and I want nothing more than to be proved mistaken and think I have spent years of my life thinking in the wrong way . I would be delighted to fail and learn and make just a little more progress. There is nothing in your article that helps me to find out one tiny thing about the Alexander technique as an area of study. That’s because all you care about is the technique of using the biomedical model as a way of disproving something of which you are in my view entirely ignorant. Your article is a disgrace . Your motive is to just say the whole thing is false because Aetna will not include it in their insurance policies. How does that prove anything. Have you heard of critical thinking? Just because an organisation is not interested in something that doesn’t prove anything. The nhs study you mentioned said the Alexander technique was good for preventing back ache. That’s a significant fact you ignore when you think about how many hours of work are lost to backache. One of the worlds greatest philosophers John Dewey defended the Alexander technique and wrote prefaces to his books and said the technique was based on science and scientific principles and he explains what science is and how you can prove things scientifically and how the technique is abiding by those principles. Perhaps he was even a little biased though because Alexander cured John Dewey’s backache. During Alexander’s lifetime he was sued in a court case in South Africa by someone who was refused lessons. Alexander won in the trial. Dr Wilred Barlow testified for Alexander. Dr Wilfred Barlow has written books about the Alexander principle. He was trained as an Alexander practitioner. He writes beautifully about the many areas of life where the technique can help people in general or patients in hospitals when the current treatments provided by the nhs can’t help them. Philip6061 (talk) 23:53, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but do you have any sources? We are not going to change the article because a stranger on the internetz says we should. - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 23:57, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

So Phillip6061 - thanks for the instruction on AT but that isn't how Wikipedia pages are built. We use notable secondary sources, we aren't allowed to inject our opinion. We can't take a class on AT and then use it in the article. We can't rely on someone who says they have knowledge to tell the editors what to write. Sgerbic (talk) 23:59, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Can I please get some help incorporating what is possible in my contributions please, are there any editors that want to take the source lists I've provided and sift through what is acceptable for wiki because I don't know what more you want 68.129.197.221 (talk) 05:50, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I barely found this comment, only because I just happened to be looking at this page. You are responding to a comment from June when there are more current discussions. You have given us a wall-of-text and I have no idea why that other section just became a solid wall of text. You have been repeatably instructed on what you can do and you keep ignoring us. From the random citations I looked at you gave, one was a dead link, many others go to journal articles behind paywalls. And the rest go to print books/articles. We keep telling you, Wikipedia editors DO NOT do research. We are NOT allowed to look at journal articles and interpret what is said in them. We have to wait until notable secondary sources come out that discuss the journal articles you cite. Your insistence on forcing changes to this specific Wikipedia page and no other edits to any other Wikipedia page are suspect. Why do you have all these journal articles, and print sources at your fingertips? Why the emotion? The more you try to ram the changes though, the less likely anyone is going to try to help. Sgerbic (talk) 06:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I recently read a book about breathing that states that thousands of years ago the books of the Tao included information on breathing as a way to improve health . The author mentions that western science has dropped this knowledge as it is not scientific only perhaps to be rediscovering it all over again. Alexander was well known on the London stage in Edwardian times as the breathing man. He gave lessons to many performers and was also known as the saviour of the London theatre. Those performers didn’t care what anyone else thought about finding a source to check if the Alexander technique was confirmed as allowable inside the narrow paradigm of the bio medical scientific world. They were great full to experience poise and balance and centred breathing and an experience of feeling good about being alive and calm in their performances. Philip6061 (talk) 00:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but do you have any sources? - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 00:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

You are absolutely not in any sense capable of choosing notable secondary sources on this subject. You don’t understand this subject. I have no confidence that you ever will. You sound impervious to any interference with your ignorance Philip6061 (talk) 00:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

You are not interested in even knowing anything about this subject Philip6061 (talk) 00:11, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

We build our articles based on what reliable sources WP:RS say. Do you have any? - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 00:12, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I could quote you sources but you are only interested in the Wikipedia source structure technique. I did not write anything here for you. I wrote this just in case a curious person who has heard there might be something in the technique and after reading your unfair , and tone deaf article might at least think for a second that this article you wrote might be false. And it is. Dont ask me for sources. Take my word for it you are wasting your time writing on this subject because you are ignorant and just saying the word sources over and over again like a fool. You should think about your errors first not my sources . Philip6061 (talk) 00:17, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Meh - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 00:20, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Look at your article where you are using sources and then look at what you are writing. Whether I am a random person or not you need to notice that what you are writing is unjustified and is just your opinion. Your use of sources is amateurish . You call youself grumpy dog as if it sounds clever to reply to everything as if you are some kind of critical thinker like Davi Hume. You are about as clever as a grumpy dog . That name is not shorthand for a smart and intelligent person maintaining high standards but a fake news merchant of the worst kind. Your article is wrong even if you are conceited enough to think you are doing something of value. Yours is the worst article on Wikipedia and you are questioning me about my sources like you are an expert . You are giving Wikipedia a bad name for standards. You are not upholding any standards. You are lying to the general public who read your fake news . You come on assertively as if you need to check who I am but you have no self awareness of your own shortcomings, incompetence, stupidity, ignorance, and failure to investigate what is plainly wrong about what you have written. Philip6061 (talk) 00:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I haven't written anything in this article that I can remember. There is a huge welcome message on your talk page. It gives great advice to new editors. You should read it. - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 00:47, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

You are a bot. I just realised you are an AI bit. No human could have no self awareness and no ability to reflect. You had me there for s minute because I thought I was arguing with someone . I can see why an algorithm would have no interest in human well being and health. Here is a question. Could you define a notable secondary source? For example I mentioned in passing one of the worlds greatest ever philosophers. Could you respond as to whether or not John Dewey is a notable secondary source. Or is it that your notable secondary sources must have no knowledge or experience of the Alexander technique. Are these people notable for what? Opposition to the technique. For being good at football? I noticed you quoted Aetna as having no interest in the Alexander technique. As a notable secondary source had they ever heard of the technique? Do you choose secondary sources as being notable for having the same views as you do? I think you are very comfortable with your notable secondary sources. They help you to build a very convenient argument Philip6061 (talk) 00:47, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I showed you links to wikipedia's definition of reliable sources and medically reliable sources in my first response to you in this section. - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 00:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

See rewrite section for sources, stop your biased edits on this wiki 68.129.197.221 (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

You say you aren’t allowed to inject your opinion in Wikipedia.? That’s what this article about the Alexander technique is doing. Non notable secondary sources are quoted followed up with someone’s opinion. And it’s all wrong. I haven’t got past paragraph three yet. So you are telling me that if I study more about how Wikipedia works you will let me get away with the nonsense written about the Alexander technique on wikipedia Philip6061 (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is just a summary of accepted knowledge as published in reliable sources (generally high-quality, secondary sources independent of the subject). If those sources are "wrong" then Wikipedia will be "wrong" in lock-step with them. Editors cannot inject their own perceptions into articles even if they are "right". A moment's though will tell you why. If there are good sources we ain't using, what are they? Alexbrn (talk) 03:21, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I have just removed a huge chunk of text as it appears to be a direct copy of text from elsewhere. It remains in the edit history as I write this, but whether an Admin might revdel it would be another thing. - Roxy the dog 14:48, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Admins please ban Roxy the dog from this wiki; he is clearly biased against the AT as he disregards posts with sources 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:43, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

It was from my desktop where I prepared the draft to fix some of what you've done to this page roxy 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:44, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hey I was attempting to respond to 68 and everything just went wonky. Technical term, wonky. Weird. Anyway, what I was writing so beyond eloquent and would have been too earth-shattering so I'll just keep it to myself and you all can imagine it. Sgerbic (talk) 05:42, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm wondering if any editors are willing to do something besides troll? The AT is clearly miscateogized as an alternative medicine, see below.

The Select Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Lords included 44 recommendations in its comprehensive report on “Complementary and Alternative Medicine” (CAM) released in November. Many of the recommendations refer to a classification scheme used in the report to organize therapies into three groups.

Group 1, called “Professionally Organised Alternative Therapies” contains acupuncture, chiropractic, herbal medicine, homeopathy, and osteopathy. The Lords report says: “Each of these therapies claims to have an individual diagnostic approach and are seen as the ‘Big 5’ by most of the CAM world.”

Group 2, called “Complementary Therapies” contains Alexander technique, aromatherapy, Bach and other flower remedies, body work therapies including massage, counselling stress therapy, hypnotherapy, meditation, reflexology, Shiatsu, spiritual healing, Maharishi Ayurvedic Medicine, nutritional medicine, and Yoga. Therapies in this group “are most often used to complement conventional medicine and do not purport to embrace diagnostic skills.” 68.129.197.221 (talk) 12:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Suggestions for desperately needed edits

This is what the page should look like in my opinion:https: //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alexander_Technique&oldid=1115779045

This page has been edited in a suspiciously biased way that doesn't represent the AT well at all and most supporting material is relying too heavily on bad sources. I suggest renaming the section "health effects" to "insurance and medical adoption" to more accurately reflect the content there. I have written a draft with peer-reviewed sources for any health claims mostly from medical journals. I also have put it into the wiki format in the link above and in draft with apa citation below. Editors please help this sad page, the uses section is beyond pathetic compared to it's very common real world applications (that I have cited!!!)

Intro:

Used for more than 100 years, the Alexander Technique is an educational method that helps individuals learn to correct inefficient or faulty movement and postural habits, reducing potentially harmful tension accumulation by changing how one conceptualizes and responds to the stimulus of movement; the AT is not a passive treatment but a method known within the AT community as mind-body re-education (Williams 2018). Movement is a focus in learning the AT, however, the AT is generally taught as an educational system rather than movement therapy (Woods 2020).

The AT has a wide range of applications; in a 2012 systematic review published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice it was concluded that “Strong evidence exists for the effectiveness of AT lessons for chronic back pain and moderate evidence in Parkinson’s-associated disability. Preliminary evidence suggests that AT lessons may lead to improvements in balance skills in the elderly, in general chronic pain, posture, respiratory function and stuttering” (Woodman, Moore 2012).

AT in the Medical Field

There is evidence that lessons in the AT likely lead to sustained benefit for people with Parkinson’s disease (Stallibrass, et al. 2002). After having lessons, Parkinson’s patients had significantly less difficulty in performing daily activities, were significantly less depressed, had a significantly more positive body concept and significantly less difficulty on the fine movement and gross movement subscales of the activities (Stallibrass 1997). AT lessons may provide a useful approach to improve mental wellbeing by increasing one’s sense of control, confidence and agency in a range of settings (Kinsey et al 2021). A study of people with chronic lower back pain found significant differences before and after AT lessons in their constructs of intention, perceived risk, direct attitude and behavioral beliefs (Kamalikhah et al. 2016). Perhaps not coincidentally, the AT was influential in the creation of some forms of psychotherapy, including Gestalt therapy (Tengwall 1981).

AT lessons are commonly used as an effective intervention for reducing chronic lower back pain (Hafezi et al. 2022), as one on one lessons in the AT from registered teachers have shown long term benefits for patients with chronic back pain (Little et al. 2008). Using EMG to record muscle activity, one study found AT lessons decreased axial stiffness by 29% on average in subjects with low back pain while resisting rotation, concluding with the authors suggestion that dynamic modulation of postural tone can be enhanced through long-term training in the AT (Cacciatore et al. 2011). Participants in another study reported significantly reduced neck pain and fatigue of the superficial neck flexors during a cranio-cervical flexion test in a study that concluded group AT classes may provide a cost-effective approach to reducing neck pain (Becker 2018). There was a significant reduction in knee pain, stiffness and co-contraction recorded in a study following AT instruction in people with knee osteoarthritis; there was also an improvement in function which appeared to be maintained at 15 months post-baseline (Preece et al. 2016). A strong association was found between a course of AT instruction and increases in measures of respiratory muscular strength and endurance in healthy young and middle-aged adults (Austin, Ausubel 1992). AT lessons resulted in trends towards fewer falls and injurious falls along with improved mobility among past multiple-fallers (Gleeson 2015) and improved functional reach in older women (Dennis 1999). The AT has also been applied in cases of joint hypermobility (Bull 2015). A pilot study published in The Journal of Urology showed that an AT training program designed for laparoscopic surgeons resulted in significant improvement in posture, improved surgical ergonomics and endurance as well as decreases in surgical fatigue and the incidence of repetitive strain injury (Reddy et al. 2011).

The high prevalence of musculoskeletal issues in the general population suggests that AT lessons could be useful as an early referral option in primary healthcare (Eldred et al. 2015), however, despite the promise of the AT the philosophical systems embedded within it and the near deification of its founder has lead to resistance in the AT’s incorporation by biomedicine (Tarr 2011). While the AT community has struggled to gain mainstream medical adoption there has been strong support from members of the medical community who see the benefits of the work for their patients and themselves (Stern 2021).

AT in the performing arts

Clearly the AT has implications for movement coordination (Cacciatore et al. 2014), perhaps this is why the AT has become an integral part of curricula at elite drama and music schools including Juilliard, the Curtis Institute of Music and the Royal Academy of Music (Miller 2003). There is a particular interest in application of AT among dancers (Lewis 2006) and musicians (Korn 2014). AT principles have been applied to music pedagogy and performance by singers (Rootberg 2011, Neely 2016, Peterson 2008), harpists (Hembreiker 2010), violinists and violists (Cotik 2017 & 2019, Lacraru 2014, Austin 2014), cellists (Alcantara 1997) and bassists (Chou 2013) among many others. A recent study found that purpose-designed AT classes for music students may beneficially influence performance related pain and the associated risk factors of poor posture, excess muscle tension, stress and performance anxiety; there were also reports of improvements to instrumental technique, performance level and practice effectiveness indicating the relevance of AT training to musical skill development (Davies 2020). In another study, application of the AT to music performance showed improvement relative to controls in overall music and technical quality as judged by independent experts blind to subjects' condition assignment; there were also improvements in heart rate variance, self-rated anxiety and positive attitude to performance (Valentine et al. 1995). While more and better designed research is needed to accurately quantify the effect of the AT on artistic performance there does seem to be a general consensus among a large number of successful artists in a variety of fields that the AT has a positive overall effect on artistic life, on and off the stage (Iammatteo 1996).

AT in education

In the field of education there is a broader interest in the AT beyond arts institutions dating back to the relationship between the AT’s originator, F.M. Alexander, and American education philosophy pioneer John Dewey. Dewey, who wrote introductions to three of Alexander’s books, said that he “owed the concrete form of certain of his ideas to contact with the work of F.M. Alexander,” those ideas being his theories of mind-body, of the coordination of the elements of the self and of the place of ideas in inhibition and control of over action (McCormack 1958).

Works Cited (alphabetical by author):

Alcantara, Pedro D. Indirect Procedures: A Musician’s Guide to the Alexander Technique 1st Edition Oxford University Press April 1997 ISBN - ‎0198165692 978-0198165699

Austin, John H.M., and Pearl Ausubel. "Enhanced respiratory muscular function in normal adults after lessons in proprioceptive musculoskeletal education without exercises." Chest, vol. 102, no. 2, Aug. 1992, pp. 486+

Austin, John L. “The Shoulders: To Rest Or Not To Rest?” American Center for the Alexander Technique Sept. 2014 https://www.acatnyc.org/blog-posts/2014/09/11/the-shoulders-to-rest-or-not-to-rest

Becker, J. J., Copeland, S. L., Botterbusch, E. L., & Cohen, R. G. (2018). Preliminary evidence for feasibility, efficacy, and mechanisms of Alexander technique group classes for chronic neck pain. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 39, 80–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2018.05.012

Bull, Philip The Alexander Technique Hypermobility Syndromes Association Journal Volume 3 Spring 2015

Cacciatore T.W., Gurfinkel V.S., Horak F.B., Cordo P.J., Ames K.E., Increased dynamic regulation of postural tone through Alexander Technique training, Human Movement Science, Volume 30, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 74-89, ISSN 0167-9457, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2010.10.002.

Cacciatore T.W., Gurfinkel V.S., Horak F.B. Prolonged weight-shift and altered spinal coordination during sit-to-stand in practitioners of the Alexander Technique. Gait & Posture (2011), doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.06.026

Cacciatore Timothy W., Mian Omar S., Peters Amy, and Day Brian L. Neuromechanical interference of posture on movement: evidence from Alexander technique teachers rising from a chair Journal of Neurophysiology 2014 112:3, 719-729

Chou, Yun-Chieh. “When the Mouse Meets the Elephant: A Manual for String Bass Players with Application of the Philosophy and Principles of the F. M. Alexander Technique.” 2013 DMA diss., Louisiana State University.

Cotik, T. (2019). Concepts of the Alexander Technique and Practical Ideas for Musicians. American String Teachers Association Journal, 69(2), 33–36. https://doi-org.library.esc.edu/10.1177/0003131319835543

Cotik, T. Developing a natural and relaxed approach to string playing - part 1 Strad Magazine Feb. 2017 https://www.thestrad.com/developing-a-natural-and-relaxed-approach-to-string-playing-part-1/1857.article

Davies, J Alexander Technique classes improve pain and performance factors in tertiary music students Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies Vol. 24 Issue 1 p.1-7 Jan 1, 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.04.006

Dennis Ronald J, Functional Reach Improvement in Normal Older Women After Alexander Technique Instruction, The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, Volume 54, Issue 1, January 1999, Pages M8-M11 https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/54.1.M8

Eldred, J., Hopton, A., Donnison, E., Woodman, J., & MacPherson, H. (2015). Teachers of the alexander technique in the UK and the people who take their lessons: A national cross-sectional survey. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 23(3), 451-461. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2015.04.006

Gleeson, M., Sherrington, C., Lo, S., & Keay, L. (2015). Can the alexander technique improve balance and mobility in older adults with visual impairments? A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation, 29(3), 244-260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215514542636

Hembreiker, Linda-Rose. "Teaching with the Alexander Technique." American Harp Journal, winter 2010, pp. 41+.

Iammatteo, E. (1996). The alexander technique: Improving the balance. Performing Arts & Entertainment in Canada, 30(3), 37. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/alexander-technique-improving-balance/docview/224880281/se-2

Kamalikhah T., Morowatisharifabad M. Rezaei-Moghaddam F., Ghasemi M. Gholami-Fesharaki M. Goklani S. Alexander Technique Training Coupled With an Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction in Teachers With Low Back Pain Iran Red Crescent Medical Journal 2016 Sep; 18(9): e31218. Published online 2016 Aug 9. doi: 10.5812/ircmj.31218

Kinsey D., Glover L., Wadephul F., How does the Alexander Technique lead to psychological and non-physical outcomes? A realist review, European Journal of Integrative Medicine, Volume 46, 2021, ISSN 1876-3820, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2021.101371

Korn, H. (2014). Indirect procedures: The musician's guide to the alexander technique. The American Music Teacher, 63(5), 49-50. https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/indirect-procedures-musicians-guide-alexander/docview/1516492602/se-2 Lacraru, Emanuela Maria, "Supporting your instrument in a body-friendly manner : a comparative approach" 2014 DMA diss., Louisiana State University. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2829

Lewis, K. (2006, 11). Understanding alexander technique. Dance Spirit, 10, 45. https://www.proquest.com/magazines/understanding-alexander-technique/docview/209305187/se-2

Little P, Lewith G, Webley F, Evans M, Beattie A, Middleton K et al. Randomized controlled trial of Alexander technique lessons, exercise, and massage (ATEAM) for chronic and recurrent back pain British Medical Journal 2008; 337 :a884 doi:10.1136/bmj.a884

McCormack E.D., Frederick Mathias Alexander and John Dewey: A neglected Influence 1958 Doctors Thesis in Philosophy, University of Toronto https://alexandertechnique.com/articles/dewey/alexanderdewey.pdf

Mahboubeh Hafezi, Zahra Rahemi, Neda Mirbagher Ajorpaz, Fatemeh Sadat Izadi, The effect of the Alexander Technique on pain intensity in patients with chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial, Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, Volume 29, 2022, Pages 54-59, ISSN 1360-8592, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.09.025.

Miller, B. X. (2003). The actor and the alexander technique. New York Library Journal, 128(6), 68 https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/actor-alexander-technique/docview/196816372/se-2

Neely, Dawn Wells. "Body consciousness and singers: do voice teachers use mind-body methods with students and in their own practice?" Journal of Singing, vol. 73, no. 2, Nov.-Dec. 2016, pp. 137+.

Peterson, P. H. (2008). on the Voice: Alexander Or Feldenkrais: Which Method Is Best? The Choral Journal, 48(11), 67–72. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23556912

Pramod P. Reddy, Trisha P. Reddy, Jennifer Roig-Francoli, Lois Cone, Bezalel Sivan, W. Robert DeFoor, Krishnanath Gaitonde, Paul H. Noh, The Impact of the Alexander Technique on Improving Posture and Surgical Ergonomics During Minimally Invasive Surgery: Pilot Study, The Journal of Urology, Volume 186, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 1658-1662, ISSN 0022-5347, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.04.013

Preece, S.J., Jones, R.K., Brown, C.A. et al. Reductions in co-contraction following neuromuscular re-education in people with knee osteoarthritis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 17, 372 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1209-2

Rootberg R. “End-gaining”and the“Means-Whereby”: Discovering the best process to achieve goals of vocal training and pedagogy using the Alexander Technique, 2011 Voice and Speech Review, 7:1, 157-163, DOI: 10.1080/23268263.2011.10739536

Stallibrass, C., Sissons, P., & Chalmers, C. (2002). Randomized controlled trial of the alexander technique for idiopathic parkinson's disease. Clinical Rehabilitation, 16(7), 695-708. doi:https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215502cr544oa

Stallibrass C. An evaluation of the Alexander Technique for the management of disability in Parkinson’s disease- a preliminary study. Clinical Rehabilitation. 1997;11(1):8-12. doi:10.1177/026921559701100103

Stern J. The Alexander Technique: Mindfulness in Movement Relieves Suffering Alternative and Complementary Therapies Volume: 27 Issue 1: February 11, 2021 10-13. http://doi.org/10.1089/act.2020.29307.jcs

Tarr, Jennifer Educating with the hands: working on the body/self in Alexander Technique Sociology of Health & Illness Vol. 33 No. 2 2011 ISSN 0141–9889, pp. 252–265doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01283.x

Tengwall, Roger A note on the influence of F. M. Alexander on the development of gestalt therapy Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences volume 17 issue 1 1981 https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696(198101)17:1<126::AID-JHBS2300170113>3.0.CO;2-X

Valentine, E. R., Fitzgerald, D. F. P., Gorton, T. L., Hudson, J. A., & Symonds, E. R. C. (1995). The Effect of Lessons in the Alexander Technique on Music Performance in High and Low Stress Situations. Psychology of Music, 23(2), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735695232002

Williams, Angela The Alexander Technique, Complementary and Alternative Medicine Sourcebook, 6th Edition July 2018 978-0-7808-1632-9 pages 439-441

Woods C., Glover L., Woodman J. An Education for Life: The Process of Learning the Alexander Technique Kinesiology Review Volume 9: Issue 3 14 Aug 2020 https://doi.org/10.1123/kr.2020-0020

Woodman, J. P. Moore, N. R. Evidence for the effectiveness of Alexander Technique lessons in medical and health-related conditions: a systematic review 2012 - International Journal of Clinical Practice VL - 66 IS - 1 SN - 1368-5031 UR - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02817.x 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:54, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Nah, what we have already is easily read, that's just an unformatted wall of text that you appear to have copied from somewhere. You should read WP:COPYVIO, which explains why you shouldn't do that. - Roxy the dog 15:08, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I am the author of the above material with all credit given to cited sources. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

(talk) 15:26, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

What personal interest do you have in highlighting critisism of AT, conflict of interest with Feldenkrais perhaps? That's what it looks like based on your edit history 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

The current wiki contains outdated and/or incorrect information

Please WP:FOC, otherwise it's likely you will get the ban you're asking to be placed on others.

Respect other editors and their work.

Work in small edits (or edit requests), making sure to point out applicable policy and reliable sources supporting the edits. --Hipal (talk) 16:49, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I am new to wiki but that is because there is a clear malicious bias against supportive material. I have watched this page as an observer for a long time and only negative news is put here; I have listed a large number of good sources hopefully an admin or other editors can straighten it out because I don't have any experience editing these pages which is why I posted here in the discussion instead of directly editing the article. Thanks. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 17:24, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

"I am new to wiki" - "I don't have any experience editing these pages" - I have been editing Wikipedia for years and still don't think I have the arrogance to post a wall of text like this and tell other more experienced editors "This page is awful and doesn't represent the AT correctly at all as well as relying too heavily on bad sources." It's not about code, it's about understanding what sources can be used and what can not. You can learn how to understand the difference. You probably should start on a page that you don't have an interest in first. Sgerbic (talk) 19:17, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

"I don't have any experience editing these pages" that is why I am appealing for help from other editors rather than directly editing the wiki. I understand what sources can be used which is why I was careful to only cite legitimate sources from peer-reviewed journals when making any health claims about the AT. Do you have any input about the suggested edits? I am an expert in multiple modalities of mind-body medicine and I know for a fact (as is evidenced by my suggested edits) this page has been edited with malicious bais and therefore needs an update because it paints a completely inaccurate picture of the subject matter; I am not an expert in wiki editorial procedure so I leave it to the admins to sort out any malicious bias from editors. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 02:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I've tried to edit the page myself but it just gets completely rejected even though sources are good... 68.129.197.221 (talk) 05:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I made a number of small edits and they were recalled in mass. At least read what was changed before reverting. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 05:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

• not sure why this got restored, something funky going on with editors* - 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Suggestions for desperately needed edits (another attempt)

This page has been edited in a suspiciously biased way (probably due to added scrutiny of its miscategorization as alternative medicine and assumptions about AT from overzealous WikiProject Skepticism members with no experience of the work [ex. from common editors profiles "We are biased against pseudoscience ... biased against acupuncture" etc.]).

The non-medical uses of the AT are hardly represented at all and the focus of the article seems to be more about skepticism than a proper explanation of the AT. The current supporting material is relying too heavily on internal sources so I included better source material below.

I suggest renaming the section "health effects" to "insurance and medical adoption" to more accurately reflect the content there moving any medical claims for or against to the uses section. I have written a draft of edits with peer-reviewed sources for any health claims mostly from medical journals.

Editors please help this sad page, the uses section is beyond pathetic compared to it's very common real world applications that I have cited below.

Intro

The Alexander Technique, named after its developer Frederick Matthias Alexander (1869–1955), is an educational method used for more than 100 years to help individuals learn to correct inefficient or faulty movement and postural habits, reducing potentially harmful tension accumulation by changing how one conceptualizes and responds to the stimulus of movement; the AT is not a treatment or therapy but a method known within the AT community as mind-body re-education[1]. Movement is a focus in learning the AT, however, the AT is generally taught as an educational system rather than movement therapy[2].

Alexander began developing his technique's principles in the 1890s[3] in an attempt to address his own voice loss during public speaking.[4]: 34–35  He credited his method with allowing him to pursue his passion for performing Shakespearean recitations.[5]

Proponents and teachers of the Alexander Technique believe the technique can address a variety of health conditions, but research findings are mixed.[6][7][8] [9][10] As of 2021, the UK National Health Service cites evidence that the Alexander Technique may be helpful for long-term back pain and for long-term neck pain, and that it could help people cope with Parkinson's disease.[10] Both the American health-insurance company Aetna and the Australian Department of Health have conducted reviews and concluded that there is insufficient evidence for the technique's health claims to warrant insurance coverage.[9][11]

Uses

The AT has a wide range of applications; in a 2012 systematic review published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice it was concluded that “Strong evidence exists for the effectiveness of AT lessons for chronic back pain and moderate evidence in Parkinson’s-associated disability. Preliminary evidence suggests that AT lessons may lead to improvements in balance skills in the elderly, in general chronic pain, posture, respiratory function and stuttering” [12]. There is evidence that lessons in the AT likely lead to sustained benefit for people with Parkinson’s disease [13]. After having lessons, Parkinson’s patients had significantly less difficulty in performing daily activities, were significantly less depressed, had a significantly more positive body concept and significantly less difficulty on the fine movement and gross movement subscales of the activities [14]. AT lessons may provide a useful approach to improve mental wellbeing by increasing one’s sense of control, confidence and agency in a range of settings [15]. A study of people with chronic lower back pain found significant differences before and after AT lessons in their constructs of intention, perceived risk, direct attitude and behavioral beliefs [16]. Perhaps not coincidentally, the AT was influential in the creation of some forms of psychotherapy, including Gestalt therapy [17].

AT lessons are commonly used as an effective intervention for reducing chronic lower back pain [18], as one on one lessons in the AT from registered teachers have shown long term benefits for patients with chronic back pain [19]. Using EMG to record muscle activity, one study found AT lessons decreased axial stiffness by 29% on average in subjects with low back pain while resisting rotation, concluding with the authors suggestion that dynamic modulation of postural tone can be enhanced through long-term training in the AT [20]. Participants in another study reported significantly reduced neck pain and fatigue of the superficial neck flexors during a cranio-cervical flexion test in a study that concluded group AT classes may provide a cost-effective approach to reducing neck pain [21]. There was a significant reduction in knee pain, stiffness and co-contraction recorded in a study following AT instruction in people with knee osteoarthritis; there was also an improvement in function which appeared to be maintained at 15 months post-baseline [22]. A strong association was found between a course of AT instruction and increases in measures of respiratory muscular strength and endurance in healthy young and middle-aged adults [23]. AT lessons resulted in trends towards fewer falls and injurious falls along with improved mobility among past multiple-fallers [24], and improved functional reach in older women [25]. The AT has also been applied in cases of joint hypermobility [26]. A pilot study published in The Journal of Urology showed that an AT training program designed for laparoscopic surgeons resulted in significant improvement in posture, improved surgical ergonomics and endurance as well as decreases in surgical fatigue and the incidence of repetitive strain injury [27]

Clearly the AT has implications for movement coordination [28], perhaps this is why the AT is an integral part of curricula at elite drama and music schools including Juilliard, the Curtis Institute of Music and the Royal Academy of Music [29] The method is said by actors to reduce stage fright and to increase spontaneity.[30] There is a particular interest in application of AT among dancers [31] and musicians [32]. AT principles have been applied to music pedagogy and performance by singers [33] [34][35], harpists [36], violinists and violists [37][38][39][40], cellists [41], and bassists [42][43] among many others. A recent study found that purpose-designed AT classes for music students may beneficially influence performance related pain and the associated risk factors of poor posture, excess muscle tension, stress and performance anxiety; there were also reports of improvements to instrumental technique, performance level and practice effectiveness indicating the relevance of AT training to musical skill development[44]. In another study, application of the AT to music performance showed improvement relative to controls in overall music and technical quality as judged by independent experts blind to subjects' condition assignment; there were also improvements in heart rate variance, self-rated anxiety and positive attitude to performance [45] . While more and better designed research is needed to accurately quantify the effect of the AT on artistic performance there does seem to be a general consensus among a large number of successful artists in a variety of fields that the AT has a positive overall effect on artistic life, on and off the stage [46].

Insurance Coverage & Medical Reception

The high prevalence of musculoskeletal issues in the general population suggests that AT lessons could be useful as an early referral option in primary healthcare [47], however, despite the promise of the AT, the philosophical systems embedded within it and the near deification of its founder has lead to resistance in the AT’s adoption by biomedicine[48]. While the AT community has struggled to gain mainstream medical adoption there has been strong support from members of the medical community who see the benefits of the work for their patients, particularly among physical therapists [49].

A review of evidence for the Alexander Technique for various health conditions provided by the UK National Health Service, last updated in 2021, found that there was evidence suggesting that it might help with:

long-term back pain – lessons in the technique may lead to reduced back pain-associated disability and reduce how often you feel pain for up to a year or more long-term neck pain – lessons in the technique may lead to reduced neck pain and associated disability for up to a year or more Parkinson's disease – lessons in the technique may help you carry out everyday tasks more easily and improve how you feel about your condition[10] The NHS further states: "Some research has also suggested the Alexander Technique may improve general long-term pain, stammering, and balance skills in older people to help them avoid falls. But the evidence in these areas is limited and more studies are needed. There's currently little evidence to suggest the Alexander Technique can help improve other health conditions, including asthma, headaches, osteoarthritis, difficulty sleeping (insomnia) and stress."[10]

A review published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine in 2014 focused on "the evidence for the effectiveness of AT sessions on musicians' performance, anxiety, respiratory function and posture" concluded that: "Evidence from RCTs and CTs suggests that AT sessions may improve performance anxiety in musicians. Effects on music performance, respiratory function and posture yet remain inconclusive."[50]

A 2012 Cochrane systematic review found that there is no conclusive evidence that the Alexander Technique is effective for treating asthma, and randomized clinical trials are needed in order to assess the effectiveness of this type of treatment approach.[51]

A review by Aetna last updated in 2021 stated: "Aetna considers the following alternative medicine interventions experimental and investigational, because there is inadequate evidence in the peer-reviewed published medical literature of their effectiveness." The Alexander Technique is included in that list.[11]

A 2015 review, conducted for the Australia Department of Health in order to determine what services the Australian government should pay for, examined clinical trials published to date and found that: "Overall, the evidence was limited by the small number of participants in the intervention arms, wide confidence intervals or a lack of replication of results." It concluded that: "The Alexander Technique may improve short-term pain and disability in people with low back pain, but the longer-term effects remain uncertain. For all other clinical conditions, the effectiveness of Alexander Technique was deemed to be uncertain, due to insufficient evidence." It also noted that: "Evidence for the safety of Alexander Technique was lacking, with most trials not reporting on this outcome.[9] Subsequently in 2017, the Australian government named the Alexander Technique as a practice that would not qualify for insurance subsidy, saying this step would "ensure taxpayer funds are expended appropriately and not directed to therapies lacking evidence".[52]

Citations

Williams, Angela The Alexander Technique, Complementary and Alternative Medicine Sourcebook, 6th Edition July 2018 978-0-7808-1632-9 pages 439-441

Woods C., Glover L., Woodman J. An Education for Life: The Process of Learning the Alexander Technique Kinesiology Review Volume 9: Issue 3 14 Aug 2020 https://doi.org/10.1123/kr.2020-0020

Rootberg, Ruth (September 2007). Mandy Rees (ed.). "Voice and Gender and other contemporary issues in professional voice and speech training". Voice and Speech Review. 35 (1): 164–170. doi:10.1080/23268263.2007.10769755. S2CID 144810660.

Bloch, Michael (2004). F.M.: The Life of Frederick Matthias Alexander: Founder of the Alexander Technique. London: Little, Brown. ISBN 978-0-316-86048-2.

Harer, John B.; Munden, Sharon (2008). The Alexander Technique Resource Book: A Reference Guide. Scarecrow Press. pp. xii–xiii. ISBN 978-0810863927. Retrieved 3 June 2014.

Woodman, J. P. Moore, N. R. Evidence for the effectiveness of Alexander Technique lessons in medical and health-related conditions: a systematic review 2012 - International Journal of Clinical Practice VL - 66 IS - 1 SN - 1368-5031 UR https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02817.x

Hafezi M., Rahemi Z., Ajorpaz N.M., Izadi F.S., The effect of the Alexander Technique on pain intensity in patients with chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial, Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, Volume 29, 2022, Pages 54-59, ISSN 1360-8592, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.09.025.

Little P, Lewith G, Webley F, Evans M, Beattie A, Middleton K et al. Randomized controlled trial of Alexander technique lessons, exercise, and massage (ATEAM) for chronic and recurrent back pain British Medical Journal 2008; 337 :a884 doi:10.1136/bmj.a884

Baggoley C (2015). "Review of the Australian Government Rebate on Natural Therapies for Private Health Insurance" (PDF). Australian Government – Department of Health. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 June 2016. Retrieved 12 December 2015.

Lay summary in: Gavura, S. (19 November 2015). "Australian review finds no benefit to 17 natural therapies". Science-Based Medicine.

"Alexander Technique". National Health Service. 17 October 2017. Retrieved 1 December 2021.
"Medical Clinical Policy Bulletin Number 0388: Complementary and Alternative Medicine". Aetna. Retrieved 1 December 2021.

Woodman, J. P. Moore, N. R. Evidence for the effectiveness of Alexander Technique lessons in medical and health-related conditions: a systematic review 2012 - International Journal of Clinical Practice VL - 66 IS - 1 SN - 1368-5031 UR https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02817.x

Stallibrass, C., Sissons, P., & Chalmers, C. (2002). Randomized controlled trial of the alexander technique for idiopathic parkinson's disease. Clinical Rehabilitation, 16(7), 695-708. doi:https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215502cr544oa

Stallibrass C. An evaluation of the Alexander Technique for the management of disability in Parkinson’s disease- a preliminary study. Clinical Rehabilitation. 1997;11(1):8-12. doi:10.1177/026921559701100103

Kinsey D., Glover L., Wadephul F., How does the Alexander Technique lead to psychological and non-physical outcomes? A realist review, European Journal of Integrative Medicine, Volume 46, 2021, ISSN 1876-3820, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2021.101371

Kamalikhah T., Morowatisharifabad M. Rezaei-Moghaddam F., Ghasemi M. Gholami-Fesharaki M. Goklani S. Alexander Technique Training Coupled With an Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction in Teachers With Low Back Pain Iran Red Crescent Medical Journal 2016 Sep; 18(9): e31218. Published online 2016 Aug 9. doi: 10.5812/ircmj.31218

Tengwall, Roger A note on the influence of F. M. Alexander on the development of gestalt therapy Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences volume 17 issue 1 1981 https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696(198101)17:1<126::AID-JHBS2300170113>3.0.CO;2-X

Hafezi M., Rahemi Z., Ajorpaz N.M., Izadi F.S., The effect of the Alexander Technique on pain intensity in patients with chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial, Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, Volume 29, 2022, Pages 54-59, ISSN 1360-8592, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.09.025.

Little P, Lewith G, Webley F, Evans M, Beattie A, Middleton K et al. Randomized controlled trial of Alexander technique lessons, exercise, and massage (ATEAM) for chronic and recurrent back pain British Medical Journal 2008; 337 :a884 doi:10.1136/bmj.a884

Cacciatore T.W., Gurfinkel V.S., Horak F.B., Cordo P.J., Ames K.E., Increased dynamic regulation of postural tone through Alexander Technique training, Human Movement Science, Volume 30, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 74-89, ISSN 0167-9457, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2010.10.002.

Becker, J. J., Copeland, S. L., Botterbusch, E. L., & Cohen, R. G. (2018). Preliminary evidence for feasibility, efficacy, and mechanisms of Alexander technique group classes for chronic neck pain. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 39, 80–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2018.05.012

Preece, S.J., Jones, R.K., Brown, C.A. et al. Reductions in co-contraction following neuromuscular re-education in people with knee osteoarthritis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 17, 372 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1209-2

Austin, John H.M., and Pearl Ausubel. "Enhanced respiratory muscular function in normal adults after lessons in proprioceptive musculoskeletal education without exercises." Chest, vol. 102, no. 2, Aug. 1992, pp. 486+

Gleeson, M., Sherrington, C., Lo, S., & Keay, L. (2015). Can the alexander technique improve balance and mobility in older adults with visual impairments? A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation, 29(3), 244-260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215514542636

Dennis Ronald J, Functional Reach Improvement in Normal Older Women After Alexander Technique Instruction, The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, Volume 54, Issue 1, January 1999, Pages M8-M11 https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/54.1.M8

Bull, Philip The Alexander Technique Hypermobility Syndromes Association Journal Volume 3 Spring 2015

Pramod P. Reddy, Trisha P. Reddy, Jennifer Roig-Francoli, Lois Cone, Bezalel Sivan, W. Robert DeFoor, Krishnanath Gaitonde, Paul H. Noh, The Impact of the Alexander Technique on Improving Posture and Surgical Ergonomics During Minimally Invasive Surgery: Pilot Study, The Journal of Urology, Volume 186, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 1658-1662, ISSN 0022-5347, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.04.013

Cacciatore Timothy W., Mian Omar S., Peters Amy, and Day Brian L. Neuromechanical interference of posture on movement: evidence from Alexander technique teachers rising from a chair Journal of Neurophysiology 2014 112:3, 719-729

Miller, B. X. (2003). The actor and the alexander technique. New York Library Journal, 128(6), 68 https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/actor-alexander-technique/docview/196816372/se-2

Aronson, AE (1990). Clinical Voice Disorders: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Thieme Medical Publishers. ISBN 0-86577-337-8.

Lewis, K. (2006, 11). Understanding alexander technique. Dance Spirit, 10, 45. https://www.proquest.com/magazines/understanding-alexander-technique/docview/209305187/se-2

Korn, H. (2014). Indirect procedures: The musician's guide to the alexander technique. The American Music Teacher, 63(5), 49-50.

Rootberg R. “End-gaining”and the“Means-Whereby”: Discovering the best process to achieve goals of vocal training and pedagogy using the Alexander Technique, 2011 Voice and Speech Review, 7:1, 157-163, DOI: 10.1080/23268263.2011.10739536

Neely, Dawn Wells. "Body consciousness and singers: do voice teachers use mind-body methods with students and in their own practice?" Journal of Singing, vol. 73, no. 2, Nov.-Dec. 2016, pp. 137+.

Peterson, P. H. (2008). on the Voice: Alexander Or Feldenkrais: Which Method Is Best? The Choral Journal, 48(11), 67–72. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23556912

Hembreiker, Linda-Rose. "Teaching with the Alexander Technique." American Harp Journal, winter 2010, pp. 41+.

Cotik, T. (2019). Concepts of the Alexander Technique and Practical Ideas for Musicians. American String Teachers Association Journal, 69(2), 33–36. https://doi-org.library.esc.edu/10.1177/0003131319835543

Cotik, T. Developing a natural and relaxed approach to string playing - part 1 Strad Magazine Feb. 2017 https://www.thestrad.com/developing-a-natural-and-relaxed-approach-to-string-playing-part-1/1857.article

Austin, John L. “The Shoulders: To Rest Or Not To Rest?” American Center for the Alexander Technique Sept. 2014 https://www.acatnyc.org/blog-posts/2014/09/11/the-shoulders-to-rest-or-not-to-rest

Lacraru, Emanuela Maria, "Supporting your instrument in a body-friendly manner : a comparative approach" 2014 DMA diss., Louisiana State University. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2829

Alcantara, Pedro D. Indirect Procedures: A Musician’s Guide to the Alexander Technique 1st Edition Oxford University Press April 1997 ISBN - ‎0198165692 978-0198165699

Buckoke P. Double bassist Peter Buckoke on treating head and neck pain 2019 Strad Magazine https://www.thestrad.com/playing-hub/double-bassist-peter-buckoke-on-treating-head-and-neck-pain/1922.article

Chou, Yun-Chieh. “When the Mouse Meets the Elephant: A Manual for String Bass Players with Application of the Philosophy and Principles of the F. M. Alexander Technique.” 2013 DMA diss., Louisiana State University

Davies, J Alexander Technique classes improve pain and performance factors in tertiary music students Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies Vol. 24 Issue 1 p.1-7 Jan 1, 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.04.006

Valentine, E. R., Fitzgerald, D. F. P., Gorton, T. L., Hudson, J. A., & Symonds, E. R. C. (1995). The Effect of Lessons in the Alexander Technique on Music Performance in High and Low Stress Situations. Psychology of Music, 23(2), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735695232002

Iammatteo, E. (1996). The alexander technique: Improving the balance. Performing Arts & Entertainment in Canada, 30(3), 37. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/alexander-technique-improving-balance/docview/224880281/se-2

Eldred, J., Hopton, A., Donnison, E., Woodman, J., & MacPherson, H. (2015). Teachers of the alexander technique in the UK and the people who take their lessons: A national cross-sectional survey. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 23(3), 451-461. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2015.04.006

Tarr, Jennifer Educating with the hands: working on the body/self in Alexander Technique Sociology of Health & Illness Vol. 33 No. 2 2011 ISSN 0141–9889, pp. 252–265doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01283.x

Stern J. The Alexander Technique: Mindfulness in Movement Relieves Suffering Alternative and Complementary Therapies Volume: 27 Issue 1: February 11, 2021 10-13. http://doi.org/10.1089/act.2020.29307.jcs

Klein, SD; Bayard, C; Wolf, U (24 October 2014). "The Alexander Technique and musicians: a systematic review of controlled trials". BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 14: 414. doi:10.1186/1472-6882-14-414. PMC 4287507. PMID 25344325.

Dennis, JA; Cates, CJ (12 September 2012). "Alexander technique for chronic asthma". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (9): CD000995. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000995.pub2. PMC 6458000. PMID 22972048.

Paola S (17 October 2017). "Homeopathy, naturopathy struck off private insurance list". Australian Journal of Pharmacy.

McEvenue, Kelly; Rodenburg, Patsy (2002). The Actor and the Alexander Technique. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 3–14. ISBN 0-312-29515-4.

Jain, Sanjiv; Kristy Janssen; Sharon DeCelle (2004). "Alexander Technique and Feldenkrais method: A critical overview". Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America. 15 (4): 811–825. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.611.4183. doi:10.1016/j.pmr.2004.04.005. PMID 15458754.

Arnold, Joan; Hope Gillerman (1997). "Frequently Asked Questions". American Society for the Alexander Technique. Retrieved 2 May 2007.

Little, P.; Lewith, G.; Webley, F.; Evans, M.; Beattie, A.; Middleton, K.; Barnett, J.; Ballard, K.; Oxford, F.; Smith, P.; Yardley, L.; Hollinghurst, S.; Sharp, D. (19 August 2008). "Randomised controlled trial of Alexander Technique lessons, exercise, and massage (ATEAM) for chronic and recurrent back pain". BMJ. 337 (aug19 2): a884. doi:10.1136/bmj.a884. PMC 3272681. PMID 18713809.

Cacciatore, T; et al. (2005). "Improvement in Automatic Postural Coordination Following Alexander Technique Lessons in a Person With Low Back Pain". Physical Therapy. 85 (6): 565–78. doi:10.1093/ptj/85.6.565. PMC 1351283. PMID 15921477. Archived from the original on 29 October 2006. Retrieved 15 July 2008.

Body Learning – An Introduction to the Alexander Technique, Macmillan, 1996 ISBN 0805042067, quote p. 74, an article in New Scientist by Professor John Basmajian entitled "Conscious Control of Single Nerve Cells"

The subject of "Means whereby, rather than the end, to be considered" is discussed many times in Man's Supreme Inheritance, typically Chapter VI, p. 263

Ernst E (2019). Alternative Medicine – A Critical Assessment of 150 Modalities. Springer. pp. 153–154. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-12601-8. ISBN 978-3-030-12600-1. S2CID 34148480.

Ryan, Alan (1997). John Dewey and the high tide of American liberalism. New York: W.W. Norton. pp. 187–188. ISBN 0-393-31550-9.

F. M. Alexander, Constructive Conscious Control of the Individual, E. P. Dutton & Co., 1923, ISBN 0-913111-11-2

Aldous Huxley, Eyeless in Gaza, Chatto & Windus, 1936 ISBN 978-0-06172-489-3 F. M. Alexander is named in the last section of Chapter 2. Miller, the character whose description immediately resembles Alexander, appears at the beginning of Chapter 49.

Tengwall, Roger (1996). "A note on the influence of F. M. Alexander on the development of gestalt therapy". Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences. Wiley. 17 (1): 126–130. doi:10.1002/1520-6696(198101)17:1<126::AID-JHBS2300170113>3.0.CO;2-X. ISSN 1520-6696. PMID 7007480.

The above unsigned screed is the suggestion, (by an WP:SPA account with WP:CIR issues), for a completely rewritten version of this article. It does not conform to Policy and Guidelines of wikipedia, and no changes to the article will be made. - Roxy the dog 13:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC) -

Looking for help making it conform to guidelines, perhaps you could help instead of obstructing the page's development. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I have corrected your page indentation to conform with talk page guidelines. I am helping. I am preventing you from making a mess of the page. -Roxy the dog 14:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

The page has already been made a mess by you... 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Inaccurate statement in intro

Article reads "Proponents and teachers of the Alexander Technique believe the technique can address a variety of health conditions, but there is a lack of research to support the claims."

Propose changing "lack of research to support the claims" to the more accurate statement "preliminary research findings are mixed"

Woodman, J. P. Moore, N. R. Evidence for the effectiveness of Alexander Technique lessons in medical and health-related conditions: a systematic review 2012 - International Journal of Clinical Practice VL - 66 IS - 1 SN - 1368-5031 UR https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02817.x

Eldred, J., Hopton, A., Donnison, E., Woodman, J., & MacPherson, H. (2015). Teachers of the alexander technique in the UK and the people who take their lessons: A national cross-sectional survey. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 23(3), 451-461. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2015.04.006

Schlinger, Marcy Feldenkrais Method, Alexander Technique, and Yoga—Body Awareness Therapy in the Performing Arts Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Clinics REVIEW ARTICLE| VOLUME 17, ISSUE 4, P865-875, NOVEMBER 01, 2006 68.129.197.221 (talk) 12:32, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Not done. None of the sources above are reliable. -Roxy the dog 13:37, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Why is that? All from 2nd hand sources in Medical Journals. Bias. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:04, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Because they do not satisfy the requirements of WP:RS. - Roxy the dog 14:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Which ones and how? 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:19, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

None of them, because they do not comply with the requirements of WP:RS, which you should read and understand to begin your journey of understanding wikipedia sourcing. It isn't my job to teach you how it works. -Roxy the dog 14:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Specifically what does not meet the requirements of the WP:RS? I believe you are in error. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:53, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Add section AT & Performing arts

Proposed additional section

The AT is an integral part of curricula at elite drama and music schools including Juilliard, the Curtis Institute of Music and the Royal Academy of Music [29] The method is said by actors to reduce stage fright and to increase spontaneity.[30] There is a particular interest in application of AT among dancers [31] and musicians [32]. AT principles have been applied to music pedagogy and performance by singers [33] [34][35], harpists [36], violinists and violists [37][38][39][40], cellists [41], and bassists [42][43] among many others. A recent study found that purpose-designed AT classes for music students may beneficially influence performance related pain and the associated risk factors of poor posture, excess muscle tension, stress and performance anxiety; there were also reports of improvements to instrumental technique, performance level and practice effectiveness indicating the relevance of AT training to musical skill development[44]. In another study, application of the AT to music performance showed improvement relative to controls in overall music and technical quality as judged by independent experts blind to subjects' condition assignment; there were also improvements in heart rate variance, self-rated anxiety and positive attitude to performance [45] . While more and better designed research is needed to accurately quantify the effect of the AT on artistic performance there does seem to be a general consensus among a large number of successful artists in a variety of fields that the AT has a positive overall effect on artistic life, on and off the stage [46]. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 12:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Not an edit request. -Roxy the dog 13:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Where might I put that? 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Here. -Roxy the dog 14:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

How is it not an edit request? Do you insist on trolling? 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:20, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Did you forget a hyperlink or something? 68.129.197.221 (talk) 16:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Another completely false statement

"The Alexander Technique is used and taught by classically trained vocal coaches and musicians in schools"

This is just not true. Vocal training doesn't equate training in the AT (which generally requires a 3 year 1600 hour course for certification), a more accurate statement would be AT is taught at drama and music schools including the Juilliard School, the Curtis Institute of Music and the Royal Academy of Music. AT teachers teach those classes and lessons not untrained musicians 68.129.197.221 (talk) 12:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Sourced in article. -Roxy the dog 13:40, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Source is incorrect. Read more carefully please. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Which source, and why is it not correct? -Roxy the dog 14:09, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Vocal training doesn't equate training in the AT (which generally requires a 3 year 1600 hour course for certification) 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:20, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

There is no source for that statement that I can see; as I said it is false. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Clinical Voice Disorders: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Thieme Medical Publishers. is the source? Beyond being irrelevant to the claim, can you point out where this claim is supported? I know for a fact it is false. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:40, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

example: Thomas Vasiliades is not a voice teacher, he teaches AT at Juilliard

https://catalog.juilliard.edu/preview_course_nopop.php?catoid=56&coid=32089 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Cotik, T. (2019). Concepts of the Alexander Technique and Practical Ideas for Musicians. American String Teachers Association Journal, 69(2), 33–36. https://doi-org.library.esc.edu/10.1177/0003131319835543

Hembreiker, Linda-Rose. "Teaching with the Alexander Technique." American Harp Journal, winter 2010, pp. 41+.

Neely, Dawn Wells. "Body consciousness and singers: do voice teachers use mind-body methods with students and in their own practice?" Journal of Singing, vol. 73, no. 2, Nov.-Dec. 2016, pp. 137+.

Peterson, P. H. (2008). on the Voice: Alexander Or Feldenkrais: Which Method Is Best? The Choral Journal, 48(11), 67–72. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23556912

Rootberg R. “End-gaining”and the“Means-Whereby”: Discovering the best process to achieve goals of vocal training and pedagogy using the Alexander Technique, 2011 Voice and Speech Review, 7:1, 157-163, DOI: 10.1080/23268263.2011.10739536

Schlinger, Marcy Feldenkrais Method, Alexander Technique, and Yoga—Body Awareness Therapy in the Performing Arts Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Clinics REVIEW ARTICLE| VOLUME 17, ISSUE 4, P865-875, NOVEMBER 01, 2006

Korn, H. (2014). Indirect procedures: The musician's guide to the alexander technique. The American Music Teacher, 63(5), 49-50. https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/indirect-procedures-musicians-guide-alexander/docview/1516492602/se-2

Buckoke P. Double bassist Peter Buckoke on treating head and neck pain 2019 Strad Magazine https://www.thestrad.com/playing-hub/double-bassist-peter-buckoke-on-treating-head-and-neck-pain/1922.article

Alcantara, Pedro D. Indirect Procedures: A Musician’s Guide to the Alexander Technique 1st Edition Oxford University Press April 1997 ISBN - ‎0198165692 978-0198165699

Lacraru, Emanuela Maria, "Supporting your instrument in a body-friendly manner : a comparative approach" 2014 DMA diss., Louisiana State University. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2829

Chou, Yun-Chieh. “When the Mouse Meets the Elephant: A Manual for String Bass Players with Application of the Philosophy and Principles of the F. M. Alexander Technique.” 2013 DMA diss., Louisiana State University.

Acting:

Iammatteo, E. (1996). The alexander technique: Improving the balance. Performing Arts & Entertainment in Canada, 30(3), 37. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/alexander-technique-improving-balance/docview/224880281/se-2

Miller, B. X. (2003). The actor and the alexander technique. New York Library Journal, 128(6), 68 https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/actor-alexander-technique/docview/196816372/se-2

Dance:

Lewis, K. (2006, 11). Understanding alexander technique. Dance Spirit, 10, 45. https://www.proquest.com/magazines/understanding-alexander-technique/docview/209305187/se-2 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:34, 13 October 2022 (UTC) 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:51, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Ex: AT teacher at Juilliard who is not a voicalist https://catalog.juilliard.edu/preview_course_nopop.php?catoid=56&coid=32089 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.129.197.221 (talk • contribs) 15:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Miscategorization of the AT

AT is NOT an alternative medicine; it is classified under “Complementary Therapies” by the Select Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Lords (AT is primarily practiced in the UK); that category contains Alexander technique, aromatherapy, Bach and other flower remedies, body work therapies including massage, counselling stress therapy, hypnotherapy, meditation, reflexology, Shiatsu, spiritual healing, Maharishi Ayurvedic Medicine, nutritional medicine, and Yoga. "Therapies in this group are most often used to complement conventional medicine and do not purport to embrace diagnostic skills.”

No AT teacher or student would classify AT as alternative medicine this is a simple case of miscategorization. AT should be labeled complementary not alternative. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 12:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

No reliable source supporting this statement. - Roxy the dog 13:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Reliable source supports the statement AT is an alternative medicine? 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:01, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. -Roxy the dog 14:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm asking for a source that AT is an alternative medicine? Can you provide one? 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:37, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

There are two provided in that sentence. read them. - Roxy the dog 14:42, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not seeing them. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

They are there, that you cannot see them isn't my problem to fix. WP:CIR applies to many aspects of competence. - Roxy the dog 14:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

You hide behind WP:CIR yet don't actually provide any sources... bias. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Uses section doesn't reflect real world applications

The anemic uses section of the article barely scratches the surface of the artistic applications; the skepticism of health claims should not carry over to a bias against actual practical application as AT is taught at a very large number of university acting, dance, and music programs; most of which offer college credit for AT classes and some for lessons.

No sources for assertion unsigned. -Roxy the dog 13:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

See multitude of sources in my suggestions for edit citations. Bias is showing roxy 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:01, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I have corrected your indenting. Please suggest the best two sources from your plethora scattered throughout this page except in this section and list them here. Thanks. -Roxy the dog 14:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Please work in good faith. Take your pick from below; organized into categories by discipline

Sources for AT applied to music:

Cotik, T. (2019). Concepts of the Alexander Technique and Practical Ideas for Musicians. American String Teachers Association Journal, 69(2), 33–36. https://doi-org.library.esc.edu/10.1177/0003131319835543

Hembreiker, Linda-Rose. "Teaching with the Alexander Technique." American Harp Journal, winter 2010, pp. 41+.

Neely, Dawn Wells. "Body consciousness and singers: do voice teachers use mind-body methods with students and in their own practice?" Journal of Singing, vol. 73, no. 2, Nov.-Dec. 2016, pp. 137+.

Peterson, P. H. (2008). on the Voice: Alexander Or Feldenkrais: Which Method Is Best? The Choral Journal, 48(11), 67–72. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23556912

Rootberg R. “End-gaining”and the“Means-Whereby”: Discovering the best process to achieve goals of vocal training and pedagogy using the Alexander Technique, 2011 Voice and Speech Review, 7:1, 157-163, DOI: 10.1080/23268263.2011.10739536

Schlinger, Marcy Feldenkrais Method, Alexander Technique, and Yoga—Body Awareness Therapy in the Performing Arts Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Clinics REVIEW ARTICLE| VOLUME 17, ISSUE 4, P865-875, NOVEMBER 01, 2006

Korn, H. (2014). Indirect procedures: The musician's guide to the alexander technique. The American Music Teacher, 63(5), 49-50. https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/indirect-procedures-musicians-guide-alexander/docview/1516492602/se-2

Buckoke P. Double bassist Peter Buckoke on treating head and neck pain 2019 Strad Magazine https://www.thestrad.com/playing-hub/double-bassist-peter-buckoke-on-treating-head-and-neck-pain/1922.article

Alcantara, Pedro D. Indirect Procedures: A Musician’s Guide to the Alexander Technique 1st Edition Oxford University Press April 1997 ISBN - ‎0198165692 978-0198165699

Lacraru, Emanuela Maria, "Supporting your instrument in a body-friendly manner : a comparative approach" 2014 DMA diss., Louisiana State University. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2829

Chou, Yun-Chieh. “When the Mouse Meets the Elephant: A Manual for String Bass Players with Application of the Philosophy and Principles of the F. M. Alexander Technique.” 2013 DMA diss., Louisiana State University.

Acting:

Iammatteo, E. (1996). The alexander technique: Improving the balance. Performing Arts & Entertainment in Canada, 30(3), 37. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/alexander-technique-improving-balance/docview/224880281/se-2

Miller, B. X. (2003). The actor and the alexander technique. New York Library Journal, 128(6), 68 https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/actor-alexander-technique/docview/196816372/se-2

Dance:

Lewis, K. (2006, 11). Understanding alexander technique. Dance Spirit, 10, 45. https://www.proquest.com/magazines/understanding-alexander-technique/docview/209305187/se-2 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:34, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

That doesn't help. Did you see the part where I said "best two?" - Roxy the dog 15:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Take the two you think are best my dear. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Here's another for good measure

https://catalog.juilliard.edu/preview_course_nopop.php?catoid=56&coid=32089 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

That's useless. It appears to be an advertisement for an AT course. Are all your suggestions of such a poor nature? - Roxy the dog 15:52, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Dance source

Lewis, K. (2006, 11). Understanding alexander technique. Dance Spirit, 10, 45. https://www.proquest.com/magazines/understanding-alexander-technique/docview/209305187/se-2 68.129.197.221 (talk) 13:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Unclear what is required in the above sentence. -Roxy the dog 13:45, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

This wiki is supposed to be developed for wikiproject dance, this is a source for such development 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect uncited statement

There is a blatantly incorrect statement that is not cited in the uses section that musicians teach AT; AT teachers with 3 year 1600 hour training teach AT lessons at universities, not untrained musicians. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:29, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

There are three citations in that section. It appears to be sourced. -Roxy the dog 14:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

There is not or it's not relevant. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

If you don't want to help perhaps you can find another wiki so another editor can work in good faith on this one. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:45, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Apologies double posting this point, the section disappeared and I assumed Roxy is deleting things willy nilly again 68.129.197.221 (talk) 14:46, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I have not deleted anything, just restored parts of the page that you removed or altered. -Roxy the dog 14:49, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

You still haven't fixed the problem after being provided sources. 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:27, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

... funny that. You haven't even defined a problem based on our Policies. - Roxy the dog 15:50, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Are false statements defined as a problem? Do you really need to be so obstructive? 68.129.197.221 (talk) 16:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Request for review from admins

Not sure I'm doing this right but I would like admins to review this page for abuse from editors. Blatant antagonizing of users with knowledge of the AT trying to make good faith improvements by skeptical editors with no idea of the content; just trying to fix blanant incorrect statements on this page is impossible and trolling users who have tried is common.

{{rfc|econ}} 68.129.197.221 (talk) 15:35, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Talk page cleanup

I noticed the ip has been removing others' comments. I've done my best to restore everything that I could find, but I've not looked prior to [3]. Some look like they could be accidents [4][5]. I don't see how this could be accidental. Apologies for any confusion or anything I've missed. --Hipal (talk) 16:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

New to editing wikis; was informed of rules and done my best to follow them. Thanks. In any case my intention here is not to fight with biased editors but to make some meaningful progress on this poor wiki 68.129.197.221 (talk) 16:25, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

The main source material is not accurate

The main source material for this page is not accurate or legitimate: Lynette Barnard (2014), ARO HEALING Touching Lives THEORIES, TECHNIQUES and THERAPIES: The Techniques and Therapies of Aro-Healing, Xlibris Corporation (self-publishing)

I have brought this up repeatedly as this is the source for the incorrect information cited from it in the article "There is a blatantly incorrect statement that is not cited in the uses section that musicians teach AT; AT teachers with 3 year 1600 hour training teach AT lessons at universities, not untrained musicians"

It says AT is "a way of massaging the body;" editors come on this source is utter garbage probably written by someone who knew nothing about AT first hand. Wtf is aro healing and what does it have to do with the AT beyond this one author? Nothing! 68.129.197.221 (talk) 16:23, 13 October 2022 (UTC)