Inter­fer­ence fields in diagnosis and treatment — two books on auri­cu­lomedi­cine

Das Störfeld in Diagnostik und Therapie

By Beate Strittmatter,

Hippokrates-Verlag, 1998, 268 pages, 150 illustrations, 5 tables.

Hippokrates-Verlag, 1999, 104 pages, 25 illustrations

Let me say at the outset: anyone concerned with auriculomedical diagnosis and treatment cannot avoid these two books.

Both are very well worth reading in their own way.

However, a few surprises await the reader.

B. Strittmatter's long-announced book fulfils the task of a comprehensive discussion of interference fields, mostly with distinction, especially regarding the central role of focal and interference-field processes in conditions that have become chronic, and is highly recommended.

If I place somewhat excessive emphasis on a few shortcomings, this is intended constructively for a further edition.

Alongside the fundamentals and the many possible sources of interference, considerable space is devoted to the various auriculomedical diagnostic and therapeutic methods, especially the principal diagnostic method, the VAS (vascular autonomic signal), known as the Nogier reflex in honour of its discoverer.

Numerous case studies and other applications (apart from interference fields) are also presented, rounded off with many drawings and explanations of points relevant to interference fields.

In my opinion, the book should be seen primarily as a homage to Bahr, repeatedly (over)emphasising that systematic auricular diagnosis is superior to other approaches as the “best method”, since, for example, “none of the testing methods” permits “the grading of a focus that has been found or the so-important identification of the principal focus” (p. 42).

That this is not so is known not only to electroacupuncture practitioners but also to kinesiologists, particularly those practising dental physioenergetics.

Indeed, despite references to matrix research, some of the statements concerning foci and interference fields seem too restricted to auriculomedical thinking.

Strittmatter expresses surprise at the “self-evidence” with which it is asserted that “80 per cent of all foci” lie in the dental, oral and maxillofacial region, attributing this to the fact that “ultimately, the author can assess only those interference fields” “that can actually be detected with his testing methods” (p. 43)—yet she disregards this consideration for auricular diagnosis and treatment.

Regarding root-treated teeth, she writes on the one hand that disinfection and repeated irrigation are important “so that all germs are eliminated” (p. 19), but on the other correctly states a few lines later (p. 19) that “protein breakdown products always remain”, “which constitute a burden for the surrounding tissue (and, depending on the quantity, also for the liver)”.

Her conclusion on this point, correct but initially abrupt in light of the preceding statements, is “that not every dead tooth causes interference, and therefore not every non-vital tooth [root-filled or not root-filled?—reviewer's note] has to be removed” (p. 20). In my view, this lacks a reference to considering pre-existing burdens and the time factor.

It is therefore surprising that, regarding root remnants, she concludes that they “usually have to be removed” (p. 22), because they “almost always appear as a focus ... in the test”.

According to Strittmatter, impacted third molars must be tested to establish whether they are an interference field, since “not every impacted wisdom tooth causes interference”.

In my opinion, here too a reference is missing to the time factor and, above all, to adrenal deficiency (kidney-yang weakness), in which an impacted third molar should be regarded as a symptom of the underlying disease.

It is not entirely understandable (p. 24) why she wishes to restrict the requirement to mill out the alveolus to teeth with radicular cysts, rather than applying it to every non-vital tooth (since it is not mentioned there).

Her qualification that inflammatory tissue can “sometimes only be removed by scraping or milling out the wound cavity” should, in my opinion, also be corrected.

In the discussion of chronic osteitis (p. 24), a reference to NICO (neuralgia-inducing cavitational osteonecrosis) after Bouquot, or to Lechner's work on chronic jaw osteitis, would have rounded out her assessment for conventionally oriented colleagues and given them an opportunity to reconsider.

In my opinion, it is important that Ms Strittmatter emphasises that “only a structure with a genuine interfering-focus effect ... has an active corresponding point on the auricle” (p. 41).

Considerable space is also devoted to the necessity of preliminary examinations, since, for example, oscillation—the constant switching between sympathetic and parasympathetic activity—and inversion—the reversal of the reflex between head and body, usually caused by blockage of the first rib—are absolute obstacles to diagnosis and treatment, as is also recognised in dental physioenergetics.

For amalgam as a special case of an interference field, whose importance is described in chronically treatment-resistant patients, particularly patients with Crohn's disease, Omega 1 is given as an indicator point. For the other five types of interference field found by Bahr, special interference-field indicator points are found on the ears and hands, depending on the patient's handedness.

The five types simultaneously establish a hierarchy of interference fields, so that one must always begin with the higher-ranking field identified.

The “histamine interference field” (= acute toxic interference field) is the most important, and the “laterality-control interference field” the weakest.

Psychological interference fields are also addressed precisely, though somewhat briefly compared with somatic ones; masked depression, for example, can often manifest as low back pain.

If symptoms do not improve after auriculomedical treatment, Strittmatter identifies various possible reasons, such as missing the principal focus and/or inaccurate insertion of the acupuncture needle, insufficient consideration of the symptoms, or substantial anatomical changes.

Also important is the observation that an initial aggravation lasting more than a few days is a sign of neurosis.

After reading Strittmatter's book, one looks forward to the second work on auriculomedicine, published by the same publisher in 1999, expecting a continuation of the subject beyond interference-field processes.

Here comes the first surprise: this book is already thinner in volume, and closer reading reveals a second surprise, for it almost, or often, proves to be an “anti-book” to the first. Many of the findings of the Bahr school (which, however, is not named) are not only systematically called into question but even presented as errors.

Thus Helling and Feldmeier tell us “that the much-cited positive and negative VAS phenomenon does not exist. There is only a VAS phenomenon or there is no VAS phenomenon” (p. 56).

Furthermore, “the VAS phenomenon ... is to be understood here as a secondary phenomenon” (p. 7).

The birth of auriculomedicine is described as the discovery of photoperception together with the discovery of the VAS phenomenon, with “the terminology, based on false assumptions by a student of Paul Nogier, ... remaining to this day” (p. 7).

Elsewhere, too, as one reads, it seems to me that there is a deliberate wish to distance this approach from auriculotherapy, and that a book has been written somewhat hastily, in my opinion, to present its authors as the more legitimate, authentic successors to Nogier.

According to Helling and Feldmeier, “the difference between auriculotherapy and auriculomedicine ... lies, among other things, in the fact that the latter includes reliable palpation of the VAS and consideration of cutaneous photoperception and laterality. Thus the therapeutic and diagnostic scope is considerably expanded by incorporating auriculomedicine” (p. 64).

We read further: “Auriculomedical diagnosis of laterality depends on the photoperception of the skin” (p. 56). Given the importance of the term photoperception, I was eager as a reader to learn what it actually meant, but had to wait until page 65 for an explanation. It is the skin's ability to receive electromagnetic waves, thus giving it the function of radar.

“Cutaneous photoperception is indispensable for auriculomedicine; however, the VAS phenomenon gives us the possibility of diagnosing cutaneous photoperceptions and their disturbances.”

The explanation and determination of laterality, the second important characteristic of auriculomedicine, also has to wait until page 51, where it is defined “as a person's sidedness or handedness, which in turn expresses that person's motor dominance in the brain”.

But, we learn on page 52, “in relation to motor dominance, it is only one piece of the mosaic in the complex picture of the brain's overall functions, and disturbed laterality is thus far more than disturbed motor dominance”.

What this “more” is, however, is presented rather long-windedly.

“As far as auriculomedicine is concerned, however, the problem of laterality is linked not only to the patient's handedness or sidedness, but also to what we may call ‘cerebral balance’” (p. 54).

“In auriculomedical diagnosis of laterality or a disturbance of laterality, it must not be forgotten that it is essentially the photoperception of the skin that permits this examination technique. With so-called zero perception at high and low frequency, laterality cannot be determined auriculomedically” (p. 55).

All clear, then?

The actual explanation in the book does not appear until page 68: stimulation with white light triggers a VAS, and the absence of this VAS is precisely zero perception. Only now do we learn the importance of white-light zero perception: namely, that if it is present, further diagnosis within auriculomedicine is pointless, though pure auriculotherapy is not.

My remarks show that systematic presentation has been somewhat neglected, and the arrangement, including, for example, the indications for use, is rather unclear. Sometimes one does not know what a note refers to or where to find the corresponding explanation, since cross-references are often missing that would allow terms or the same subject to be found elsewhere in the book. This also applies to explanations of terms when they first appear. Sometimes important matters are simply lost in the text and should be emphasised more, such as diagnosing a scar interference field through an exhausting VAS phenomenon or through the so-called parasitic frequency.

The crucial concept of photoperception (see above) is explained in detail much too late, so that at the beginning of the book one is sometimes left uncertain about what is meant. A reference there to the later description would have been useful. The same applies to other terms.

For the seven Nogier frequencies (Bahr's are not mentioned at all), in my opinion an illustration is missing that would say more than the lengthy description. The same applies to individual projection zones on the ears. Much that is interesting and worth reading is provided on food intolerance and its testing through the so-called hyper-VAS, in which the VAS jumps against the palpating finger in response to white-light stimulation, making the VAS sensation distinctly more intense.

If I emphasise this somewhat negative impression, that does not mean the book is worse than the one discussed first or should not be read. On the contrary, with a little more effort one learns so much that is new, and so many different ideas, that it enriches auriculomedical thinking, provided one is not distracted by the “trench warfare” between the two schools.

It also became clear to me that the portrayal of one method as absolutely correct—as it had been presented for years—now has a counterpole that puts many “old” statements into perspective.

For example, the function of laterality and its significance are presented quite differently, and the locations of many ear points (e.g. heart, liver, pancreas, nose, paranasal sinuses) are also different, quite apart from the different methodological approach.

As a dentist, this book taught me for the first time about a different topographical tongue zone on the rim of the helix at the level of Darwin's point, and about the highly important area of psychological scars on the lobule between the prefrontal cortex and trigeminal zone. This is a very interesting area, as I have since been able to establish in practice.

Overall, despite its greater weakness, this book is, for the reasons mentioned above, at least as recommendable and worth reading as Strittmatter's, so it makes sense to read the two together.

Both books have their respective weaknesses, easily remedied in later editions, but these are negligible compared with the information gained and the advantages practitioners can derive from both.

Beginners may be somewhat more confused after reading them, albeit on a higher level. Advanced practitioners, however, will be grateful for the many suggestions in both books.

The prices are entirely justified in view of the books' production quality.