CK,
You wrote:> I think Bob Kidd said it best in his "cornerstones" paper
published in the
UK journal that, and I paraphrase, "the absence of further scientific
inquiry (post Root et al) has led the original theories to become more a
doctrine that a science."<
In the introduction to Normal and Abnormal Function of the Foot my father
wrote:
"The practitioner must have the best possible basis on which to make
treatment decisions. He cannot wait until sufficient research has been
conducted to conclusively prove how the foot functions."
"Using the facts revealed by that research which has been completed, and by
adding the logical reasoning based upon the requirements of each applicable
basic science, a story of normal foot function develops which is coherent
and exciting to those responsible for foot care. Sound methods for
diagnosis and treatment of abnormalities can be developed, once normal
function and structure of the foot is understood."
My father intended his work to act as a part of the foundation, not as the
full foundation and certainly not as the house which rests on it!
Warm regards,
Jeff
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
leave podiatry
to [log in to unmask]
Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|