‘Highs’ and ‘Lows’ of SCENAR
© by Dr. Irina Kossovskaia, June 2005 (posted on the SCENARISTA newsgroup)
(FORWARD NOTE: this article represents a posting that was a part of a heated discussion way back in 2005. Unfortunately, I do not have the previous postings that led to this one, so my arguments may sound confusing to you at times. Besides, the article mostly refers to the IR (Initial Reaction) readings on the first generation SCENARs; COSMODIC devices do not do it quite the same way… And yet, I am still putting it up, and without any alterations. Just the way it was originally written. If you pass the confusing moments, there is a lot of information there that is important for ANY SCENAR user to understand – no matter if you are equipped with a RITMSCENAR, an Acusen, the DOVE, or the EX735Ag.)
Dear All,
It is such a pleasure to see active and intelligent discussions on the newsgroup. It reminds me, once again, what SCENAR is all about – DYNAMICS. Where there is dynamics, there is life. It is simple, isn’t it? As Dr. Alexander Revenko says, “Dynamics perfects energy”.
Which brings me to the issue of ‘highs’ and ‘lows’. When we measure the Initial Reaction (IR), we do not measure the stable parameter (say, a voltage), but rather the speed of its dynamic change. The higher the speed the higher the IR.
IR shows the level of reactivity of the body in the designated area and characterizes the condition of adaptive reactions – local and general.
I would caution practitioners against very simplistic interpretations of IR as being indicative of ‘inflamed’ (>35), normal or ‘degenerative’ (<25) conditions of the measuring area. (I am using Dr. Tennant’s gradation and terminology, which I cannot agree with, in particular in that, as far as I know, the 1st IR corridor of 18-25 has always been considered ‘average’, not low or ‘degenerative’.) It is not that straight forward.
Try a simple experiment. Measure IRs along the spine of a person before and after a series of, say, sit-ups (or better yet, passionate kisses :-)). I bet you will have a different, higher, corridor. Is that a result of the increased tissue voltage and ‘inflammation’? More likely, you just have a different type of adaptive reaction (say, an activation reaction instead of a training reaction) and informational processes in the body are now running faster, thus resulting in a faster change of the parameters of the initial SCENAR signal. This situation is dynamic and can change back in a few minutes, if you decide not to pursue your experiment further to see, how high can the ‘highs’ go…
IRs are usually indicative of the adaptivity, generally or locally, and show the speed of adaptive reactions in the area. Typically, areas of inflammation are ‘energetic’ with a high speed of adaptive reactions and high IRs. Areas of degeneration lack life and the speed of adaptive reactions (and, consequently, IR readings) is low.
However, the correlation is not linear. You can have cheerfully high IRs over the areas of obvious degeneration, and that’s probably when you want to work on it. See, in SCENAR technology we mostly work on ‘highs’ – because the body works on ‘highs’.
Areas of high IRs show you where the highest body dynamics is, ‘here and now’. You are looking for the highest high, because it represents the smallest small asymmetry, the body’s priority and focus at the moment. It only makes sense to support the body in its healing efforts, rather than try to change its plan of action.
The body has its own intelligence (as well as each and every cell in it), and one of the major ‘highs’ of SCENAR therapy is the ability to put this intelligence to work instead of competing with it. The aim of any SCENAR procedure is to reveal, to discover (and I am not using the verb ‘to understand’ on purpose) the body’s ‘plan of action’, and to follow it, enhancing every step and thus increasing the body’s efficiency. The body will show its priorities in small asymmetries (found while ‘brushing’ the skin in Subjective mode or taking readings in Objective mode – and this will not necessarily correspond), and the dynamics of asymmetries will lead the treatment.
The skill of a SCENAR therapist is in the ability to identify the small asymmetry, to separate it from other asymmetries and, by changing its condition, provide for the major dynamic change in the entire system. The smaller and the more intensive the selected small asymmetry, the faster will be the dynamics of the system and the more profound will be changes on the healing path. This is called ‘the principle of small sufficiency’, and it is one of the cornerstones of the SCENAR technology.
I am sorry to occupy your time explaining the very basics of SCENAR, the ‘kindergarten’ SCENAR, but it seems to me that Dr. Tennant is mixing two things: applying the SCENAR device and using the SCENAR technology, totally ignoring the rules and principles of the latter. These are not the same. The SCENAR, as a very effective electrical stimulator and an energy medicine device, can be successfully utilized by any other healing modality or practice, complementing the other healing tools. It can be used on acupuncture points and meridians according to TCM principles to change the energy flow in the body, or with massage therapy to relax and prepare muscles before the procedure, or to ‘increase the tissue voltage’ doing SW1/Var on everything (as per Dr. Tennant), or something else. The list is virtually endless. I even used the SCENAR assisting a Native American shaman in their traditional ritual of dealing with ‘entities’ (very successfully indeed). The point is – all this has nothing to do with the SCENAR technology.
SCENAR technology, or ST, is an independent medical discipline, which has a developed theoretical basis, a specialized system of expert assessment of the body’s condition, and a specific treatment methodology, which cannot be related to any other medical practice or modality. ST has its roots in the theory of functional systems of the body and in the theory of its adaptive activity. From this point of view, SCENAR is a dynamic functional system (it has been designed as an informational analogue of a living functional system) capable of determining the optimal therapeutic influence through the assessment of functional asymmetries and cyclical changes in the body and providing such influence through forming the main product of ST – the Functional Pathologic System (FPS).
I know, that sounds a little more complicated than ‘the tool of restoring the body voltage’. Actually, the relative complexity of theory and methodology of SCENAR, scaring off some practitioners, became one of a few ‘lows’ of this otherwise welcomed and easily accepted modality. It is not the purpose of this posting to go into details of FPS formation; I just mentioned it to remind you what SCENAR technology is all about. I don’t know where Dr. Tennant got the impression that techniques of Objective mode (or numeric techniques) ‘show the brain that something needs healing’ from. Nothing of a sort is ever taught at any of the SCENAR trainings I know (and I followed the development of Russian training programs since 1996).
First of all, there is a difference between ‘the brain’ and ‘the body system’. If you consider the brain the only regulative organ in the body, then yes, the spinal cord injuries should affect healing. But most of the information exchange in the body and functional regulation happens without the brain involvement at all! Humoral and hormonal regulative factors, such as RP (regulatory peptides), are being released predominantly in the synapses of autonomic nervous system, independently from the central nervous system and the brain in particular, and most of the healing is under control of autonomic nervous system anyway. Besides, there are other ways of communication between cells in the body, including light. Therefore, there is nothing surprising in the fact that healing does NOT depend solely on the brain, whatsoever, even from a reductionistic biomedical point of view. It is taught in medical schools.
Second, the Objective mode techniques do not intend to show anything to the brain. The body already knows what is going on and is taking actions. As I tried to point out earlier, these techniques aim at expert evaluation of the ‘here and now’ body situation with identification of the place of highest dynamics == the small asymmetry == the body’s priority and focus, and subsequent enhancement of the asymmetry to evoke the stronger healing response. Something like ‘electronic homeopathy’. Extremely effective, if you know what you are doing, and almost useless in you are clueless (like everything else). The ways to look for the small asymmetry may be different, and this is where various techniques like ‘Higher’, ‘All Higher’ or “Stereognosis’ come to existence (even though it would be more correct to call these techniques ‘principles’, the selection principles).
It is like if you are conducting a beauty pageant and utilizing different selection methods to choose the beauty queen(s). You can screen the entire female population of a state or province, Dosing* every time as you find a prettier than the previous girl, than compare all pretty ones, select the state winner ‘taking her down to 0’, and then let the state winners compete with each other for FM/Var – that would be the selection principle, or algorithm, ‘Higher’.
Alternatively, you can just go with screening across the country, Dosing* the progressively prettier girls, taking down to 0 every pretty face which is subsequently higher on Dose*, FM/Varing any lucky one which is subsequently higher on 0s, and starting all over again after that – this is ‘All Higher’, of course. You get more than one queen this way, but what is the agenda after all – to put on a good fight or to just show the country where its beauty lives?
Same with ‘Stereognosis’, only you make comparisons not subsequently but with certain standards (the first IR to get a Dose*, the first Dose* to get a 0, the first 0 to be FM/Vared) that are established during the first selection round; from this point on the first IR, Dose*, or 0 of every new round is compared to these standards, the higher ones are marked accordingly, and only after that the contest moves forward providing for comparisons within the round, until FM/Var is set and a new round announced. Pretty easy, really. Just remember to always go for higher numbers.
These selection principles can be applied on the 3P6P (3 pathways 6 points), on the Collar zone, on the abdomen, on the Palm zone, or anywhere else where you have enough room for comparisons – but it is usually areas and zones significantly impacting the entire system. Techniques of Objective mode are always SYSTEMIC, even if they are performed just on ‘the point of pain’. Hence, it is quite difficult for me to comprehend the logic of the following Dr. Tennant’s phrase: “Treating inflamed organs with higher, all-higher, etc. while ignoring degenerative organs is ill-advised.”
I don’t even know where to start arguing, because it seems to me that we are talking in different languages. It is just not possible to ‘ignore’ anything in the system with the Objective mode techniques; it is not up to an operator to decide where to put an attention and a focus of the treatment. You just need to trust and follow the body’s innate intelligence and follow the ‘highs’ as your landmarks.
Certainly, you may decide that you are smarter than the system by trying to re-direct its healing efforts towards the areas of ‘lows’. You may even succeed, and the body will re-prioritize its activity. Only it will take quite an effort and the system will not be happy about it. Most likely, it will just give up competing with you and give you the lead. But do you really want such a responsibility? If, for one reason or another, you are not leading any more, the system will be left confused and uncertain and it will take it a while to restore confidence. Or what if you made a mistake? That’s why it is not advised to work on ’lows’ in SCENAR therapy unless you know exactly what you are doing, can predict the consequences, and be prepared to take the lead.
Just in case, the question, ‘What to do with these low readings, especially if they correspond to the area of complaint?’ still sits as a splinter in your mind, I want to remind you that IR readings are very dynamic and will change as the body resolves its issues one by one and moves the focus to the ‘degenerative’ area. When the body’s attention is there, the readings will go high, and then come down to ‘normal’ as the issue is being resolved and the energetic metabolism of the area is restored.
Of course, there is a particular case when the system is low on energy in general and all IR readings are in the ‘0’ corridor – and I wouldn’t necessarily assume that this implies an acidic state with low pH and a low tissue voltage (energy exists in various forms and not necessarily has to be electric), it just may be an adaptation reaction of training, or low level of reactivity, or the state of areactivity etc. As a rule, the adaptivity state changes after 2-3 SCENAR sessions and numbers move into a higher corridor, along with the improvement of a general state, mood, appetite, and working capacity.
This will happen faster if you utilize special ‘energizing’ SCENAR techniques and/or using other energy-enhancement and body cleansing methods available to you accompanied by the corrected nutrition. I find that SCENAR can optimize the use of energy resources of the body and improve the energy consumption from the environment, yet does not ‘supply energy’ per se. Therefore, if you have at your disposal a bioenergy-enhancement technique, it is good to use in almost any case (strong bioenergy fields are extremely rare lately, which any EAV or Nakatani testing will prove). My personal preferences are certainly the Solaris Blanket, the BEFE method in its various versions (Q2, IonCleanse etc.), Acuvision, and last but not the least, the low level laser (LLL). The combination SCENAR + LLL + Blanket has been my favorite for the last year, and I can recommend it wholeheartedly.
In the conclusion to this posting (which turned out to be quite lengthy) I want to complete the cycle and return to the IR readings. Hopefully, at this point there should not be any doubt in anybody’s mind that it is inappropriate to use the term ‘normal’ to assess the readings. ‘Average’ would be a better term. There are also no readings that a client ‘should have’. Numbers are there for us to optimize the treatment and monitor the client’s dynamics, that’s all. These dynamics are unpredictable because they depend on many different factors, thus the IR changes are also unpredictable and non-specific (meaning their change cannot be directly linked to the change in physiologic condition of underlying tissues).
So, don’t torture yourself and your client trying to get the ‘normal’ readings. Just go with the flow and smile regardless if you are getting ‘highs’ or ‘lows’. As long as you are seeing changes, everything is OK.
Remember: SCENAR is all about DYNAMICS. In SCENAR therapy, Any Change Is a Good One.
Many blessings to All.
Dr. Irina
P.S. I just discovered another Dr. Tennant’s message posted on the group, where he suggests “you forget the word “asymmetry”. I beg you not to; otherwise you might as well forget about the SCENAR technology as such and just keep using a computer to hammer in nails, so to speak. If Dr. Jerry Tennant is not using the computer for what it is meant for does not mean you also should not.
SCENAR (SKENAR) as a new field of medical science and as a unique phenomenon is constantly growing and evolving. It’s evolution is being pioneered by LET Medical Research Laboratory in Russia led by Dr. Alexander Karasev – the original inventor of SCENAR (SKENAR) and COSMODIC ®.
GO HERE to see the array of the newest SCENAR and COSMODIC ® devices.
These sophisticated and intelligent machines more and more resemble the famous Star Trek healing device… What it is going to be 5-10 years down the road? 🙂 Stay tuned…
