My mentor, Dr. George Goodheart, used to tell of The Zebra In The Bathtub.

He asked individuals to imagine there was a Zebra in their bathtub, eating them out of house and home causing unwanted distress.

While naming the cause of discomfort and suffering – the so-called Zebra In The Bathtub – provided some momentary relief, it failed to address the nature of the problem:

"Why is a Zebra there in the first place,
and once we get rid of it,
how do we stop it from coming back?"  

Not only did Dr. Goodheart want to remove the Zebra from the bathtub, but he wanted to make sure that nobody's home was ever affected by the Zebra again.

As you may have guess, the "Zebra In The Bathtub"represents our patient's symptoms.

It has shown up for some reason, it is causing great distress, and our patient wants it gone. And as physicians, not only do we want it gone – but we want to stop it from returning ever again.

To achieve this we use a systemic, rather than a symptom driven, approach.

The systemic approach dictates that we first look for the reason the Zebra appeared in the bathtub in the first place.

We do this by working within a hierarchy that guides us to an appropriate and often remarkable outcome, asking ourselves the equivalent questions of:

As these questions seek to answer why the Zebra is in the bathtub, and what steps should be taken to both remove it and stop it from returning...

The questions we ask seek to answer why the symptom has appeared, and what steps should be taken to both remove it and stop it from returning.

To ensure that the right questions are asked at the right time, and that any physician can get the right result for their patient, I discovered that having a step-by-step process was helpful.

This lead to the development of Quintessential Applications. Quintessential Applications is the process I have developed, used, and taught for more than 30 years.

It predictably addresses patient symptoms through a step by step, physiological based, basic science driven method.

And what's more, it allows anyone who uses it to confidently identify what steps must be taken first, next, and last for any patient who enters their office.

When you begin working through patient presentations in a systematic way, two things are likely to occur.

First, you will discover a localized symptom is often not the result of a localized issue - but rather, it is the expression of an issue further upstream in the neurological hierarchy.

It is not uncommon to address the inconsistencies in the upper echelons of this neurological hierarchy and find the patient is now symptom free.

As a result, your patients are treated in a more effective and efficient manner than they otherwise would be.

(And I don’t need to tell you the positive impact this has on referrals.)

Secondly, your patients will recognize a deeper sense of confidence and efficacy in your treatment protocols.

Instead of wading through the process, looking for hints of what to do next in your assessment and treatment, you will be operating from a framework that provides far greater understanding.

To help you see the difference between using the system and not, allow me to share a parallel example:

Consider for a moment that two mechanics were working on your car’s engine problems.

The first mechanic moved around the car, probing this and that – checking the tires, starting the engine, running the windshield wipers – all in an effort to try and find the potential cause of engine trouble.

The second mechanic began with a checklist, and began asking questions in a systematic way. Is the battery connected correctly? Is the ignition connected to the engine? Is there petrol in the car? 

One mechanic will probe and probe, trying technique after technique, hoping to get lucky and find the root cause before it’s too late. And maybe he will.

The other will systematically apply techniques in a sequential manner, beginning from the areas of greatest impact. And in turn, he will be guaranteed to have predictable success by following the process.

A student of mine one remarked how his approach to treating patients had fundamentally changed after using the Quintessential Applications Clinical Protocol.

“I am no longer symptom driven, but system driven” he explained.

By learning the step by step process that aligns proven techniques into the most effective order possible – an order that works systematically to remove the cause of a symptom – and applying it to his patients, my student dramatically improves his outcomes.

And he is not alone. Students from around the world have shared their experience of integrating the Quintessential Applications Clinical Protocol into their practice.

I'll share some of their comments in just a moment.

But first, if you are still reading, and agree that being system driven – methodically seeking to understand what system put a Zebra in the bath tub, and how to change the system so he won’t come back – would be a more effective approach than being symptom driven, I have a final case study that I think you will enjoy.

It relates to a common presentation that all physicians see at this time of year...

As a physician, you have no doubt seen multiple sore throats in your time.

Likewise, you are no doubt familiar with the common routine.

Patient comes in with presenting symptoms of throat soreness. The throat is assessed, antibiotics or soothing remedies for the throat are prescribed.

This is a typical symptom driven treatment approach.

Today I would like to share with you an alternative – a systemic driven treatment – extracted from my own case histories.

My thoughts, as I treated this patient, are included in parentheses.

“A 49 year-old woman presented with a sore throat with which she had awakened that same morning. Her only significant history was that she had eaten yogurt - not typical for her - the previous day.

(The clinical thought process here was that she had inoculated her small intestine with unnecessary bacteria from the yogurt which had triggered an immune response and the sore throat.)

She also had pain in the iliac crests bilaterally and bilateral lower neck / cervicodorsal area pain.

She had an open ICV.  Pinching her small intestine visceral referred pain areas (VRPs) negated the ICV challenge.

(This suggests the need for increasing sympathetic activity in the small intestine as indicated by Visceral Challenge Technique – or, to be more specific, treat the Chapman’s reflexes by IRT with an offender. )

Oral probiotics (acidophilus) caused a positive therapy localization (TL) to both small intestine (quadriceps) Chapman’s reflexes.

(This suggested the presence of excessive bacteria in the small intestine as the source of her immune response.)

She also showed a need for IRT to the right iliolumbar ligament. After clearing the IL ligament, IRT was performed to both quadriceps Chapman’s reflexes with oral acidophilus.

Next, the Cytokine Detoxification Procedure was performed. (See Quintessential Applications Appendix page 15.) Immune stimulation by thymus thumping, or by oral Thymex (Standard Process), or oral homeopathic 6x preparations of interleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor–alpha (Metabolics, LTD) created a bilateral PMS inhibition. This weakness was negated by glycine and B-2 (riboflavin).

(Glycine is necessary for negating cytokine’s effects. Riboflavin is used by unfriendly gut flora, and will often strengthen a patient when in reality, the patient has plenty of dietary riboflavin, but the unfriendly flora is using it up and not leaving enough for the patient. In these cases, B-2 actually helps the unfriendly flora more than it helps the patient.)

Correction was performed by rubbing the liver Chapman’s reflex for about 30 seconds with Thymex in the mouth while periodically  thumping (every 5-10 seconds) the thymus area.

Oral sugar challenge resulted in an open ICV which was negated by rubbing bilateral Chapman’s reflexes for the quadriceps.

(This enteric nervous system reflex pattern is common in intestinal dysbiosis.)

She had an L-5 inferior challenge which responded to IRT.

Rapid eye movements - REMs caused a recurrence of both PMS inhibitions and a recurrence of sugar causing an open ICV. This was negated by TL to L-3. An L-3 / L-4 fixation was corrected which negated the REMs problem.

(Having patients perform REMs – with their eyes closed – will cause a recurrence of corrected problems and challenges that are associated with symptoms occurring during sleep or immediately upon awakening.)

T-5 was adjusted as an anterior subluxation.

The patient was symptom free in her throat, iliac crests, and CD area.

Final Comment: Unnecessary acidophilus (yogurt) created a gut immune system reaction and the resulting cytokines were unable to be detoxified by the liver resulting in an inflammatory response of the sore throat. The excessive bacteria in the small intestine created a temporary shortage of riboflavin, using it for their own purposes and not leaving enough for the patient to synthesize adequate glycine. GLY blocks IL-1 (and IL-6) as well as TNF-alpha. Its restriction contributed to the presence of these cytokines and the subsequent inflammatory process. The iliac crest pain was related to the small intestine / quadriceps weakness. The CD pain was associated with the bilateral PMS and the T-5 anterior.

Correction was dependent on decreasing the source of cytokine activity: IRT to the Chapman’s reflexes for the quads with acidophilus, followed by treating (rubbing) the same reflexes coincident with oral sugar to neutralize the fertile field for these bacteria to keep growing in the small intestine (where they are not usual inhabitants – hence the immune response.) These techniques were essential to remove the source of the problem. Correction of cytokine excess by rubbing the liver Chapman’s reflex restored optimal function to the liver which had been temporarily overwhelmed by the excessive cytokines from the small intestine response.”

If you've read this far, you've learned two things.

You've learned that being systemic driven is more effective than symptom driven, and that it gives you a framework that can identify the root cause of a patient's symptoms, allowing you to more effectively treat your patient.

And you've also learned that the systemic approach enables you to treat your patients in a consistent, step-by-step manner, and that this step-by-step manner enables you to produce predictable outcomes.

In short: you understand the approach that lead to a proven step by step protocol for diagnosing and treating your patients.

The rationale for this proven clinical approach has been published in a peer reviewed paper, which you can read by clicking here.