APRIL 7, 2022 
What’s Gallagher’s Test?
How to perform it – why its important:

This blog post is sponsored by @AhliaYoga: Join Ahlia for her meditations and yoga practices on YouTube

Many, but not all newsletter subscribers are MC2 docs, I always try to be inclusive so that the info presented has value for all DC’s. That said, while Gallagher’s Test is specific to MC2, the reason we perform it can be applied to virtually any technic that seeks balance as an objective.

It is a misundertood test, even within MC2 because it is similar to another test but gives completely different information. It is a post, prone C1 re-check and may also be indicative of a lower extremity injury. All of this is discussed with Dr. Dan in the video below.

Another FAQ is the difference between MC2 and TRT. Here’s my response:

While a somewhat generic answer can be found on my site, to fully appreciate the differences, a little history is needed.

MC2 (Mastering Chiropractic with Certainty) is built on Torque Release and Upper Cervical engines. The similarities to Torque Release are that we both look at areas of dural attachment as primaries. Both technics can be done by hand or with adjusting instruments and we both recommend the same type of table for assessment and adjusting. Dr. Holder and I, after co-teaching in New Mexico decades ago, agree that DC’s that are exposed to both technics invariably have a better understanding and depth of application than those that study one or the other.

That’s where the similarities end…here’s what happened: I took one of the first TRT seminars in Chicago in 1995 and loved it. After two weeks of application back in my upper cervical and full spine practice, I was amazed to see how few people needed an upper cervical adjustment. At the time I thought I’d done a great job on their C1 but then I decided to check their upper cervicals the way I had previously….supine.

I was shocked to see that the overwhelming majority of people checked atlas clear prone with TRT but absolutely not clear when checking them in a standard upper cervical supine analysis. And thats when the first major shift or departure took place.

I decided a clear upper cervical spine was more important than being non-linear (although there are many ways to define non-linear) and so I checked and cleared the upper cervicals in my patients and then proceeded to do TRT.

When I did so, I found much less was needed. 91% of the people I adjusted on any given day only needed to be adjusted in two areas or less. In the process of doing less and doing different to my patients from one visit to the next, I also found that many of the TRT indicators fell by the wayside and the Lovett pairs portion of the analysis also bore me very little fruit. What were the primaries without relying on spinal pairing? I found the 3 transition zones in the dorsal spine were more active on my patients. I found very little coccyx, occiput or sphenoid involvement after clearing C1 so this new assessment became a more efficient approach for me.

While many of non-linear approaches find something to adjust on every visit; I often find nothing needs to be done (BJ’s concept of Intelligent Adaptation). To me, the best indicator to alter a care program is wheen nothing needs to be done. Lastly, I found that, in the absence of an upper cervical subluxation, the Derifield leg check showed more than the difference between lumbo-sacral vs sacro-iliac involvement. It showed distortion of the dura in either a vertical (flexion-extension) or horizontal (rotational) plane. Derifield’s findings are a sub-set of a bigger picture.

We have recently discovered a stress induced pattern in people (covered in the advanced and Symposium materials)…..Study the info on the ANTERIOR T12.

To summarize some of the more important differences between MC2 and TRT:

  1. MC2 is linear. We access and adjust (when needed) the UC spine first.
  2. It is, none the less NON-LINEAR, in that we find that every action does NOT produce an equal and opposite reaction.We also address balance differently and we expect patients to be balanced with 3 or fewer adjustments on a visit.
  3. MC2 teaches two primary indicators prone with one anomaly (now Ant T12)
  4. MC2 introduces and uses a procedure known as bio-toning to determine a precise contact point and line of drive for every adjustment on every visit

While there are certainly other differences, my hope is that those interested in finding out more will both visit the chiropracticmastery.com website and join us either at an upcoming live seminar or on Streaming Video (available on the website).

Check the website for future MC2 programs with an ADVANCED module or simply get access to the Symposium video (available as a $200 upgrade to those who already have the MC2 video). Here’s the site link for more info: https://chiropracticmastery.com/videos/

Want a more nerve system-cause oriented approach to practice?
Take action…at the very least, ask questions!

Dr. Steve Hoffman
If you want to speak with someone who sees more in you than you might see in yourself, schedule a complimentary call using my calendal link HERE
Current Seminar Schedule: LEARNING MC2 is a priority if YOU want to know more about how the neural-dural
subluxation causes the vertebral subluxation. YOU love the idea that its not how much you do to a
patient but how much you do for them. YOU can embrace the concept of less is more. YOU want to be more honoring to your and the patient’s body.

Join Ahlia for her meditations and yoga practices on YouTube