We posted the article that has just come out in Massage Magazine by Tom Myers here on this site. Check out the full article. We had not yet seen the article, and the post was from Tom’s notes sent from Australia. We made a mistake in posting figure 3, and included two duplicate images.

I was very impressed with an immediate comment from Jaap van der Wal himself with some comments about the captions on the article.

“Figure 3 has a wrong subtitle and legenda and is not clearly interpreted. In principle a ‘dynament’ is a ‘bone-fascia-muscle-fascia-bone-unit’. A ‘classical’ ligament can be thought in this model as a dynament ‘without muscle tissue’. This situation is interpreted on the RIGHT in figure 3. In figure 3 the ‘typical bone-fascia-muscle-fascia-bone-unit’, which should be in the center, is missing / absent. Moreover four presented configurations (should be five) are presented twice (double).” ~ Jaap van der Wal

Many of us raised in the Structural Integration community have seen and felt the neuromyofascial and skeletal connections, but the upsurge of research in this area is refreshing.