How does NIS differ to other modalities?

by Dr Allan Phillips D.O.

Practitioners, let me address this by asking these questions...

Does your current method of treatment rely on...

What you do manually, or by what you give your patient?


Does the patient’s brain neurologically sense, and therefore readjust to its potential by acknowledging sensory input in the circuits being contacted by yourself or the patient?

Verbal questions that you feel might be appropriate to elicit a response?


Does the brain of the patient correlate through sensory input, whether primary neurological patterns are understood to be functional and optimal?

Your understanding of what is an acceptable result


Will your treatment stand the scrutiny of a medical lab to correlate with your diagnosis in terms of pathological findings?

Intervention by questioning or any other means, in order to address emotional default patterns that undermine and inhibit a patient’s physiological status.


Can you obtain from the brain without questioning, why and where the issue of emotional stress is derived from – correct and prevent further subconscious default patterns.


In the first 14 years of practice I accepted that in order to approach the aetiology causing somatic dysfunction, it was necessary to consider that some discord had arisen in the spine, peripheral joints or soft tissues. Looking back now, I was rather naive to think that such a narrow set of variables could be all encompassing to manifest such a unique anthology of symptoms. Equally naive, was my assumption that if one ate all the right foods and consumed all the right vitamins and minerals that everything would fall into place.

Little did I realise... that something as simple as anxiety could deprive the stomach of HCL to prevent utilisation of protein.

Little did I realise... that when the stomach is dysfunctional for any reason, the neck flexors and extensors are weakened to create neck problems.

Little did I realise... that unless the gait patterns were neurologically organized, reoccurring structural problems will never resolve.

Like so many practitioners I spent 14 years treating patients with manipulation-based procedures, at the expense of the brain ignoring my reasoning and continuing to ‘throw another curve ball.’ It was like paying penance to the ‘software’ (spine and peripheral joints), rather than referring to what controls the software - the brain.

Sadly in 2011 procedures are still being taught in higher learning institutions with the view to graduating a practitioner in the science of understanding and alleviating pain. Unless the basis of diagnosis and treatment is to investigate/address the neurological reasoning's for pain, then our understanding is based on a ‘white cane’ approach.

I found the comment interesting, when a patient said the only thing that has helped them so far is acupuncture. I gave this a lot of thought and went to Hong Kong in 1979 to attend a teaching program in acupuncture. This proved to be very valuable, not only from the aspect of inserting needles, but to appreciate the meridian system.

  • Did a system of meridians really correlate with the glands of the human body?
  • Did the hypothesis of a meridian having control over a set of muscles have any credence?

These were the questions that needed clarification for me.

Very quickly the meridian system surfaced as strong evidence based medicine in terms of correlating with western laboratory results.
This was evaluated with the known glandular dysfunction. I found that by needling the body in response to indicators from the 7 pulses on each wrist, made positive changes to alter gland potential.

I was bothered however, by an intuitive nuance that kept suggesting there must be an automatic approach to this system that would eliminate ‘manual gear’ shifting. Some 5 years later, having researched the intricacies of the post central gyrus together with a muscle test, NIS was born.

Further research has progressively found deficits in the meridian/western medicine correlation, such as the ability to obtain access to the status of the hypothalamus, thalamus, and amygdala. Slowly the focus has changed and the ‘wide angle’ approach of NIS is now raising questions to challenge the medical paradigm that is still aligned to a static neurological model. Such a model is languishing with the science of physics at Stanford and Cambridge, where professors Pribram and Bohm have proven the brain to operate on a holographic principle.

This principle is the basis of the Neurological Integration System (NIS). Raising the threshold of fitness and endorphins takes you to another level of physical reality. Raising ones awareness allows you to savour what the brain says is realistic.

Dr. Allan K Phillips, Founder of Neurolink's Neurological Integration System.