"The principles of Rolfing contradict established medical knowledge, and there is no good evidence Rolfing is effective for the treatment of any health condition. It is recognized as a pseudoscience and has been characterized as quackery." Wikipedia
Anyone who has looked up Rolfing on Wikipedia has probably seen this quote. It has a tone that is biased to the point of sounding nonobjective. This is typically out of character with Wikipedia articles on most topics. On any topic that I do have a fairly solid background in, I would say that the articles are pretty well written and have an objective tone. When anyone has tried to edit the Rolfing page, it has been changed back again nearly immediately, suggesting that there is a team of medical professionals dedicated to denouncing Rolfing entirely. The odd thing is there are many other alternative health practices that have little to no scientific backing that are not so viciously attacked on Wikipedia, so what's the problem?
Ida Rolf, and the Rolf Institute presently, made a study of physiology and anatomy to help explore what can be done with posture and movement, but have never made the claim that Rolfing is a science, so referring to it as a pseudoscience is foolish. The Rolf Institute has kept up with scientific investigation to inform our understanding of how things in the body and nervous system work, but at the end of the day, just like psychology, it is really and art and not a science. Ida Rolf was concerned that Rolfing, previously known as Structural Integration, would be co-opted by the mainstream health care community and changed for the worse, so she warned against the tradition being taken over by scientism. This has been seen in other alternative health care professions as well.
Many, formally fringe healthcare practices had to fight very hard to be taken seriously in America, against a virtual mafia of health care associations that decided on what was and was not acceptable. This includes, chiropractic, osteopathy, and even physical therapy. If these associations had their way, these practices would have been stomped out completely. Generally speaking, Osteopaths are now considered doctors of one sort, D.O., and chiropractors another, D.C., but not without a great deal of struggle and compromise to their teachings. Osteopathy revolves around a lot of esoteric and spiritual ideas, much of which has be weeded out by the scientific community, thus requiring the government to put pressure on them to not teach anything unscientific or funding will be taken away. In a country where many people can't afford health care, and where health care is totally unaffordable without insurance, the last thing we need is to have alternative health care stomped out.
People can wait around for science to "prove"that something appears to work or not, but the fact is that there needs to be studies and those studies need to have funding. There have not been many studies revolving around Rolfing, and because it is not profitable to drug companies there probably will not be. The benefits of Rolfing can usually be felt immediately after a session, and for some time to come after that. It's true that it could be a placebo effect, but I personally do not care if it is or not. If an individual feels better, and experiences less pain, if they feel like Rolfing is contributing to their quality of life, then I will take it. That's all that matters. To say that Dumbo's feather is useless because it did not give him the power to fly is quite frankly DUMB, it helped him bring out a power that was within him. It's a dated reference, go watch Dumbo if you are curious. :)
The Rolfer does not claim to "heal" anyone. They help bring out an innate ability to find better posture, movement, and find a higher sense of order. Through addressing restriction in muscle and connective tissue, and working with embodiment we are speaking to the body's inner wisdom. Just as we do not claim to heal anyone, we also do not diagnose, which is good because we keep our observations and inquiry open. I myself have been misdiagnosed by medical doctors with the utmost confidence and arrogance, only to find that they were totally wrong once I have gone to another medical practitioner in a different field. Medical specialists have a very narrow view in this country, so it's a good idea not to get stuck in an approach that does not seem to be working. The reason that may people continue to pursue Rolfing is that they feel like it works!
Even more arrogant and illogical is the claim by medical professionals that Rolfing does not do anything. If you are doing direct, and often deep, muscle tissue work with a client for an hour, how could that not do anything? The practice of massage and myofascial release (also known as deep tissue massage) do have some scientific backing, because some scientists bothered to do studies on them. The irony is that myofascial release was invented by Osteopaths and Rolfers from Osteopathic and Rolfing techniques. Yes that is right, deep tissue massage is comprised of Rofling techniques. Don't believe me, check out the Wikipedia article on myofascial release.
On the topic of placebo, one thing that is starting gain attention, is that placebos can also have negative effects, and when medical professionals diagnose an individual with a condition, it can make their condition worse and install a sense of hopelessness. Pain is subjective, it's not so much a question of having nerve endings triggered, it's how those signals are interpenetrated in the brain. If someone has occasional neck pain and is then diagnosed with spondylosis, their pain can suddenly become much worse, even unmanageable, until drugs and surgery becomes the only perceived solution. Medical doctors are now being cautioned about how they speak to patients.
Nearly every health care practitioner, fringe or mainstream knows that practically everyone over that age of 30 has a herniated disk, or degeneration in one or two vertebra, or osteoarthritis, even professional athletes. Most people don't even know it until they receive an X ray or an MRI. The point is, most of the time we can adapt to these issues and be quite functional, even Olympic athletes. We have scientific studies to thank for that knowledge!
Many clients come in to see me with a looming sense of doom because they we diagnosed with spinal degeneration, or arthritis, or what ever. I say, welcome to the club buddy. We are not working to cure anything, we are working with the individual's natural sense of order and balance, something that we all have inside. You can sit around waiting for science to prove something, or you can get out there and experiment. If you enjoy the work, as most people do, what do you have to loose? No one needs approval from scientific literature to justify going out and getting a massage, so why would they need that to try Rolfing? Despite it's reputation for being painful, a carefully executed Rolfing session should be mostly pleasant, with some challenging moments of course! But if you have not yet, why not try it out for yourself?