From Vasomotion to Interoception: The PULSE-V Hypothesis of Predictive Tissue Regulation in Manual Medicine

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Manual medicine has long outgrown explanations that rest solely on structural-biomechanical correction. While the techniques reliably alleviate musculoskeletal pain and functional complaints, the evidence suggests that durable benefit depends far less on lasting mechanical realignment than on a distributed set of neurophysiological, autonomic, interoceptive, and contextual processes. A persistent translational gap nevertheless remains between these abstract predictive models of bodily regulation and the tangible, regional tissue dynamics that clinicians encounter in practice.We propose PULSE-V (Predictive Updating of Local Somatic Errors via Vasomotion) as a hypothesis-generating framework that seeks to narrow that gap. The central suggestion is that low-frequency vasomotor oscillations (~0.1 Hz) within angiosomes, when exhibiting optimal fractal complexity and multiscale organisation, may serve as a candidate biophysical substrate capable of structuring ascending interoceptive signals. When this complexity is disrupted — shifting microvascular dynamics towards either rigid periodicity or stochastic noise — the resulting afferent stream may become ambiguous and contribute to interoceptive prediction error. Chronic somatic dysfunction can then be understood as a maladaptive attractor state — a self-stabilising loop in which ambiguous peripheral input, impaired sensory attenuation, and entrenched top-down priors reinforce one another.PULSE-V is offered as a deliberately falsifiable programme rather than a settled theory. It generates testable predictions concerning regional vasomotor patterns, multimodal biomarker signatures, and the differential contributions of vasomotor, affective-touch, and relational elements in treatment. If supported, the model offers a mechanistically grounded account of the frequently observed discrepancy between the modest mechanical effects of manual intervention and the substantial clinical outcomes that follow.

Article activity feed