Draft:Autonomic Response Testing
 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 4 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,173 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
Submission declined on 3 September 2026 by Carolina2k22 (talk).
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. |  |
Submission declined on 12 August 2026 by Dafootballguy (talk). This draft appears to contain text generated by a large language model (such as ChatGPT). You cannot use LLMs to generate article content.
Declined by Dafootballguy 42 days ago.LLM-generated pages with certain obvious signs of being machine generated may be deleted without notice. Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject. See the advice page on large language models for more information. | |
Submission declined on 21 May 2026 by Theroadislong (talk). This draft appears to contain text generated by a large language model (such as ChatGPT). You cannot use LLMs to generate article content.
Declined by Theroadislong 4 months ago.LLM-generated pages with certain obvious signs of being machine generated may be deleted without notice. Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject. See the advice page on large language models for more information. | |
Submission declined on 12 May 2026 by MidnightMayhem (talk). This draft reads like an advertisement. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a platform for promotion or marketing. Drafts that are exclusively promotional may be deleted without notice.
Declined by MidnightMayhem 4 months ago.Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove:
Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject. If you have a conflict of interest (e.g. you are the subject, an employee, or a relative) or are being paid to edit, you must disclose this to comply with Wikipedia's Terms of Use. | |
Submission declined on 24 January 2026 by SomeoneDreaming (talk). This draft reads like an advertisement. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a platform for promotion or marketing. Drafts that are exclusively promotional may be deleted without notice.
Declined by SomeoneDreaming 7 months ago.Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove:
Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject. If you have a conflict of interest (e.g. you are the subject, an employee, or a relative) or are being paid to edit, you must disclose this to comply with Wikipedia's Terms of Use. | |
Comment: Not entirely sure if this still reads as AI, so I am not declining it on that basis, potentially someone with a better eye for it could do so. However, this still reads like an argumentative essay of some sort, therefore fails WP:NOTESSAY. I think that this article likely needs a complete and fundamental rewrite. Carolina2k22 • (talk) 12:31, 3 September 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: Stills reads as AI. In solidarity Dafootballguy Want to talk? 21:35, 12 August 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: GPTZero says 100% AI generated. Theroadislong (talk) 07:48, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
Autonomic Response Testing (A.R.T.) is an alternative diagnostic method used by some health practitioners within complementary and integrative medicine practices.[1] It is a form of muscle testing derived from applied kinesiology and other related techniques.[2][3][4][1][5]
Autonomic Response Testing (A.R.T.) was developed in the late 20th century by Dr Dietrich Klinghardt, MD, PhD in collaboration with chiropractor Louisa Williams M.S., D.C., N.D.[6] and was later further developed by Daniela Deiosso MSc.[7] It incorporates elements of applied Kinesiology and Yoshiaki Omura’s Bi-Digital O-ring test.[8][9]
In conventional medicine autonomic function testing includes procedures such as tilt-table testing and autonomic reflex tests. These are unrelated to Autonomic Response Testing (A.R.T.).[10]
References
[edit]- 1 2 LaRiccia, P.J., Brobyn, T.L., Curzon, J., McClure, M. and Chung, M.K. (2019) ‘Autonomic Response Testing as a Whole Person System of Health Care’, Townsend Letter, November. Available at: https://townsendletter.com/narrative-review-autonomic-response-testing-lariccia-et-al/ (Accessed: 26 May 2026).
- ↑ Hall, S., Lewith, G., Brien, S. and Little, P. (2008) ‘A review of the literature in applied and specialised kinesiology’, Forschende Komplementärmedizin, 15(1), pp. 40–46. doi: 10.1159/000112820.
- ↑ Haas, M., Cooperstein, R. and Peterson, D. (2007) ‘Disentangling manual muscle testing and Applied Kinesiology: critique and reinterpretation of a literature review’, Chiropractic & Osteopathy, 15, article 11. doi: 10.1186/1746-1340-15-11.
- ↑ Cuthbert, S. and Goodheart, G.J. (2007) ‘On the reliability and validity of manual muscle testing: a literature review’, Chiropractic & Osteopathy, 15, article 4. doi: 10.1186/1746-1340-15-4.
- ↑ "What is A.R.T.®? Autonomic Response Testing®: The Method, History, and Key Figures A.R.T. Global". www.artglobal.com. Retrieved 2026-08-24.
- ↑ Klinghardt, D. and Williams, L. (1996) A.R.T.: Autonomic Response Testing. Self-published practitioner training manual.
- ↑ Klinghardt Institute (n.d.) ‘Our Team’. Available at: https://klinghardtinstitute.com/our-team/ (Accessed: 26 May 2026).
- ↑ Omura, Y. (1983) ‘The Bi-Digital O-Ring Test: critical evaluation of its abnormal responses with laboratory tests including “blood pressure & blood flow method,” “blood chemistry,” etc., and “neurological method”’, Acupuncture & Electro-Therapeutics Research, 8(1), pp. 37–43. doi: 10.3727/036012983816715037.
- ↑ Klinghardt Academy of Neurobiology (n.d.) ‘Autonomic Response Testing’. Available at: https://www.klinghardt.org/art.html (Accessed: 26 May 2026).
- ↑ MedlinePlus (n.d.) ‘Autonomic Testing’. Available at: https://medlineplus.gov/lab-tests/autonomic-testing/ (Accessed: 26 May 2026).
- Draft articles about medicine and health
- AfC submissions on other topics
- Pending AfC submissions
- AfC pending submissions by age/9 days ago
- AfC submissions by date/15 September 2026
- AfC submissions by date/25 August 2026
- AfC submissions by date/26 May 2026
- AfC submissions by date/19 May 2026
- AfC submissions by date/26 February 2026
- AfC submissions by date/21 January 2026
- summarize secondary sources: do not offer your own analysis or arguments;
- be written from a neutral point of view: represent the subject without bias, avoiding praise, criticism, or persuasive or promotional language;
- not contain original research: do not include new theories, unpublished ideas, or personal experiences.
Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject.