State, Not Scar · claim VASO-C076 · Observation rung · The phenomenon at the fingertip

Long-standing (ancient) knots take months of repeated work to release. (True if old knots, on consistent report, typically require months of repeated work before releasing.)

Not featured in the current editionAI-extractedorigin: report 2026-09-09-inbox-vasocomputation-031907; split from VASO-C038 (2026-09-09-verify-vasocomputation-052024)

source anchor

[p. 3]

“in a session, the ancient ones take months”

Evidence

Context· weakVASO-E074

Landfald 2025: active/latent differences in a second muscle as context for the graded-stiffness and fresh/old claims — part 2

what the source states: Latent points responded more readily to compression and "were more often resolved after the first treatment" (86% of latent vs 60% of active MTrPs no longer detectable sonographically, p = 0.021).
what we infer: For the trapezius vibration-elastography gradient this is a parallel from another muscle and method, not a replication. For the fresh/old claims it is the nearest instrumented cousin — the more symptomatic point is harder to switch off — but active/latent is a clinical classification, not the age of the knot, so the record carries no weight for or against those claims.
limitations: Different muscle, method and site classes from the trapezius sonoelastography study.
Active/latent is not the fresh/old axis; the authors' 'earlier or less fibrotic' reading is their conjecture.
Second reader (claude-sonnet-5, 2026-09-20, run 2026-09-20-answer-vasocomputation-172213, verify-v6) found the passage bears on VASO-C075, VASO-C076 and not on VASO-C033; the link dropped at intake: The quote and 86%/60% figures are accurately drawn from the Discussion/Table 2 and the locator is correct, but this passage concerns active-vs-latent resolution speed in the gastrocnemius, not trapezius sonoelastographic lesion area, so it has no bearing on VASO-C033 despite being labeled 'context' for it. For the fresh/old claims (C075/C076) it offers only a weak, self-acknowledged analogy (active/latent is not the fresh/old axis, and the 'earlier/less fibrotic' reading is the authors' own speculation), which is fairly characterized as context. The record is otherwise atomic and does not need an independence note since it directly cites the primary study rather than repeating another cited source.

Ingrid C. Landfald (2025)AI-verified citation

Context· weakVASO-E075

Landfald 2025: active/latent differences in a second muscle as context for the graded-stiffness and fresh/old claims — part 3

what the source states: Active points required more sessions to deactivate than latent points, with "sessions required for elimination" averaging 1.4 ± 0.5 for active versus 1.1 ± 0.3 for latent MTrPs (p = 0.038).
what we infer: For the trapezius vibration-elastography gradient this is a parallel from another muscle and method, not a replication. For the fresh/old claims it is the nearest instrumented cousin — the more symptomatic point is harder to switch off — but active/latent is a clinical classification, not the age of the knot, so the record carries no weight for or against those claims.
limitations: Different muscle, method and site classes from the trapezius sonoelastography study.
Active/latent is not the fresh/old axis; the authors' 'earlier or less fibrotic' reading is their conjecture.
Second reader (claude-sonnet-5, 2026-09-20, run 2026-09-20-verify-vasocomputation-113521, verify-v6) found the passage bears on VASO-C075, VASO-C076 and not on VASO-C033; the link dropped at intake: The quote and locator are accurate, and the record's own caveat about active/latent not being the fresh/old axis is fair. But this active/latent sessions-to-elimination datum from gastrocnemius compression therapy has no bearing on C033, which concerns sonoelastographic lesion area in the upper trapezius from a different study entirely; that claim link should be dropped. For C075/C076 the weak, self-flagged, speculative analogy to lesion age supports treating it only as context, which the record already does.

Ingrid C. Landfald (2025)AI-verified citation

Context· weakVASO-E077

Landfald 2025: active/latent differences in a second muscle as context for the graded-stiffness and fresh/old claims — part 5

what the source states: The faster short-term response of latent points to pressure-release therapy is a suggested pattern for which "confirmation in controlled studies is needed".
what we infer: For the trapezius vibration-elastography gradient this is a parallel from another muscle and method, not a replication. For the fresh/old claims it is the nearest instrumented cousin — the more symptomatic point is harder to switch off — but active/latent is a clinical classification, not the age of the knot, so the record carries no weight for or against those claims.
limitations: Different muscle, method and site classes from the trapezius sonoelastography study.
Active/latent is not the fresh/old axis; the authors' 'earlier or less fibrotic' reading is their conjecture.
Second reader (claude-sonnet-5, 2026-09-20, run 2026-09-20-answer-vasocomputation-172213, verify-v6) found the passage bears on VASO-C075, VASO-C076 and not on VASO-C033; the link dropped at intake: The quote and locator are accurate and the statement fairly reflects the source's own hedged language about latent points' faster response needing controlled confirmation. But this observation concerns active/latent trigger-point response speed in the gastrocnemius, not the trapezius stiffness-area comparison that VASO-C033 addresses, so it does not bear on C033 at all. For C075/C076 it is only weak context since active/latent is explicitly not the same axis as fresh/old and the 'earlier or less fibrotic' reading is the authors' own speculation, not a finding about knot age.

Ingrid C. Landfald (2025)AI-verified citation

an honest empty state

This claim is in the ledger but not in the current edition's featured set. Nothing here has been assessed — that absence is information, not an oversight.

Still missing: plain-language gloss, credibility assessment, diagnosticity assessment, strongest objection, what would change our mind. A claim gains them when an edition features it and the edition's adopted assessment supplies the full treatment — a decision the panel reviews, not a field anyone flips.