Abdominal Conditioning: Chek & Siff

[Guest guest]

Some people have been commenting that Chek and I some day need to have a

one-on-one debate because we have never done so. On the contrary, we have

had several open debates on various aspects of training and rehabilitation.

Here is one of them from Oct 1998 which appeared on another listserv before

our Supertraining list came into being. On this occasion we took part in

what generally was a rather productive discussion, even if it became very

long. Here is a copy of some of the discussion.

----------------------------------------

Chek wrote:

* Wow Mel! I will have to schedule time off to answer your post. I will do

my best to be concise and make my counter-points.

Mel:

*** Me, too, but because this issue of weird and wonderful abs is such a

focal point of fitness training today, it deserves a lot more clarification.

BACKGROUND

First of all, I must clarify one issue. You constantly comment on my input as

if I am a theoretical scientist with no practical or clinical experience,

which tends to give you and others a very limited view of the scope of my

analysis.

Actually, virtually none of my work has ever been done for solely theoretical

reasons. Most of the subjects involved in my research or training

programmes have been competitive athletes, fitness lovers or ordinary injured

folk who have been referred to me by their doctors or physical therapists.

For many years, besides my main job as professor in mechanical engineering

dept, I have been involved in lecturing in biomechanics and strength

rehabilitation or training to departments of physical therapy and physical

education.

Numerous projects in the departments of physiology, physical therapy,

anatomy, orthopaedics, occupational therapy and others in the Faculty of

medicine at my university and with many private physical therapists,

orthopaedic surgeons and sports doctors led me to become practically involved

in the rehabilitation of hundreds of subjects with many musculoskeletal

disorders, including the back.

This led to my being invited to lecture at several chiropractic, physical

therapy and sports medicine conferences on lifting mechanics and back

rehabilitation, where the emphasis was on practical methods, rather than

theoretical modelling.

As national coach in S African weightlifting, I worked with hundreds of

competitive lifters right up to national level and I competed nationally in

weightlifting, powerlifting and karate and carried out many biomechanical

tests on these and many other athletes. I was deeply involved in the

preparation and future training of some of the world's most successful teams

in cricket and rugby.

So, now may I be permitted to talk to you as a fellow practitioner and seeker

who is not just sitting ensconced in some ivory tower proclaiming from a

place which many coaches and clinicians think is inhabited by alien creatures

in white coats waiting to dissect earthly cockroaches?

Right, now on to the major discussion:

----------------------------------------------------------------

Mel:

ANALYTICAL DIFFICULTIES

( was offering his views on recruitment and control of deeper muscles of

the trunk)

<This is an intriguing comment. How does one definitely confirm that this

is the order of events without the use of microelectrodes or needle

electrodes inserted into the different components of the abdominal muscles?...

.......Visual or palpatory methods are even more equivocal than EMGs,

especially since transversus may be recruited in several different ways,

including pulling in or rapid distention of the abdominal area - research

has even indicated that transversus is one of the first muscles to become

activated during forward walking.>

:

Yes, in a laboratory setting these things are all of real importance. If I

relied on such intricate mechanisms I would have a $500,000+ tool box and

would need my patients to stay for days at a time to get to the bottom of

thins. The fact is, most of my patients come to me after failing in the

medical system where they have had extensive EMG studies, conduction velocity

studies, MRI arthogram, and most every expensive and invasive test you can

imagine and they are not better off! I have been in business for many years

successfully rehabilitating the people that the fancy equipment couldn't

help, so believe me, if you are a skilled clinician you only need this stuff

to develop conceptual models and confirm or not confirm your clinical

suspicions.

Mel:

Costly apparatus is unnecessary - all of my research apparatus was built for

me personally or as part of student projects at a fraction of the commercial

cost. Certainly, we found palpatory, 'eye-balling' and simple movement

tests, like the standard ones used by many phyios most helpful, but when we

allied that with some quickly administered laboratory tests, the results were

even better.

Unfortunately, reliance on being a skilled clinician is another isolationist

approach which sometimes can have serious consequences. I recall some other

expert who was vainly trying to rehabilitate someone with chronic back pain.

Several of the tests you mentioned showed inadequate transversus and internal

oblique strength, as well as a serious deficit in multifidus strength. For

weeks, a series of pelvic tilting, breathing, postural realignment and other

remedies, plus pain-killers were tried, but to no avail. Eventually, he was

sent for a CAT scan and other conventional laboratory medical tests - lo and

behold, this poor man had cancer of the spine!

On other occasions, force plate tests and EMG studies have shown up

pathologies which skilled clinicians have failed to detect. On the other

hand, the most intricate laboratory tests have not been able to detect latent

heart disease or distinguish between different neuromuscular disorders.

In other words, it is a good idea to integrate the best of which both

scientists and clinicians have to offer and not to throw out anyone

discipline because of personal preferences.

:

How do I do it??

The transverse abdominus ( TVA) has fibers that are in the transverse plane.

By the very nature of the architecture of the muscle, if it fires it always

draws the umbilicus toward the spine, exaggerates the oblique line,

is accompanied by recruitment of the multifidus, pelvic floor and often the

diaphragm. . . .

Mel:

The pulling in of the umbilicus and exaggeration of the oblique line is not

observed to occur during the squat, clean, bench press, snatch or deadlift,

since a reflex distension of the abdominal region occurs in all maximal

lifting and pushing tasks.

:

<When an individual loads a bar and places it upon his/her back, there is an

immediate stabilization response secondary to the mechanoreceptor input from

all involved joints, particularly the weight bearing joints. >

Mel:

??? I don't follow what you mean here. This is a very general remark which

needs to be elaborated upon to be meaningful in the context of trunk

stabilisation. Recent research distinguishes between the different

stabilisation processes involved if loading of the spine is compressive or

shearing.

Others attribute this initial acute stabilisation reflex to depend largely on

increases in intra-thoracic or intra-abdominal pressure, rather than simple

mechanoreception (by the way, are you regarding mechanoreception as the same

as proprioception or as a more limited process involving only mechanical

transduction?).

:

<This input is combined with the conscious command to run the generalized

motor program " squat " for example, which also activates all stabilizer

functions tied to the engram. >

Mel:

Are you using the term 'engram' in the sense used in Scientology to refer to

" a mental image picture which is a recording of an experience containing

pain, unconsciousness and a real or fancied threat to survival. It is a

recording in the reactive mind of something which actually happened to an

individual in the past and which contained pain and unconsciousness, both of

which are recorded in the mental image picture called an engram. It must, by

definition, have impact or injury as part of its content. These engrams are

a complete recording, down to the last accurate detail, of every perception

present in a moment of partial or full unconsciousness " .

Or are you using it in its original archaic sense as an " engraved memory "

(hence 'engram')? Either way, what is meant by stabiliser functions being

tied to an engram?

:

<My observation begins immediately upon the decision is made to " squat " as

that is when you see the body in the set-up or preparation phase. Once

loaded, I will observe and palpate for recruitment of the TVA, multifidus,

tension in the thoracolumbar fascia watch respiratory patterns. Although good

stabilization is usually obvious immediately, I will observe the entire

process of execution and return to the rack. >

Mel:

Of course, we know that the very act of palpation being applied during active

movement can modify the kinaesthetic input to the nervous system and skew the

results. This is emphasized in many books such as Knott & Voss

" Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation " and is actually used by Russian

coaches as a form of 'kinaesthetic manipulation' to deliberately influence

patterns of muscle activation.

:

As one passes through the sticking point (in particular) I will observe the

action of the abdominal wall and associated segments.

Mel:

Is this just by visual observation? Which associated segments? As research

given in my original post mentioned, the variations in recruitment, including

left to right symmetry, are often idiosyncractic and non-repeatable, even

with careful instrumented analysis, so how can eye-balling achieve more?

:

If the TVA is contributing appropriately, the umbilicus will have moved

progressively toward the spine until the stabilization threshold is crossed

(a term I developed to indicate the point at which gross stabilization is

observed or palpated).

Mel:

What is a stabilisation threshold? This idea of thresholds may apply to

all-or-none processes such as action-potential firing of nerve cells, but

increasing amounts of research show that traditional concepts of homeostasis

and balance in the body are no longer acceptable. Even the concept of

'anaerobic' or lactate thresholds are no lonegr being applied as casually as

they used to.

In the case of joint and overall trunk stabilisation, there is no single

finely tuned threshold of stabilisation, but a region or continuum in which

the joint or body 'hunts around' for a specific moment in a dynamically

changing metastable situation to ensure that the movement may continue or

stop in a given way. There is no single mathematical solution to the problems

of balance and stabilisation of the body - there are always several variable

strategies which may be adopted to cope with a given situation.

Research is showing that when the degree of variability decreases and the

range of stability becomes more finely defined, then the likelihood of injury

and disease (including heart attacks and epileptic seizures) tends to

increase. In know that this sounds paradoxical, but this research is being

found to agree with many clinical observations.

:

If the TVA is dormant the abdominal wall gets thicker anterior to posterior

right away, usually before the descent even begins.

Mel:

How can one be categoric about transversus being dormant while increases in

intra-abdominal pressure caused by breath holding are occurring? Are your

subjects performing submaximal, breathing squats?

How can one ever measure the anterior to posterior thickness of the abdominal

wall without invasive surgical procedures or costly MRI or PET scans? - oh,

sometimes, very skilled use of certain ultrasound scanners can give a good

approximation! One certainly cannot differentially palpate this from the

contribution made by other tissues and muscles.

If you are referring to thickening due to muscle contraction, the same

comment applies, but once the recti abdominis are taut, you cannot palpate or

differentiate transversus during a heavy squat (as mentioned earlier, there

is a reflex distension of this region which counters any inward pull via

connective tissues).

:

Many individuals with inverted recruitment patterns have some common findings.

Mel:

In my earlier post I asked exactly what an inverted recruitment pattern is -

I am still none the wiser. Do you mean 'inverse' recruitment or are you

referring to an inverse stretch reflex or what? Where was this type of

syndrome first described clinically?

:

Many individuals with inverted recruitment patterns have some common findings:

- often use weight belts

- often suffer from low back pain . . . . .

- there is frequently restriction of the middle thoracic spine and inability

to reverse the thoracic curvature

....to name a few

Mel:

No doubt you have read my comments on the different ways of wearing a belt

and how we must distinguish between belts as mechanical supports and belts as

lightly-worn kinaesthetic devices and belts being used for maximal attempts

and belts being worn all the time. No published clinical studies or research

have shown that all forms of belt usage correlate significantly with the

incidence of back pain or dysfunction. There are far more folk with back

problems who do not wear belts or lift heavy weights.

Of more concern is your remark that one can 'reverse the thoracic curvature'.

The reversal of this thoracic convexity is a rare pathological condition and

never occurs in normal daily life or under any sporting conditions. Reversal

of this curvature means changing the thoracic convexity to concavity, so that

the upper back curves inwards just like the lower back! Is this really what

you mean? It is impossible voluntarily to reverse the thoracic convexity -

don't even mention this concept anywhere in the medical field, because it is

wrong.

Mel:

<Many researchers (e.g. see Basmajian " Muscles Alive " ) have shown that

vigorous exhalation . . . or explosive tensing of the abdominal muscle

complex (as often done during Olympic or power lifts) automatically activates

the obliques far more than rectus abdominis, so that heavy lifting, if anyt

hing, tends to delay or neglect activation of the superficial ab muscles.

:

<The external obliques are superficial ab muscles. >

Mel:

The internal obliques are not superficial and invasive EMGs show that both of

the obliques reflexively become far more actively involved than rectus

abdominis in heavy lifting and pushing tasks.

Mel:

<Other material cited by Basmajian shows that apparent contraction of the

recti abdominis is due more to passive bulging than electrical activation

during this sort of stabilising task. In addition, several of his colleagues

have confirmed that the recti are far less electrically active than the

obliques during trunk stabilization in response to lifting or pushing tasks.

:

<This is very task specific in my opinion. The fascia of the oblique muscles

invests the rectus muscles, therefore any contraction of the oblique muscles

would cause a palpatory tightening of what would appear to be the rectus

muscles. There is a distance difference to the trained hand.>

Mel:

It is not possible to distinguish by palpation between passive increase in

muscle tension or active contraction of muscle - one can crudely distinguish

differences in tension and gross location of changes in tension.

Anyway, what you have just written is almost a rephrasing of what I wrote,

namely that the obliques are responsible for the primary contraction and this

is associated with secondary passive involvement of rectus (along with

activation caused by increases in intra-abdominal pressure produced by breath

holding). So we agree that the abs are not the primary stabilisers in

lifting tasks . . ?

:

<Olympic lifts are all pulling lifts, which require only enough recruitment

of the rectus abdominus to stabilize the thorax, providing an effective force

generating platform for the extensors of the body. If the abdominals

did not activate sufficiently to resist the force of the extensors the body

would just collapse on the floor. >

Mel:

Olympic lifts have been shown also to be strongly similar to jumps and

activation of the recti abdominis (via the passive bulging and activation

caused by intra-abdominal pressure) as shown by EMG and intra-abdominal

pressure recordings is greater than that recorded with any form of unloaded

supine situps, crunches or leg raises.

You referred to abs as stabilising the thorax in lifting - now the thorax

anatomically is just the chest, so once again we are referring to the passive

role of the abs, since active use of the abs as trunk flexors would cause

rounding of the lumbar spine and this is dangerous during any Olympic lifting

or powerlifting.

Mel:

< Moreover, EMG studies show that the erector spinae, hamstrings and gluteal

muscles play a far more significant active role than any of the abdominal

muscles (their role is more passive) during lifting (Vorobyev 'Textbook on

Weightlifting' has many EMGs on weightlifters showing this), so it always

intrigues me why physical therapists in particular seem to be so fanatical

about the apparently overriding importance of the abdominal muscles during

lifting.>

:

Most of what I assume you are referring to is looking at pulling movements.

If not, please tell me which studies to read and then I can make an

intelligent response.

Mel:

See above - I gave the one study written by Vorobyev - you will find others

in " Spine " journal, the Journal of Biomechanics, Ergonomics and several other

places. I am busy collecting summaries of all these back articles at present

and have so far found more than 2000 references (in the journals above and

many others) - how on earth I am going to reduce them to manageable size I do

not know. Anyway, as I come across relevant ones (like the one on spinal

disc shrinkage), I will continue to send them to this group.

Regarding your lengthy comments on the role played by passive bulging of the

abs in stabilising the trunk, I can clarify the picture thus:

The abdominal muscles in a role as antagonists to hyperextension of the

spine, can be activated in two ways:

Action 1 : bringing its distal and proximal attachments closer together to

cause active flexion of the spine (as during situps or overhead throws)

Action 2 : creating a very tense band of muscle-connective tissue across the

front of the body which assists the actively involved deeper abdominal

musculature to allow the trunk to become a much stronger pneumatically

supported structure (as in pulls, squats and bench press) or to prevent the

trunk from moving into dangerous hyperextension (as in standing presses).

When I spoke about its role as a involuntary passive stabiliser, I was

referring to the latter role. Obviously, if the abs were not electrically

activated via all the nerves serving them, then they could not act as a

supportive sheet of anything - I should have mentioned that, instead of just

assuming that would be understood. The point I wished to stress was that

Action 1 (trunk flexion) is totally inappropriate for any form of

weightlifting or powerlifting, while Action 2 of the abs is what dominates

during lifting and pushing.

Mel wrote:

EXTRA AB EXERCISE NECESSARY?

<As Dr Spassov, Bulgarian weightlifting coach, and other lifting coaches have

stressed, if one does lifting training which includes the weightlifting and

powerlifting movements, then there is no need for additional abdominal

exercise, because heavy lifting training and its accompanying stabilization

processes, naturally condition the abdominal muscles. For bodybuilders, yes,

but for athletes who do strength training, no supplementary abdominal

training is required.

:

I will give them a free copy of my new Core Conditioning correspondence

course if you will give me their contact details. I bet you that if they can

step outside their dogma they will change their mind.

Mel:

Don't assume that they are dogmatic - the Russian and Eastern European

scientists base their methods on considerable research and translation of

much Western science and they would most certainly have used additional

abdominal training methods if they had found that it would have helped them

dominate world sport.

I can assure you that Spassov, Medvedev, Verkhoshansky, Zatsiorski, Ozolin,

and others of their ilk have seen and done considerable work on trunk

strengthening and stabilisation, so they are hardly ignorant of what is out

there. They have no minds to change - their methods enabled their athletes to

dominate Olympic sports for many decades and that speaks volumes for their

methods.

:

When I met Poliquin he was making world record holders and Gold medalists

every year and I completely changed his mind and he is not an easy sell, I

assure you. IF you don't believe me Mel, call him. Ask Al Vermeil of the

Bulls if he thinks the abdominals are just a piece of connective tissue, and

if my approach works?

Mel:

While these two coaches have worked with many top performing athletes, and

though I have great respect for Al from my own work with the Bulls, neither

of these men is a scientist or clinician who is capable of commenting

definitively on the biomechanics of trunk action. In that respect, I would

be more inclined to be convinced by a great scientist and practitioner such

as Dr Zatsiorsky (whose knowledge Al also finds astounding). Unfortunately, I

have seen too many functional anatomical errors in ' work for me to be

guided by it yet.

Mel wrote:

<Do you have any references which shed more light on the abdominal muscle

complex (AMC) recruitment issue during different types of movement, other

than the ones which I have mentioned above? It would be most unusual for any

lifters to actively recruit and not passively distend the abs during lifting,

so I am fascinated about the kinesiology displayed by this particular group

of athletes. As far as I know, few, if any definitive EMG studies have been

carried out on the muscle recruitment patterns of the AMC of weightlifters or

powerlifters.

Any references yet? Unfortunately, for every one of your anecdotal successes

with isolated ab training, others could produce just as many anecdotal tales

of equal or greater success without specialised ab training (e.g. by Russian

coaches who have produced thousands of Olympians) - I would rather like to

see science direct either of us in a way which either reinforces or modifies

our anecdotal experiences.

Mel wrote:

<Spinal injury, contrary to what is commonly believed is quite rare among

Olympic lifters (about 8% of all injuries, according to a study published in

the IWF Weightlifting magazine). Moreover, elite powerlifters whom I know are

concerned that too many folk take part in powerlifting contests without

adequate technical training, because they think that powerlifting does not

require the same skill as Weightlifting. Were your 'patients' elite lifters?

:

Your 8% is based on lifters of what caliber? I have had patients of all

levels of proficiency although I have never treated a world class Olympic

lifter, just competitors. I have certainly studied them though.

Mel:

That IWF publication referred to 'ranked' lifters; in other words, ones who

competed at national and international level in Russia. They also have

studies performed on athletes at all levels of proficiency, right from

childhood up to Master and International Master class (some of the translated

material is in Dr Yessis' " Soviet Sports Review " ).

We will have to stop there, - I don't know how many readers will manage

to read through both of our posts, but let's hope that it has been a useful

exercise for those who have had the trunk endurance to do so!

--------------------------

Dr Mel C Siff

Denver, USA

Supertraining/