Weight Belts and TvA Again

[Guest guest]

Craig Burris CPT, CES, CHEK I wrote:

<This is the case with the transverse abdominus (sic). If it does not

activate before a movement it can destabilizes the spine. Simple activation

however is not enough. There has to be a proportional amount of strength

relative to the other muscles; i.e., if I can lift 300lbs with proper

stabilization I might be able to lift 350 with improper stabilization this

means I have a stabilization deficit. Strengthening the weak link will

create a stronger chain. This is no different that having weak rotator cuff

muscles that reduce the amount you can bench. I hope this clears up some of

the confusion and animosity between the " Siff's " and the " Chek's. " Good

Day, Good Luck, Train Smart.>

*** First of all, let's clear up some puerile nonsense before we go on to

some more technical matters. I have no sort of animosity against Chek or any

other guru - as I have stated many times before, my objections to some of

their ideas is based entirely upon their lack of corroborating evidence,

their misinterpretation of the many articles that they abstract information

from or their heavy reliance on personal beliefs.

No scientist should ever be willing to stay quiet in the face of the

proliferation of all these fitness myths and misinterpretations that have

been foisted upon the fitness market during recent years. You may have

noticed that more and more of what I have written and less and less of what

they have believed in is being supported by increasing numbers of scientists

and practitioners. The ab drawing in dogma is but one of these ideas that is

being debunked. If you will be at the IDEA Person Training Summit in

Washington in Feb 2003, I will be providing simple, but very compelling

demonstrations to illustrate how incorrect such beliefs are in serious sports

training and manual labour situations.

Now onto some science. Transversus abdominis is by no means unique in

activating before a movement takes place, nor is there any proof that

idiosyncrasies in its timing necessarily, predictably and generally will

" destabilise the spine " in actual dynamic sporting movements (whatever that

is meant to mean) . In the case of rapid, ballistic, perturbed motion or

many other actions which involve feedforward processes, many muscles try to

activate before the movement takes place. Why? Well, it is not so much a

matter of " spinal stability " or " balance " , but a strategy used to change the

mechanical stiffness of the limbs and utilise reflexive muscular actions to

enhance movement efficiency.

My PhD focused heavily on the changes of mechanical stiffness and damping

ratio of the limbs to enhance movement efficiency and diminish the likelihood

of injury and I can assure you that if anticipatory activation did not occur

in the lower extremities when you jump or run, you would have a very

uncomfortable and futile experience in trying to carry out many sporting

activities. For example, in the absence of muscle preactivation, your

ankles, knees and hips would be relaxed and " wobbly " during the footstrike

phase and you would totter around in a most ungainly manner with excessively

flexed joints or fall to the ground with every stride.

Interestingly, one can carry out many daily activities safely and effectively

with faulty TvA timing, but the same is not true of faulty muscular timing or

muscle action in the upper and lower extremities, especially in rapid,

skillful or ballistic activities. Try a simple experiment - sit on your legs

until they experience pronounced " pins and needles " , then stand up and try to

balance on a much revered balance ball or run at moderate pace.

Chek and others have spent a great deal of time concentrating on a single

abdominal muscle and apparently chosen to ignore the vital role played by

many other preactivation processes. This is because they have read the

literature, relied implicitly and unquestioningly on it, and never carried

out any basic research for themselves on resolving these issues of motor

control. Interestingly, it is impossible to find a single study which has

used a spinal nerve block to remove TvA from the action to determine what

effect this may have on basic daily tasks. Has anyone seen any research like

this? If so, please share it with us, because it should shed some useful

light on all these beliefs and hypotheses about what TvA does or does not do

in real daily and sporting movements.

While idiosyncrasies in TvA activation timing may be observed in many people

who exhibit spinal pain or dysfunction, nobody has yet been able to determine

if the TvA problem or the back problem came first? As usual, we have the

familiar " chicken or egg first? " puzzle. The fact is that many key muscles

need to be activated or preactivated in many sporting actions.

You write about " proper stabilisation " ? What is this entity? What is

" improper " stabilisation, then? It is well known (again the work of

Bernstein is helpful in this regard) that the every person uses a different

motor strategy at every different time to solve a given motor problem.

Certainly, there are approximate guidelines, but there is no universal

" proper " model strategy which suits everyone all the time. You stated:

" ...if I can lift 300lbs with proper stabilization I might be able to lift

350 with improper stabilization this means I have a stabilization deficit. "

If you have a " stabilisation deficit " (how do you determine this in a given

sporting or daily action, by the way?), then your body will immediately use

compensatory actions which ensure that the given movement is carried out as

safely and as effectively as possible, unless there is some pre-existing

pathology. I wrote several letters on this topic of opportunistic muscle

synergy - see our archives for more on this.

There are many elite and world champion weightlifters and powerlifters (one

of whom is Louie with a miserable squat of only about 950lbs) who

apparently utilise " improper " methods of spinal stabilisation, yet they break

world records and rarely injure their backs. Note that *none* of them relies

upon that much-vaunted ab drawing-in and TvA activating method that some

gurus and therapists seem hell-bent on teaching despite all the recent

evidence questioning its use anywhere outside the acute phases of

rehabilitation. Maybe if they learned " proper " spinal stabilisation, they

would all be jerking 275kg and squatting over 1200lbs!

Good Day, Good Luck (if you believe the myths), Train Smart (Question all

beliefs and be open to other possibilities!).

Dr Mel C Siff

Denver, USA

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Supertraining/