Re: Chek and TVA dicussion

[Guest guest]

As someone who's studied under Chek in the past, I thought I should chime

in here and give my two cents. First off, is a great guy and I have

nothing against him personally. However, after thousands of dollars spent on

his videos and his internships I'm absolutely convinced that (and the

NASM)is wrong about the TVA thing. For someone who is so into

integrated(anti-isolation) training, he sure goes out his way to glorify the

isolated recruitment of the transversus abdominus.

To help get my point across I will use an excerpt from Stuart McGill's excellent

text: LOW BACK DISORDERS Evidence-Based Prevention and Rehabilitation(which by

the way is a much more scientifically plausible text the and Jull's).

The initial question posed and McGill's response are as follows:

" Is any single muscle most important? Several clinical groups have suggested

focusing on only one or two muscles to enhance stability.....in particular,

clinical groups have emphasized the multifidus and and transverse abdominus. The

Queensland group( and colleagues) performed some of the original work

emphasizing these two muscles. This was based on their reseach, which noted

motor disturbances in these muscles following injury...The intentions of the

Queensland group were to address the documented motor deficits and attempt to

reduce the risk of aberrant motor patterns that could lead to pathology-inducing

patterns in their damage model. In other words, their recommendations appear to

be directed toward re-educating the faulty motor patterns. However, many

clinical groups have interpreted this approach to mean that these two muscles

should be the specific targets when teaching stability maintenance over all

sorts of tasks... "

McGill than goes on to conclude:

" In summary, achieving stability is not just a matter of activating a few

targeted muscles, be they multifidus, transverse abdominus, or any other.

Sufficient stability is a moving target that continually changes as a function

of the three-dimensional torques needed to support postures. It involves

achieving the stiffness needed to endure unexpected loads, preparing for moving

quickly, and ensuring sufficient stifness in any degree of freedom of the joint

that may be compromised from injury. "

McGill's statement on the Australian research folly makes the most sense to me.

McGill has even done research which shows that spinal stability is lowered when

patients are taught to " hollow " their abdomen (isolated TVA recruitment) versus

" abdominal bracing, " which recruits all the layers of the abdominal

wall(external oblique, internal oblique, and TVA). Abodminal bracing doesn't

mean pushing your abs out or pulling them in. It is more of a isometric

contraction as if bracing for a punch into the stomach.

Pavel Tsatsouline teaches this as well and using bracing technique my back feels

much healthier than when I was doing that stupid hollowing nonsense. In fact, I

had constant low-back isssues when I was exclusively using 's techniques on

improving my so-called " segmental stabilization. " As a sprinter I was killing

my back my trying to let me my " inner unit " do all the work. What a joke!

Now I'm stronger than ever and don't even think about my abs much when working

out. As long as I hold my breath appropriately when lifting or sprinting my body

takes care of the rest. Now this is not to discount TVA isolation exercises for

those people who have true spinal pathologies; there is a place for the vaccum

exercises, just don't teach people to consciously recruit their TVA during

dynamic movement. It's no more ridculous than telling someone to only use their

supraspinatus muscles during arm abduction!

Keats Snideman

Phoenix, Arizona

[Guest guest]

Well Keats...I couldn't have put it better myself!

That should just about end this enduring discussion!

Thanks for your accurate input.

Giles

Sydney Australia

> As someone who's studied under Chek in the past, I thought I

should chime in here and give my two cents. First off, is a

great guy and I have nothing against him personally. However, after

thousands of dollars spent on his videos and his internships I'm

absolutely convinced that (and the NASM)is wrong about the TVA

thing. For someone who is so into integrated(anti-isolation)

training, he sure goes out his way to glorify the isolated

recruitment of the transversus abdominus.

>

> To help get my point across I will use an excerpt from Stuart

McGill's excellent text: LOW BACK DISORDERS Evidence-Based Prevention

and Rehabilitation(which by the way is a much more scientifically

plausible text the and Jull's). The initial question posed

and McGill's response are as follows:

>

> " Is any single muscle most important? Several clinical groups have

suggested focusing on only one or two muscles to enhance

stability.....in particular, clinical groups have emphasized the

multifidus and and transverse abdominus. The Queensland group

( and colleagues) performed some of the original work

emphasizing these two muscles. This was based on their reseach,

which noted motor disturbances in these muscles following

injury...The intentions of the Queensland group were to address the

documented motor deficits and attempt to reduce the risk of aberrant

motor patterns that could lead to pathology-inducing patterns in

their damage model. In other words, their recommendations appear to

be directed toward re-educating the faulty motor patterns. However,

many clinical groups have interpreted this approach to mean that

these two muscles should be the specific targets when teaching

stability maintenance over all sorts of tasks... "

>

> McGill than goes on to conclude:

>

> " In summary, achieving stability is not just a matter of activating

a few targeted muscles, be they multifidus, transverse abdominus, or

any other. Sufficient stability is a moving target that continually

changes as a function of the three-dimensional torques needed to

support postures. It involves achieving the stiffness needed to

endure unexpected loads, preparing for moving quickly, and ensuring

sufficient stifness in any degree of freedom of the joint that may be

compromised from injury. "

>

> McGill's statement on the Australian research folly makes the most

sense to me. McGill has even done research which shows that spinal

stability is lowered when patients are taught to " hollow " their

abdomen (isolated TVA recruitment) versus " abdominal bracing, " which

recruits all the layers of the abdominal wall(external oblique,

internal oblique, and TVA). Abodminal bracing doesn't mean pushing

your abs out or pulling them in. It is more of a isometric

contraction as if bracing for a punch into the stomach.

>

> Pavel Tsatsouline teaches this as well and using bracing technique

my back feels much healthier than when I was doing that stupid

hollowing nonsense. In fact, I had constant low-back isssues when I

was exclusively using 's techniques on improving my so-

called " segmental stabilization. " As a sprinter I was killing my

back my trying to let me my " inner unit " do all the work. What a

joke!

>

> Now I'm stronger than ever and don't even think about my abs much

when working out. As long as I hold my breath appropriately when

lifting or sprinting my body takes care of the rest. Now this is not

to discount TVA isolation exercises for those people who have true

spinal pathologies; there is a place for the vaccum exercises, just

don't teach people to consciously recruit their TVA during dynamic

movement. It's no more ridculous than telling someone to only use

their supraspinatus muscles during arm abduction!

>

> Keats Snideman

> Phoenix, Arizona