Re: Re: Fact or Myth? Can abnormal posture decrease athleticism?

[Guest guest]

Ok here I'd like to say my perception of Mel's methods differs from Mr.

Eastham's in that Mel also encouraged those of us in the field to post our

experiences and opinions, it was when someone tried to state something like

" belts are dangerous " as an overall opinion (from the Chek discussions) that he

required the scientific studies to refute his opinion and mine to be incorrect

on such a topic. So kindly stop saying that opinions have no place on this

forum, they have since its inception. Mel was not only a good academic but an

athlete in his own right and thus encouraged us to speak up. One look at the

archives would bear this out.

Unfortunately Mel is no longer with us to comment on his sentiments personally.

To this day, I wish we still had the benefit of his company here. I'm sure I'm

not alone in the number of people who still miss him even after nearly three

years and labor here to keep his memory green and the forum of value as a living

memorial.

It is when someone makes a sweeping statement that such and such is correct and

thus should be accepted as fact that they are required to back it up with a

study. But as noted here again recently, there are a great many flawed studies

and when the studies are in conflict with my own personal experience as an

athlete, I will question the study. Particularly in light of the practice of

supplement makers and their minions doing " studies " which are not properly

controlled or regulated, the study has become a more tarnished instrument even

for discussion! Where the almighty dollar has a place in the assertion that

such and such is truly so, then there is the question of motivation and again,

the study may not be properly and scientifically grounded.

I stand behind my post with regard to Lamar Gant and my opinion that athletes

are not necessarily hampered by their " imperfect posture " and that we should use

caution in presuming to " correct " them into a way we believe to be proper as it

may actually impair or destroy the athlete's success. Sometimes the real world

has notable exceptions to the researcher's world and your posting is one that

again, suggests there's a gap between academics, athletes, and other

professionals at times that is difficult to resolve, particularly in writing and

in the face of actual exceptions that we may have met in reality. This too has

been the topic of another thread currently running, the differences between

academics, the medical profession generally, and athletes in the field..

To apply or reject the research is also the province of the coach or athlete in

the field, and those who counsel them. There are a great many studies we read

and reject without further consideration as athletes and coaches, so again,

there's a problem with overwhelming and convincing evidence, that matches what

we come across in the real life situations outside of laboratory and somewhat

controlled conditions. Were I as a powerlifter to take that old study from

what, 1959, stating that deep squats injure the knees as fact, rather than my

own experience, I would not be squatting below parallel? Were I to take a

doctor's " opinion " that " lifting heavy makes your female parts fall out " as

fact, would I compete powerlifting or even lift weights?

Academic studies serve only a partial purpose here and in the real world.

Thankfully this forum has continued to be a medium in which the exchange of

ideas, opinions, studies and factual information can all be transmitted and

examined in a thoughtful and careful way. Thus ST continues to be more than

just a " high quality academic chat site " . I look forward to the further

postings on this thread.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT, CSCS, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: Fact or Myth? Can abnormal posture decrease

athleticism?

<<<I'm joining this string of posts a few days late. I apologise if I've

missed all the posts with the academic studies attached, but the majority of

posts thus far seem to involve people's opinions. To be honest these

opinions shouldn't really hold much weight in a high quality academic chat

site like supertraining.- I'm sure Dr Siff will be disappointed with the lack

of trustworthy academic studies.

I have been recently researching to topic of posture and have been

researching posture and its relationship to back pain or athletic

performance. I have been unable thus far to find any good research studies

which is a bit disappointing but I do know there are studies especially

relating to how improvements in golf address posture help to improve the

golf swing. I will keep hunting and will post when I find but in the mean

time here are a couple of interesting studies that show how Neutral spine

endurance exercises (or postural training from biomechanical and

physiological perspectives) decrease low back pain. As we know, pain

reduction is quite different from athletic performance but they will

hopefully stimulate some thought and if anybody does have any other studies

relating to posture and athletic performance please get them out. As Dr

Siff was always at pains to point out peoples opinions are not very

objective (im sure we all remember the posts between Siff and Chek where

Siff was able to show quite conclusively, utilising solidly researched

scientific reasoning, that Cheks opinions were largely flawed). .

Control of the Lumbar Neutral Zone Decreases Low Back Pain and Improves

Self-Evaluated Work Ability: A 12-Month Randomized Controlled Study.

Randomized Trial

Spine. 31(18):E611-E620, August 15, 2006.

Suni, Jaana PT, PhD; Rinne, Marjo PT, MSci; Natri, Antero MD, DMSci;

Statistisian, Matti Pasanen MSci; Parkkari, Jari MD, DMSci; Alaranta, Hannu

MD, DMSci

Abstract:

Study Design. A randomized controlled study with 12 months intervention.

Objective. To study the effectiveness of a training intervention with

emphases on the control of lumbar neutral zone (NZ) and behavior modeling as

secondary prevention of low back pain (LBP) and disability.

Summary of Background Data. Improving the control of lumbar NZ and enhancing

muscle activation patterns ensuring spinal stability have been proposed as

means for secondary prevention of LBP and disability. In addition, cognitive

behavior interventions have been shown to lower the risk of recurrence of

LBP and long-term disability.

Methods. Middle-aged working men with recent LBP but without severe

disability were randomly allocated to either a training (TG, n = 52) or

control group (CG, n = 54). The aim was to exercise twice a week for 12

months, once guided and once independently. The outcome measures were the

changes in intensity of LBP, disability, self-evaluated future work ability,

and neuromuscular fitness.

Results. The intensity of LBP decreased significantly more (39%) in the TG

than in CG at 12 months. The proportion of subjects with negative

expectations about their future work ability decreased in both groups at 6

and 12 months; however, the proportion was significantly bigger in TG

compared with CG (P = 0.028). There effects on disability indexes and

fitness were not statistically significant.

Conclusions. Controlling lumbar NZ is a specific form of exercise and daily

self-care with potential for prevention of recurrent nonspecific LBP and

disability among middle aged working men.

Stability increase of the lumbar spine with different muscle groups. A

biomechanical in vitro study.

*

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Search & itool=pu

bmed_AbstractPlus & term=%22Wilke+HJ%22%5BAuthor%5D> Wilke HJ,

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Search & itool=pu

bmed_AbstractPlus & term=%22Wolf+S%22%5BAuthor%5D> Wolf S,

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Search & itool=pu

bmed_AbstractPlus & term=%22Claes+LE%22%5BAuthor%5D> Claes LE,

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Search & itool=pu

bmed_AbstractPlus & term=%22Arand+M%22%5BAuthor%5D> Arand M,

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Search & itool=pu

bmed_AbstractPlus & term=%22Wiesend+A%22%5BAuthor%5D> Wiesend A.

Abteilung fur Unfallchirurgische Forschung und Biomechanik, Universitat Ulm,

Germany.

STUDY DESIGN. This study investigated the influence of five different muscle

groups on the monosegmental motion (L4-L5) during pure flexion/extension,

lateral bending, and axial rotation moments. OBJECTIVES. The results showed

and compared the effect of different muscle groups acting in different

directions on the stability of a single motion segment to find loading

conditions for in vitro experiments that simulate more physiologically

reasonable loads. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. In spine biomechanics

research, most in vitro experiments have been carried out without applying

muscle forces, even though these forces stabilize the spinal column in vivo.

METHODS. Seven human lumbosacral spines were tested in a spine tester that

allows simulation of up to five symmetrical muscle forces. Changing pure

flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation moments up to +/-

3.75 Nm were applied without muscle forces, with different muscle groups and

combinations. The three-dimensional monosegmental motion was determined

using an instrumented spatial linkage system. RESULTS. Simulated muscle

forces were found to strongly influence load-deformation characteristics.

Muscle action generally decreased the range of motion and the neutral zone

of the motion segments. This was most evident for flexion and extension.

After five pairs of symmetrical, constant muscle forces were applied (80 N

per pair), the range of motion decreased about 93% in flexion and 85% in

extension. The total neutral zone for flexion and extension was decreased by

83% muscle action. The multifidus muscle group had the strongest influence.

CONCLUSION. This experiment showed the importance of including at least some

of the most important muscle groups in in vitro experiments on lumbar spine

specimens.>>>>