Biomechanics vs PMOT Examination/training of Posture

[Guest guest]

Biomechanics vs PMOT Examination/training of Posture

We have been talking about Examination (also how to train) of Human

Spinal Posture from a biomechanics vs. PMOT view.

PMOT as in human ability to produce force for human movement is

increased by basic muscle hypertrophy through Progressive Muscle

Overload Training.

Biomechanics viewing proper posture and the mechanical advantage it

provides as being the key to improvement force for human movement.

To narrow down more specifically Spinal posture relative to PMOT or

Biomechanics I will begin with the White and Panjabi in their text

Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine with their statement the spine's

posture demonstrates Biomechanical Adaptation. The spine will adapt

a posture relative to effects applied to it.

We see the human spine born with a C-shape posture. The same

posture that quadrupeds possess. We see that under the influence of

the effect of gravity it attempts to grow into the characteristic

upright S-shape posture.

We see in outer space that without the influencing effect of

gravity, the astronaut's spine adapts the simian C-shape.

We see it is characteristic as people age they loose the S-shape.

They become humped over.

The Greeks 4000 riddle of the Spinx asked this question. What walks

on four legs in the morning, two legs in the afternoon and 3 legs in

the evening and has only one voice? Who could answer it would

receive life, who could not would have life taken from them.

The answer? Man. As infant walking on all fours, in middle age

upright on two legs and as older person walking bent over with the

cane acting as the 3rd leg.

This is not some idle riddle. When studying human locomotion

relative to spinal adaptation it is characteristic to first see the

infant with C-spine, then trying to adapt the secondary cervical and

lumbar lordotic curves and then in later life seeing the human slump

back into the C-shape and will mimic the same locomotion

characteristics as the infant. .

We see that the Evolution science attributes our unique ability of

being an upright bipedal creature is due to our adapting the S-shape

from our predecessor the Ape and their C-shape spine.

For instance locomotion studies will define one as being either a

locomotion (human) machine or a postural maintenance (ape) machine

relative to quality of ones postural adaptation and the effect on

the hamstring muscle.

Proper adaptation of the S-shape posture appears to be the secret

behind the ability of humans to leverage upright posture and move

against the adverse effect of earth's gravity.

It appears that it also gives humans the ability to be upright and

work under control against forces that are in front of the body.

Such as push a grocery cart hit as in volleyball or push the other

fellow backwards in football.

So it appears Proper adaptation of the S-shape posture appears to be

the key to the human bodies musculoskeletal lever systems

effectiveness to jump, run and move forward against the adverse pull

of gravity or anterior force.

PMOT training does not address adaptation of the S-shape posture as

the key to physical ability. It does not try to define what is the

model of proper posture or how the posture of the optimal S-shape

model, as lever machine, produces superior upright bipedal abilities

or produces ability to push against an object to the anterior as in

football or pushing a grocery cart.

It only addresses muscle hypertrophy on any ones posture

(hunchbacked individual for instance) as to running faster, hitting

harder. It cannot tell you why hunchback bent over person cannot

hit in football or run.

Biomechanics addresses what is the optimal model of the S-shaped

spinal posture. How as lever machine it produces the superior

locomotion as in running. How it produces the optimal leverage for

pushing the guy in front of you backwards in football. How it gives

the football player the best vertical leaping ability or how it

leads to them when standing to stand at the minimal energy

expenditure so they are naturally better conditioned.

Biomechanical strengthening of the spine is not as PMOT issue, but a

biomechanical adaptation issue. Biomechanical or orthopedic

strength training that results in the enhancement, restoration and

preservation of proper S-shaped posture.

So you train the spine properly to adapt the secondary lumbar curves

for football for running so your athlete possesses under the skin

the optimal posture that produces the best mechanical advantage.

It appears to me the world of PMOT training does address the concept

of posture affecting performance. It cannot tell you how C-shape

spine produces poor locomotion or hitting ability in football

because it does not address mechanical advantage. It cannot tell you

how to train for adaptation of the S-shaped posture because training

for it is only muscle hypertrophy. It does not recognize there

exists an effect on earth that relative to gaining a S-shaped

posture that your body possesses a better mechanical advantage to

function against that effect.

It boils down to how does the PMOT mind vs. the Biomechanical mind

evaluate spinal posture. I have told you how the biomechanics

thinking evaluates spinal posture. Now I would like to hear not

only in addition to how I am wrong but a statement how the PMOT

thinkers evaluate spinal posture or do they at all? And if they do

or do not why?

Scherger D.C.

Ridgefield WA