On 10/5/00 , [log in to unmask] writes:
<< Interestingly, these studies don't look at the muscle function under the
loads that weightlifters use but rather under low load perturbation (eg
the movement of a single limb). The importance of this is that so many
of the acute LBP patients we see suffer their injury under these light
loads. They may have been playing rugby the week before with no problems
then they go to brush their teeth one morning and their backs 'go'. So
it is relevant that the research looks at this low-load perturbation problem.
>>
***Thank you for that summary of research into TA activation etc - I am fully
aware of that body of information, but still remain unconvinced that these
'clinical' methods offer any significant advantage over standard
weightlifting methods for learning to use the body more competently.
Some years ago I presented several papers at various ergonomics,
physiotherapy and chiropractic conferences on the biomechanics of lifting to
minimise the risk of spinal injury and based my input on the lessons to be
learned from that population which almost daily lifts the heaviest loads,
namely the weightlifters and powerlifters. I have yet to come across any
research evidence which shows that this sort of approach is inferior to any
clinical approach.
Anyway, your above remark is central to the whole issue, because of its
reference to minimal perturbation stimuli. For far too long, many therapists
and kinesiologists have tried to explain human performance and injury on the
basis of fairly linear relationships between cause and effect. The whole
"overtraining" and "overreaching" syndrome system is based largely on the
premise that overtraining and overtraining injuries are necessarily the
rather linear result of excessive loading in terms of intensity or/and volume.
Understanding of the body and its subsystems usually is based upon idealised
notions of 'balance' and 'homeostasis', but increasing amounts of evidence
suggest that this model of physiological and psychological functioning is
often inadequate and inappropriate. The body may well act like a
nonequilibrium system in which very small perturbations can cause a massive
change of state, as is described by the work of Nobel Prize-winning scientist
Ilya Prigogine. A great deal of research has now shown that bodily systems
may experience catastrophic change when they apparently are closest to
perfect harmony and 'balance'. For example, a tendency towards enhanced
rhythmicity in certain aspects off the cardiac rhythm correlate very
significantly with sudden heart attacks.
This type of model would then apply very adequately to the situations that
you describe in your letter, ones in which non-sporting individuals who
suddenly experience back pain and disability. However, if we take the
nonequilibrium (dissipative) system model further, it may well caution us
about using isolated methods which attempt to restore too great a level of
'balance' in a single manner, because it is precisely those conditions which
may set the stage for subsequent episodes of sudden breakdown. In other
words, it might be more desirable to use a variety of methods to resolve the
problem.
Converesely, the "dissipative structure" model also suggests that even very
small adjustments can cause marked and rapid improvements in performance, so
that it may not even be necessary to apply intense or prolonged methods of
therapy in order to elicit beneficial change.
For further reading, Prigogine's book, "Order out of Chaos" provides some
fascinating information on this type of model.
Dr Mel C Siff
Denver, USA
http://www.egroups.com/group/supertraining
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|