Here is the original letter:

<< I’ve just been awarded a research bursary and am planning to investigate
the possible link between hamstring strength and core trunk stability. I’m
planning to measure concentric/eccentric hams strength intially, send
subjects off to do hams strength work, transversus abdominus strength work
and placebo exercises. I’ve been able to get lots of literature re hams
strength, transversus abdominus (mainly Hodges, Jull and Richardson) and hams
injury prevention. What I haven’t been able to get is much information on
hamstring/muscular trunk control interaction. Anybody out there able to point
me in the right direction? >>

Here is my response:

***Just a small point about which I have written before – how does one assess
“core stability” statically or dynamically under conditions in which
peripheral stabilisation does not play a significant role in the overall
stabilisation process or confound the results? For instance, if one wishes
to assess “core stability” in a standing position, then how do we rule out
the major role played by the lower extremity musculature in the process?

Moreover, stability is not necessarily a result of adequate strength, but the
amount of “strength”, force or torque exerted at crucial stages of joint
action throughout any given movement. If someone produces inappropriate
patterns or timings of motion, then, no matter how strong a given muscle may
be, then stability will be severely compromised. This point often seems to
be forgotten in many studies of relationship between injuries and muscle
strength. Though the intrinsic strength of a muscle may be adequate in the
execution of a given task, it may not be utilised efficiently in that or
other tasks.

Moreover, if strength is adjudged to be adequate as estimated by static or
isokinetic tests in a given action, this does not imply that strength under
other conditions will be adequate. We simply cannot ignore the vital fact
that strength is not only the result of muscle action, but of neuromuscular
facilitation in response to specific stimulation in a given motor task. It
is not valid to extrapolate findings from isolated joint testing to a process
as multifactorial as dynamic stabilisation.

In this regard, articles such as the following can be very revealing:

Zajac FE & Gordon MF(1989) Determining muscle’s force and action in
multi-articular movement Exerc Sport Sci Revs 17: 187-230

Andrews JG (1985) A general method for determining the functional role of a
muscle J Biomech Eng 107: 348-353

Andrews JG (1982) On the relationship between resultant joint torques and
muscular activity Med Sci Sports Exerc 14: 361-7

What does all of this imply for the researcher? Well, it means that the
research protocol, and possibly the title of the project, needs to be devised
very carefully to take these problems into account. One has to be especially
careful as to how one defines and measures “stability”, especially the
“stability” of a portion of a dynamically linked system. So far, I am not
very convinced that many researchers are adequately addressing this problem -
maybe you could take a significant step forward to rise above the
perpetuation of some dubious traditional and relatively unchallenged
hypotheses. Best wishes in your task!

Mel Siff
Denver, USA
Mel Siff Dot Com
Supertraining Twitter Feed

You may recall a post on the value of belts in lifting which requested that I
review a series of articles which Paul Chek, a regular speaker on the fitness
circuit, recently wrote on the subject in Testosterone emag (see the archives
of the Supertraining eGroup). Relying on some rather dubious biomechanics
and clinical anecdotes, he deduced that all belt usage is detrimental to
lifting. Well, he posted some rather unhappy reactions to my review on
another weights user group. In one of these letters, he stated:

<<In summary, it is not a case of believing in the belly button “going in, or
going out”, it is a case of the order of events. If the body functions
correctly, segmental stabilization via the inner unit will prepare the system
for force generation. This is why I often say in my lectures, “in order for
the musculoskeletal system to stay healthy, stabilization must always precede
force generation”. >>

My response may be of interest to some of you:

*** “It is totally incorrect to state that stabilisation precedes
mobilisation. Neither is this taught or applied clinically in physical
therapy (e.g. in the application of PNF, Bobath etc), nor is it supported by
scientific research into the mechanisms of motor control. The annual
series of Bernstein memorial lectures on motor control offer just one source
of an extensive body of information which shows that stability is established
via ongoing feedback or error-correction processes acting on a foundation of
ongoing, varying levels of movement. If you have information to the
contrary, then you would be able to revolutionise the entire world of control
theory, not only in biology, but also in aeronautics, space exploration and
many other fields of human endeavour. And you would become an enormously
wealthy man in industry! ”

It is important to note that a system that is completely stable or following
a precisely described regular pattern (e.g. an unmodulated sine wave) carries
no information, so that it becomes very daunting to try to control a system
that tells you nothing about its current state. It is also fairly well known
that systems which are very close to equilibrium can display catastrophic
changes of state in response to very small perturbations (e.g. see work on
non-equilibrium systems by Nobel Prize winning scientist, Ilya Prigogine).

The process of stabilisation is by no means as simple and clearcut as Chek
seems to imply. Once again,this stresses how important it is for public
lecturers and authors in the fitness and training world to understand the
science behind the ideas and methods that they are trying to teach, sell or
apply.

Mel Siff
Denver, USA
Mel Siff Dot Com
Supertraining Twitter Feed

<…. Also, it is not uncommon to see respiratory disease patients with
chronic low back pain, since they cannot effectively utilize their TVA to
help control the segmental stability (note I did not write “core stability”)
of their spines. I had never considered that resistive breathing might be a
training aid, but it sounds very interesting. >

Mel Siff’s response was as follows
*** That is why I have hypothesized for many years that TVA activity is
really a secondary effect produced by appropriate control of intra-abdominal
pressure via involuntary or voluntary breath management. Most of the time I
even consider that the TVA activates quite automatically when the body is
forced to stabilise or react to any positional or movement changes. I have
often quoted EMG work by Basmajian to remind people that TVA activation is
intimately linked to any actions which elicit changes in breathing status,
especially if forced breath holding or exhalation takes place.

Remember Beevor’s Axiom, namely that the body (generally) knows of actions
not muscles? So — just learn some appropriate methods of controlling one’s
breath in different situations or carry out dynamic activities which compel
the body to produce such breathing actions, and the rest will follow quite
naturally! Anyway, in suggesting this, I fully appreciate that some ancient
Eastern guru (not the fitness type!) several thousand years ago would have
reminded me that all of this is really nothing new! Let’s not keep putting
the TVA cart before the breath-control horse and, for once and for all,
restore some sanity to this “Transversus in Wonderland” saga.

Mel Siff
Denver, USA
Mel Siff Dot Com
Supertraining Twitter Feed

“Dr Siff — I enjoyed your discussion of the Pilates method. You are the
first person I found on the Internet who seemed willing to look at their
claims logically.” [from Dr R M G]

No sooner had this letter arrived than I came across a magazine article which
proclaimed that it had been written to help the fitness professional to
really understand what Pilates is and what its benefits are. For a brief
moment, I thought that some genuine validation of their often exaggerated
claims would be forthcoming, but I discovered before reading to the end of
the first column that this was not to be.

————–

What Is Pilates? — Understanding and teaching this popular movement method

By Colleen Glenn & Roberta Morgan

[Personal Fitness Professional Feb 2002: 12]

[Colleen Glenn is a managing partner at Goodbody's Wellness Center, director
of the GoodBodys Pilates Education Series and vice president of The Pilates
Method Alliance. Roberta Morgan is PR Director with Center Studio in Los
Angeles and is a board member of the PMA.]

Invented in the early 20th century by Joseph Pilates, Pilates was created by
combining Eastern modes of exercise such as Yoga and Tai Chi with Western
practices such as aerobics and weight training. Even with the boom in Pilates
that has taken place throughout the world over the last 10 years, there are
still many people, even in the world of fitness and/or rehabilitation, who
are not clear on how this method works and why a new trainer must study long
and carefully in order to teach it. >

*** It is amazing that so many folk make it seem as if their fitness or
wellness methods almost require the intelligence and training of a “rocket
scientist”. Even old Joe Pilates himself didn’t have a very good grasp of
movement science, even for those times. Moreover, the glaring lack of
scientific research into the alleged uniqueness of Pilates training means
that there is a great shortage of intellectual matter that has to be studied.
Even the “scientific” or anatomical material that has to be studied
produces such gems that Pilates “produces thinner, less tight muscles” than
weight training — what more needs to be said about education that seems to
be so impoverished?

This means then that the extensive time necessary to even teach one exercise
on the “Reformer” or the “Cadillac” has to be spent on simply practising a
human movement that certainly does not require any skill which even vaguely
compares with a single axel on the ice, an Olympic snatch, a baseball strike
or a back salto in gymnastics or diving. Anyhow, many groups try to create
an aura of mystique or complexity about their special training method because
this makes it more marketable and attractive to the easily-bored fitness
public.

Although the authors state that “there are still many people, even in the
world of fitness and/or rehabilitation, who are not clear on how this method
works”, a quick reading of this article shows that even the experts do not
seem to be very clear about “how” this method works and what science really
exists to validate their claims for uniqueness.

The article continues:

<The Pilates Elders, the original remaining students of Joseph and Clara
Pilates, have stated that, “Pilates is a movement technique as well as a
lifelong learning process of training your body with an expectation toward
health and wellness. ” Joseph Pilates believed that since the mind built the
body, training the physical in this way sharpens mental acumen as well.

Pilates promotes good posture through breathing, proper muscle use and
coordination building core strength and flexibility and the use of
resistance-based equipment developed by Joseph Pilates. The Pilates body is
not one of bulk and restricted movement or of the runner’s sometimes anorexic
appearance. This is a dancer’s body at its agile best – long, lean, toned and
trim. Many people claim Pilates actually adds an inch or more to their
height. Other benefits include:

- Relaxation and stress reduction, encouraging overall health

- Mental and physical control of the body, leading to actual re-training of
neural pathways and physical grace of movement

- Gentle, safe, yet challenging non-impact exercises that build abdominal and
back muscles, which stabilize the spine, protect the lower back and tighten
and strengthen the buttocks

- Improved posture and stability, better coordination and balance
Strengthened bones and improved circulation

- Prevention of body pains and limitations associated with aging. Increased
mental and physical stamina and energy

- Fewer repetitions that are indefinitely (sic) more effective in changing
the body

*** As usual, no references or web resources are cited which support any of
these claims (of course, we will be told that in such magazine articles,
these would be out of place). Instead, we read nonsense on “retraining”
neural pathways (whatever that is supposed to mean in the healthy person),
implications that non-impact exercise is safer and more effective than
impulsive exercise, claims that Pilates PREVENTS body pains, and implications
that the fewer repetitions of Pilates are more effective than higher
repetition training, irrespective of training goals. All other claims are
not unique to Pilates — many other forms of exercise can claim the same
benefits and even more.

The article again:

<Pilates re-educates and promotes a process that truly enhances the mind/body
connection. Joseph Pilates promised that in 10 sessions of Pilates, you will
feel the difference. In 20, you will see the difference, and in 30, you’ll
have a whole new body. Given patience and persistence, you can improve
breathing capacities, align, stretch and strengthen the spine, improve
posture and tone the entire musculature. It has proven benefits for
conditions such as osteoarthritis and osteoporosis. Everyone from
post-rehabilitation patients to athletes see results.>

*** If ANY form of fitness training with or without weights did not produce
similar changes within those periods, something must be gravely amiss. For
the average gym user, 30 sessions is more than 3 months of training and, if
serious weight training were used for that time, I have little doubt that
most free weight trained subjects would visibly and in terms of physical
performance be superior to most Pilates-trained subjects. Muscle hypertrophy
(without those Pilates-condemned “bulges”), fat loss, strength, power and
even flexibility (if full range loaded exercise is used) invariably would be
greater.

The article once more:

<While some Pilates exercises can be performed on a mat with teacher
guidance, the equipment certainly enhances the experience and results. Most
of the equipment designs utilize spring mechanisms that the client employs
while moving the body, carefully noting its positioning. The spring system
assists and enables the body to achieve greater flexibility and range of
motion in the different planes of movement, thereby enhancing proprioception,
restoring joint mobility and providing an ultimate physical and mental
challenge.>

*** Springs offer resistance which do not load the joints and muscles in
optimal patterns of action, especially since spring resistance increases with
extension, whereas joint torque capabilities decrease after reaching a peak
well before any full movement is completed. Springs do not specially
“enhance proprioception” — I wonder if the authors would clarify what they
mean by proprioception and how one can alter it. I doubt if the Pilates folk
even know how one can combine elastics (or springs) with free weights to
enhance strength and power training, thereby extending the capabilities of
springs on their own. All that they seem to believe is that weights will
make you bulky, short-muscled, stiff and clumsy — now where have we heard
that before?

Do they really believe that spring training provides the “ultimate physical
and mental challenge”? If so, I am astounded, because even combined weights
and band training can be very wearisome if used very extensively in all
training. Maybe Pilates folk are just very easy to please! However, I would
rather not spend money on playing with spring laden machines, when I can do
many hundreds of exercises on a single free weights bar alone for nothing.

The article again (read my article on Pilates on the dolfzine.com site for
more information on these toys):

<The most well-known piece of equipment is the Universal Reformer. Other
visually simple but deceptively effective Pilates equipment includes such
items as Low Chair, Electric Chair, Trapeze Table (which Joseph Pilates
called The Cadillac, seeing it as the ultimate in his designs), Ped70-Pul and
Spine Corrector.

The Low Chair, sometimes called the Wunda Chair, was developed when Joseph
observed Chinese acrobats maneuver on a box. Since he had strong beliefs
about how people should stand, walk, sleep and sit to stay healthy, he wanted
the Low Chair to be in every hotel and home; he believed that modem chairs
compromised internal functioning and posture.

From its origins as a massage and therapeutic table, the Trapeze Table, or
Trap Table got its name from the circus trapeze. Pilates developed the table
to resemble a single four-poster bed with springs, wooden bars and hanging
trapeze-type equipment to challenge even the most physically fit individuals.
Concentration is very important to work the arms, legs, trunk and entire body
against the various spring tensions and positions this equipment affords.

A movement technique requires learning fundamentals to build upon, time to
physically acquire skills and mentally understand them. It is about
repetition, refining and a depth of understanding, something that requires
many hours of practice and apprenticeship. Professionals attending
introductory seminars and short programs do gain invaluable concepts and
preparatory exercises to incorporate in private and/or group settings, but it
is just a start. Teaching the Pilates’ concepts is quite different from
teaching exercises. The latter is surface; the former is unique and profound.>

***On many occasions I have openly requested just some scientific information
to validate the oft-repeated Pilates claims, especially regarding its alleged
uniquenesses, but none has yet been forthcoming, other than complaints about
“Dr Siff always picking on us – why, oh why?” (the usual sidetracking
techniques which try to disguise the likelihood that there is no information
available). If the science is not there to quote, what complexity and depth
can there be that one has to study?

Proclaiming that “teaching the Pilates’ concepts is quite different from
teaching exercises” is yet another gross exaggeration, unless they mean that
it is even simpler to teach Pilates exercises. Further, it is massively
misleading to add that teaching exercises is “surface”. Have they really
tried to teach the physical and mental skills necessary to master any complex
skills in any coordinated sport or even the more demanding weights exercises
such as the snatch?

The article continues:

<Pilates could not come of age in a better time. In 10 years, over 76 million
people in the US will be middle-aged or elderly. Older populations require
low-impact programs laced with variety that also address physical
limitations. Emphasis needs to be placed on health, function, quality as well
as prevention. Pilates addresses the needs of the current aging exercise
populations. As a result, Pilates is one of the fastest growing forms of
exercise today. As a professional, the question is not if you need to learn
Pilates but rather when and how.>

*** Once again, they proliferate the belief that low-impact exercises
necessarily are superior and safer (for people of all ages), even though
research shows that moderate levels of impact or more heavily resisted
exercise seem to play a very important role in increasing the degree of bone
mineralisation and halting the progress of skeletal deterioration. Bone
scans, for example, show that lifters who have used weights for several years
have significantly greater bone density than members of the general public –
I would be interested to see a comparison of the bone scans of lifters and
Pilates practitioners of comparable experience.

Although many older folk who have spent rather sedentary lives may be quite
frail, it is incorrect to assume that ALL older folk should avoid more
demanding forms of exercise. As a professional, it is more of a question if
you know enough about strength and fitness training in general, than if you
know a great deal about how to teach only a single limited form of training.

Sure, there can be a very useful role for Pilates, but it is not universally
superior to all other forms of exercise. To suggest that it can serve as a
total replacement for other systems of training or that it is definitely
superior in most ways to weights and other forms of overall training is
irresponsible and misleading, unless, of course, your aim is to attract more
business the way of Pilates!

The article went on:

<Formed last year, the Pilates, Method Alliance (PMA) is as international
non-profit organization of teachers, teacher trainers, studios, manufacturers
and facilities dedicated to preserving the legacy of Joseph and Clara
Pilates. The PMA states that, “The Pilates Method is an exercise process that
creates an internal physical transformation and integration of mind and body.
In order to be a teacher, one must experience it (the transformation) first,
understanding that it’s never complete but & constant evolution of learning.”>

*** Once again, we are exposed to this so-called “New Age” mind-body
integration mantra, as if this is unique to Pilates. Even though some sports
will not specifically pay attention to making deliberate efforts to integrate
the use of the mind into their physical training, this integration usually
happens quite naturally without effort by simply taking part in the sport
seriously. It is inconceivable to lift heavy weights, run long distances,
swim for hours, sprint a 100m in less than 11 seconds, sink a golf put from
15 metres, do a somersault on a skateboard……without mind-body
integration, so that claim is redundant. In fact, it is virtually impossible
to take part in any physical activity (and yes, that includes sex!) WITHOUT
mind-body interaction.

The article once more:

<The PMA recommends that anyone who would like to teach the Pilates method of
exercise attend a comprehensive training program and maintain a commitment to
education. Here are some questions to help you find a training program that
is right for you.

1. Are there any requirements for entry into the program? Most comprehensive
Pilates programs require prior Pilates exercise experience, knowledge of
anatomy and/or an entrance exam for a prerequisite.

2. Does the training program offer instruction on a pieces or just a specific
piece of equipment with a limited repertoire of exercises?

3. Does the program meet weekly or monthly? How long does it take to complete?

4. Are lecture, observation, apprenticeship and practice hours involved?

Pilates is a time-proven and enormously effective movement technique that
greatly enhances the mind, body and spirit.>

*** Now we note that Pilates also integrates the SPIRIT into the whole human
equation! — maybe if they returned to a soapbox at that famous street
intersection in San Francisco, Haight-Ashbury, or on the grass at Woodstock,
a few more people might buy that line, but, even in the hugely gullible
fitness and health world, that really is stretching one’s luck a bit far.

Do they really believe and KNOW that indulging in physical games on Pilates
devices is magically going to enhance what happens in the spiritual realms?
Maybe this little-known Pilates prayer has something to do with it:

Our integrated father-mother which art in Pilates heaven,
Hallowed be thy games
Thy playground come,
Thy exercises will be done on the mat as it is in the Cadillac heaven
Give us this day our daily flat muscles
And forgive us our trespasses for using free weights
As we forgive them that trespass on our machines
And lead us not into temptation to use heavy weights or ballistic bounces
For thine is the Pilates kingdom
The commercial power and the physical glory
For ever and ever
Aum!

————-

Mel Siff

PUZZLE & PARADOX 119

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

For newcomers to this forum, these P&Ps are Propositions, not facts or
dogmatic proclamations. They are intended to stimulate interaction among
users working in different fields, to re-examine traditional concepts, foster
distance education, question our beliefs and suggest new lines of research or
approaches to training. We look forward to responses from anyone who has
views or relevant information on the topics.

———————————————

PUZZLE & PARADOX PP119

Understanding and management of spinal problems may be confused and impaired
by the misleading use of certain definitions and models of spinal stability.

PREAMBLE

The back has probably generated more concepts and models of postural
management and rehabilitation than any other part of the body, undoubtedly
because of the prevalence of back pain, dysfunction and disability in Western
populations. Entire courses, clinical rehabilitation regimes and treatment
‘protocols’ have been developed to manage back problems, with a myriad of
experts gaining almost demi-god status for their particular approaches. Thus,
we are confronted with methods such as the manipulative schemes of
chiropractors and physical therapists, as well as Alexander technique,
Maitland, McKenzie, Pilates, Feldenkrais and a host of other models which are
specifically or partially devoted to back care.

We learn about neutral spinal posture, abnormal curvatures, ‘correct’ pelvic
tilt, ’swayback’, hyperlordosis, kyphosis, ‘proper’ lifting techniques and
numerous other issues relating to how we think that the trunk work., yet
agreement on all issues is by no means universal. Many folk with so-called
‘abnormal’ curvatures or postures do not suffer from debilitating back pain
and disability, years of heavy weightlifting does not lead to the expected
high incidence of injury or malfunction, and some methods of spinal
management have minimal success with some subjects.

DEFINITIONS

The foundation of all schemes of back use and care begins with definitions of
neutrality, the spinal curvatures, balance, abnormality and pelvic
disposition. Definitions of neutrality are bandied about so casually that
one would think that neutrality in the standing position is the same as
neutrality in seated, lying, walking, running and other situations. Are we
really entitled to apply such universal definitions of neutrality, bearing in
mind that spinal disposition is the result of dynamic processes throughout
the body?

Why is neutrality in the standing anatomical position considered to be more
fundamental than neutrality in the relaxed supine position? Is it
appropriate to apply concepts of neutrality in the static standing posture
with neutrality in the more dynamic cases of walking or running? Or does
neutrality disappear when one deviates from this ‘neutral’ standing position?

Many folk refer to normal lordosis or kyphosis, yet there appears to be no
such thing as normal scoliosis. Why this discrepancy? They consider lordosis
to refer to the normal concave curvature of the lumbar spine and kyphosis to
mean the normal thoracic convex curvature, but the suffix “-sis” always
refers to some form of pathology. Thus, lordosis should be used only to
describe excessively concave lumbar curvature, while kyphosis should be used
solely to mean excessively convex thoracic curvature. Scoliosis needs no
such attention – nobody uses that term to describe normal lateral curvature
of any part of the spine.

There are some who take all of this one stage further by referring to
‘hyperlordosis’, when lordosis already happens to be a ‘hyper-’ condition.
At a popular level, the term ’swayback’ is used as a synonym for ‘lordosis’,
but some therapists attempt to distinguish between hyperlordosis and
swayback. This distinction is by no means universally accepted, yet it is
sometimes used to offer different types of therapy to treat what is
considered to be abnormal spinal posture.

LAY TERMINOLOGY

A major part of this confusion is that the colloquial word ’swayback’ is not
a clinical term and that it is inappropriate to base kinesiological or
therapeutic analyses on lay terms being used in a clinical setting. This is
tantamount to comparing a cartilage operation with a menisectomy, because the
layperson thinks that cartilage is necessarily the same as meniscus.

Thus, it would appear to be meaningless to even consider comparing ’swayback’
and lordosis – either that or an acceptable clinical term has to be
introduced to accurately describe so-called ’swayback’ which is not the same
as the colloquial use of the same term. If some believe that swayback is
different from lordosis because each has a different characteristic degree
of pelvic tilt, then we are going to get nowhere, since virtually all
anatomists just use them as clinical and non-clinical synonyms.

The tendency towards swaying back in the so-called swayback posture is
increased among those whose knee joint tends to ‘hyperextend’, while it is
used quite comfortably as a standing variant when one stands with the hands
on the hips or presses a load overhead.

Some well-meaning postural experts advise us that adults need to become more
childlike in standing or sitting, because children have not yet lost their
‘natural’ tendency to have the ideal posture. It needs to be pointed out
that it is entirely meaningless to compare adult and child postures, since
the typical human spinal curvatures are consolidated only in adulthood and
that the more flattened spinal posture is unsuitable for the greater stresses
of adult life.

IMBALANCE?

Then, when so-called imbalances are found between the different muscle groups
involved in stabilising the spine, a large array of static hands-on tests of
muscle strength are used to identify these imbalances (such as the impressive
inventory of tests of Kendall). Yet, we know that the ’strength’ of
muscles depends on joint angle, velocity of movement, region of action,
degree of neural activation and fatigue. Are we justified in extrapolating
these static tests to identify imbalances which may or may not appear under
more dynamic or explosive conditions?

Why is balance or homeostasis considered to be so precisely defined that any
small deviations from fairly rigid ‘norms’ may be blamed for leading to a
host of back problems? One therapist swears that postural realignment will
solve the problem, another swears by mobilisation, others by manipulation,
pelvic re-education, myofascial trigger point therapy, ‘active release’,
McKenzie, shoe inserts (orthotics), Pilates, acupuncture and even
reflexology. Is the success or failure of any such system due more to the
possibility that the spine is such an imprecise functional system that
numerous strategies can affect its operation?

SOLUTIONS?

Is it not possible that no posture which deviates moderately from the ‘norm’
really will cause any problems provided that it is not held for too long or
subjected to prolonged or excessive loading in any given direction? After
all, the body is in constant motion, even during sleep, which may well be the
body’s natural way of preventing any given structure from being excessively
or inappropriately loaded.

So, if we move around regularly from one posture to another, no matter how
poor each may appear to be, are we not then minimising the occurrence of any
dysfunction – as long as we don’t load the spine excessively or hold the same
posture for too long in any one state? Is it only when we forget to shift
around regularly in seated and other positions that problems begin to emerge?
Is the prevalence of back pain and dysfunction more a consequence of lack of
adequate postural variation than any single ‘correct’ posture?

Though our models of optimal spinal functioning may well be quite accurate,
is it that essential to implement them so precisely, when regular shifting
from one position to another may tend to offset most of the alleged risks of
imprecise spinal usage? Does this then imply that many of the popular
therapies and methods of spinal use and rehabilitation are unduly
prescriptive and in many cases, redundant?

—————-

Mel Siff

Now that the Pilates system of training has undergone a huge rebirth in the USA and started to attain the status of culthood, its latter day practitioners are now reviving some of the myths of strength training. Here are a few that are now doing the rounds, taken directly from the advertising blurb that is promoting Pilates in the media:

Myth 1. Weight training tends to shorten the muscles, but Pilates lengthens them. All that lifting bunches up the muscles and makes one tight and stiff.

Fact: All muscles contract and shorten when they are activated. All muscle lengthen when they relax. If muscles appear to lengthen and flatten with training, then this would imply that one is losing muscle bulk, which is not a highly desirable state for anyone. This Pilates belief is total nonsense and betrays a sorry knowledge of muscle physiology. It would also seem to suggest that the more Pilates work you do, the longer your muscles become. That, of course, would mean that your muscles would develop slack and you even tually would not be able to move your joints!

Myth 2. Pilates offers much more variety than weight training. It now has over 2000 exercises.

Fact: The field of weight training, which includes free barbell and dumbbell weights and machines, offers at least ten times that number of exercises and exercise variations. Pilates does not even come close.

Pilates practitioners, of course, should note that the well-known Pilates machine, the Reformer (a type of lying sled device), the Cadillac, the Spine Corrector and various other machines were developed by Joseph Pilates from a host of earlier weird and wonderful machines that were on the fitness market of Europe and Russia during the late 19th and early 20th century. If one examines some early patents from Germany, for example, even some weight training devices like some made by Nautilus were derived from these earlier innovations.

One might even state that “Pilates training” constitutes just another man’s own range of strength training routines and machines, someone like Arthur Jones, Bob Hoffman, Eugene Sandow, Professor Attila or Joe Weider. Those who are “doing Pilates” thus are simply doing another type of strength training program and they don’t even recognise that fact. If any of their instructors think that old Joe Pilates had a totally unique approach or philosophy, then they would do well to learn that several of the strengthening trend setters of the past 100 years all had some fascinating philosophies and methodologies that are not dramatically different from that of Pilates. Reading through a book such as Webster’s “The Iron Game” or talking to Dr Terry Todd and his wife will fill in some of the gaps in their education if anyone is unaware of that fact.

Myth 3. Pilates realigns the body, corrects muscle imbalances and helps to heal injured backs. Weight training usually causes imbalances and overstresses the back.

Fact: Suitably individualised Pilates and progressive weight training programs both can be used to “correct imbalances” and improve postural alignment, which actually have a lot more to do with motor education than what means is used to achieve those ends. Conversely, poorly taught Pilates and weight training both can be injurious. There are very few other methods that can develop such spinal strength, power and stability than a well-designed heavy weight training program.

The bottom line? Why don’t modern Pilates teachers and enthusiasts simply state that they really prefer Pilates training to any other methods at the moment and that other forms of training may well be more enjoyable and productive for others? There is no scientific or clinical evidence that Pilates is any better or worse than any other form of training for the average population, so let it be marketed as such.

Of course, anyone who is a student of international sport knows that Pilates training done as the sole form of conditioning has produced very few or none of the world champions in sport, nor has it been shown to offer superior musculoskeletal healing to any other form of therapy. That does not make it any the less enjoyable or effective for those who feel justified in spending thousands of dollars a year to learn it. Those people simply enjoy it because they have found that it suits them, nothing more, nothing less.

Fortunately, when I was being taught Pilates methods more than 15 years ago by some Pilates teachers in return for my teaching them modified forms of PNF training which Pilates did not specifically address, we discovered that we all had something to teach and learn from one another’s training — though we agreed that Pilates methods of pelvic stabilisation were not intended for lifting heavy loads in weightlifting and powerlifting. Once again, a case of live and let live! Pilates teachers and weight trainers were getting along just fine until the commercial marketeers came along to distort the facts with their comparative advertising.

Mel Siff

There has been so much discussion on the resurgence of Pilates methods of training that I thought it might be helpful to write a lengthy commentary on this conditioning system, based on my own exposure to Pilates training, various Pilates books and dozens of websites (almost all of which are commercial advertisements for classes or certification).

In all of these sources, I was unable to find any quality research which supports the claims of Pilates or shows its superiority over other well-structured multifaceted varied systems of conditioning. All claims to its excellence are based upon comparison with limited bodybuilding regimes and anecdotal testimonials by clients who have had little exposure to the wide world of modern strength science. If there is anyone who can quote some definitive peer-reviewed research, please share it with us.

PILATES HISTORY

Joseph Pilates was born in Germany in 1880 and grew up in England, where he was interned during World War I and used this time to become a nurse. His frail childhood apparently inspired him to pursue a path of lifelong fitness that led him to take up bodybuilding and several other sports to become a competent skier, diver, boxer, and gymnast.

It is apparent that the time spent in those old gymnastics and bodybuilding training halls laid many of the foundations for the design of his special training machines and his training methods. While working as a nurse, he inventively used the springs and frames of hospital beds to make variations of what he had seen used by gymnastics and physique coaches of his time. There can be little doubt that he, like so many young men of his time were impressed by the innovative approaches of training legends such as Eugene Sandow, who consulted for many kings, queens and heads of State at the time.

During the 1920s, he moved to New York, where he opened his first formal studio, which ultimately attracted well-known dancers such as George Ballanchine and Martha Graham to train there regularly, which provided an invaluable marketing boost to his career in the USA. Since his work grew up in the world of gymnastics, an aesthetic art which has strong allegiances with ballet, it obviously received sympathetic support from the emerging dance community in the USA, which, until that time was vastly overshadowed by the dancing giants of Europe.

Consequently, his methods became very well publicised in the dance and drama community and, until recently, have remained confined largely to these same communities that spread his method in its earliest days. Also not surprising is that some of his latter day disciples have astutely discerned that any intriguing apparently novel systems of fitness can make a fortune in the fitness and shape gullible West. In this regard, Romana Kryzanowska, his one Master Teacher, who, after Joseph’s death, was asked by his wife, Clara, to continue with Joseph’s teachings and today she serves as the guru of the Pilates movement.

SOME PILATES METHODS & MACHINES

The following website summarises many of the Pilates methods and machines, giving photographs of devices that clearly have been derived from the world of gymnastics and early fitness training, as anyone with a reasonable background in gymnastics history and coaching will tell you:

This site introduces Pilates thus: <<The ‘Pilates Method’ is not just exercise, however. It is a series of controlled movements engaging your body and mind, performed on specifically designed exercise apparatus and supervised by extensively trained teachers.>>

http://www.pilates-studio.com/about.htm

Of course, this same sort of preface may be applied to many different fitness and health training regimes, especially those drawn from the world of scientific strength training (see, for example, the major aspects of this field by skimming through the Table of Contents of Siff & Verkhoshansky “Supertraining” at this site: http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/8682/siff.htm).

High Chair (Modified Gymnastics Staking Pommel)
The Reformer (A modified rowing trainer with pulleys)
The Mat (A fat mat!)
The Pedipull (A modified pulley machine)
The Magic Circle (A 14″ sprung-steel ring with cushioned handles)
The Cadillac (Modified type of Parallel and Horizontal Bars)
The Low Chair (Modified Gymnastics Staking Pommel)
The Spine Corrector Barrel (Low Level type of Pommel Horse)

Originally Pilates devised over 500 specific exercises using five major pieces of his modified gymnastics apparatus, while his pupils have added something like another 1500 variations to increase this list to its current status today to develop the body more uniformly, in their opinion.

He baptised one of his central principles with the name “Contrology” to define his general programme of fitness exercises which showed a clear appreciation of early Grecian aesthetics of training, their coordination and balance of body and mind, and the burgeoning training schemes of leaders such as Sandow, Professor Attila, George Hackenschmidt and Dr Krayevsky.

According to Pilates (in his book “Your Health”, 1934), Contrology “is the conscious control of all muscular movements of the body. It is the correct utilization and application of the leverage principles afforded by the bones comprising the skeletal framework of the body, a complete knowledge of the mechanism of the body, and a full understanding of the principles of equilibrium and gravity as applied to the movements of the body in motion, at rest and in sleep.”

Interestingly, the above words are very similar to what Sandow wrote when he championed the introduction of physical education and sport as compulsory school subjects and the regular examination of pupils by doctors and dentists. Therefore, it is highly relevant to summarise the fitness world in which Pilates grew up.

THE INFLUENCE OF SANDOW & EARLY FITNESS LEADERS

(Extracted from Siff & Verkhoshansky “Supertraining” 1999 Ch 1)

The great Sandow, born in Koningsberg in East Russia in 1867, was sought out by presidents and rulers from all around the world, with his book, “Life is Movement” being received enthusiastically by nine kings and queens and many princes of Europe, as well as US Presidents William Taft and Woodrow Wilson. Besides defeating many strongmen of his time, he was a generous sponsor of many charitable causes and an early champion of more hygienic conditions of working and living for all, including the central role of formal fitness and health management. As part of his vision, he pressed for the introduction of physical education and sport as compulsory school subjects, and the regular examination of pupils by school doctors and dentists. At the same time, he to ured the world lecturing to promote physical culture as a means of improving quality of life, with his contributions being described as follows by the

“Mirror of Life and Sport” (8 April 1911):

” His Majesty King George has conferred an unique honour upon Mr. Eugene Sandow, the world-renowned exponent and founder of scientific physical culture. Mr. Sandow just having had the honour of being appointed Professor of Scientific Physical Culture to his Majesty. The keen interest which the King has always taken in the physical welfare of his people is well-known, and there is no desire more dear to his Majesty’s heart than to improve the conditions of life for the masses.

Mr. Sandow’s appointment must be regarded as a striking recognition of the undoubted benefits of scientific physical culture, and there is no doubt that the interest shown by his Majesty in the subject will considerably increase the popularity of the science of which Mr. Sandow is the principal authority. Mr. Sandow is a man who has risen by his own unaided effort to a position in which he is not only a national but a world factor in the science of improvement of the human body and the combating of that physical degeneracy which in former eras has always accompanied the advances of civilisation.”

In many respects, therefore, Sandow was one of the most important founding fathers of the fitness revolution, revealing that the modern phenomenon of science-based physical training is by no means novel or innovative. Interestingly, Sandow’s methods focused largely on the development of strength and skill as the foundation of health, an approach which was almost completely deposed more than half a century later by cardiovascular scientists such as Dr Kenneth Cooper of the USA, who massively downplayed the role of these fitness qualities and stressed ‘aerobic’ fitness as being far more important to general health. It has taken more than 25 years for the quality of strength advocated by Sandow to return to academic acceptance.

In Russia, during this same period, the eminent Polish-born physician, Vladislav Krayevsky (Krajewski), founded the St Petersburg Amateur Weightlifting Society (1885), having visited various German towns to familiarise himself with what was already known throughout Europe as weightlif ting or ‘heavy athletics’, because of his great interest in the use of physical culture for the prevention and treatment of illness. Many prominent scientists, artists and athletes became his pupils, including another famous strongman, George Hackenschmidt, who credited Krayevsky for teaching him all that he knew. Hackenschmidt, in his book, “The Way to Live”, added that some of the world’s strongest men of that era, including Sandow, were trained according to Krayevsky’s system.

Krayevsky’s considerable knowledge in medicine, psychology, physical culture, methods of using exercises and organizational abilities made him an acknowledged leader in weightlifting sports (including wrestling). He not only promoted weightlifting, taught classes and organized competitions, but also lifted himself, achieving significant success in barbell lifts.

Krayevsky wrote two of his fundamental works during the period 1896-1899, “The Catechism of Health – Rules for Athletes” and “The Development of Physical Strength with Kettlebells and without Kettlebells” (1900).

Krayevsky displayed an excellent knowledge of the history of physical culture and all forms of gymnastics. He paid special attention to therapeutic gymnastics in his “Diagram of Medico Gymnastic Uses” and its accompanying detailed commentary, a book that was widely read by many people in the training world of the time. Krayevsky was very familiar with Swedish gymnastics and noted its therapeutic applications, but his concern with the lack of scientific substantiation of the Swedish system led him to recruit Russian experimentalists to research it.

Many of Krayevsky’s methodological recommendations are still valid. These recommendations include medical control of the athlete’s health, regularity of workouts and planned sequencing of increasing loads, multi-faceted physical development, psychological management, observation of wellness rules (especially sleep) and refraining from the use of alcohol and smoking. Krayevsky was especially concerned with forming correct breathing habits and methods of combating fatigue, and felt that many of the limitations imposed by heredity could be overcome by appropriate training.

Many of these early strength pioneers devised interesting and unique training weights and machines, including cable machines, variable resistance machines using cams and levers, elastic springs and cables, friction resistance devices, kettlebells, thick-grip bars, hollow-ended barbells and dumbbells whose weight could be increased by adding lead shot, odd-shaped bars, isolation machines, weighted boots and various throwing devices. Yet there are those today who lay claims of originality to designing these machines more than 50 years after their original manufacture. In addition, a large number of weight training, bodybuilding exercises and techniques which are believed to be original today had been tried and tested in that burgeoning exploration era of finding the best methods of strength training.

BACK TO PILATES

In his system, Pilates stressed the importance of using fewer sets of few repetitions of compound movements that require significant motor skill and coordination (like well-organised strength training!), as opposed to the prolonged repetition of fairly automatic movements (like modern aerobics and jogging!). His reason for this was that endless repetition of unchallenging reflexive routines tends to decrease the degree of mental involvement, whereas carefully executed sets of very few repetitions of skilled movements tend to offer a better balance of mind and body training.

As we have noted above, all of these principles were abundantly evident in the work of Sandow, Krayevsky and other early masters. The major difference is that Pilates entered the world of dance to astutely promote his commercial career there and stressed the sale of his gymnastics-derived devices, while the other fitness leaders of that era allowed clients to use anything and everything that might be appropriate for any given individual, thereby laying the foundations for all modern fitness centres anf gyms.

In one respect, we should be grateful that the Pilates adaptations of the conditioning methods of his time has now offered a way out of the frequently repetitive and mindless militaristic group fitness classes. Not that the latter cannot play a valid role in the attainment of some aspects of general fitness, but they generally tend to be rather impoverished in terms of broader mind-body enhancement of strength, power, flexibility and motor control (unless the instructor happens to be far more creative and unconventional than the average).

Moreover, the likelihood of injury in Pilates type exercises tends to be far less than in most forms of aerobics class. However, the Pilates neglect of strong ballistic movement, high impact, heavier loading and high power output movements with loaded implements in free space also create deficits in all-round human development.

Even if Pilates does not actively add weight training methods to its repertoire of activities, it would go part of the way towards reducing these deficiencies by involving some of the Specific Activation and Specific Relaxation methods from PNF, as well as some of the pattern variations from that discipline.

In fact, if you are fairly well versed in the principles and procedures of PNF, and you are able to modify the traditional Knott-Voss activities to include pulley machines, some gymnastics apparatus, dumbbells, elastic bands, physio balls and a variable bench, you will be able to offer a very extensive form of challenging and productive training that Pilates will struggle to rival. If you are willing to include a few methods from the world of resistance training (Weightlifting, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding) and martial arts, then your system will go far beyond what Pilates can ever offer.

Before anyone extolls the originality and uniqueness of all that Pilates used in his training system, we have to recall that a very sincere Pilates inadvertently came upon or adapted patterns and procedures that mirror some of the methods used in PNF and weight training, as pioneered by other hugely influential fitness gurus who grew up in the European arena of late 19th and early 20th century training. This does not diminish its value, but it simply serves to place his training methods in a far more balanced light.

After all, there are still those who state categorically that

(http://bodymind.net/q&a.htm):

<<The very idea of coordinating or balancing body and mind was itself little-appreciated in the early 20th Century by most physical fitness gurus. At the end of the 20th Century, the concept of introducing ’spirit’ into the exercise equation still stretches the limits of appreciation of many fitness trainers and students.>>

This could not be further from the truth, as we have noticed in examining the fitness world into which Pilates was born. If anything, the fitness leaders of that time were more holistically inclined than the average fitness instructor of today (e.g., see Webster “The Iron Game”, 1976).

In his 1945 book of exercises, entitled “Return to Life Through Contrology”, Pilates wrote that “Contrology is complete coordination of body, mind, and spirit. Through Contrology you first purposefully acquire complete control of your own body and then through proper repetition of its exercises you gradually and progressively acquire that natural rhythm and coordination associated with all your subconscious activities.” Again, absolutely nothing new at the time. These words simply repeat what Sandow and several of his colleagues had said way before Pilates methods were being taught.

An oft-repeated claim is this: “You will feel better in 10 sessions, look better in 20 sessions, and have a completely new body in 30 sessions.” ( Joseph H. Pilates). If we examine this, it is equivalent to 10 weeks of three times a week of periodised modern strength training, which, in the same space of time easily can produce the same results as Pilates. If it doesn’t, then there is something seriously wrong with your training!

SOME PILATES RESEARCH

While searching for some published research on Pilates methods, I found this website and thought “at last, something!”, but my initial hopes waned the moment that I read these articles.

http://www.pilates.uk.com/research/

These articles are fixated on comparing ‘normal springs’ with the ’special’ Pilates springs used on his ‘Reformer’ machine and offer no information whatsoever on the allegedly special physiology behind Pilates. In addition, here some extracts that reveal significant defects in the calibre of the research:

<<Gravity versus Springs. Gravity provides a constant external resistance throughout the range of motion of the exercise. Springs (and other elastic media) provide an increasing external resistance as they lengthen. Unfortunately this coincides with shortening of the muscle and a reduction in generated force.>>

***While the acceleration due to gravity is fairly constant over the surface of the earth, any movement against gravity involves acceleration, which means that resistance changes throughout the range of motion. Although springs offer resistance which increases directly with extension, training against gravity with or without weights can also increase resistance anywhere in the range of movement where you try to accelerate the limb or load. Movement at every stage of joint motion involves muscle shortening, so what this remark has to do with “coinciding with shortening of the muscle” is anyone’s guess.

<<Since spring tension increases steadily with length: the area under the force-distance curve is almost triangular. With gravity, the resistance is constant, making the area a complete rectangle.>>

***This last sentence reveals that the author has never undertaken any biomechanical research, nor does he appear to know that, if the Force-Time curve is a complete rectangle, the acceleration and deceleration phases to and from some apparently constant peak force are vertical lines and the acceleration in each case must be infinitely large. Even if the curve is obtained on an isokinetic dynamometer, the acceleration and deceleration phases cannot be vertical lines.

<<The difference between the two (the upper triangle) represents the extra work, which has been lost. Put another way, exercise against gravity can provide up to twice the benefit, in terms of ‘work done’, compared with exercise against springs.>

***How does work become “lost” in the elastic resistance case? If we wish to be pedantic, and the movement starts and ends in the same place, then no external work is done, be it against gravity or springs. If we wish to consider internal metabolic work, then his analysis is inappropriate and incorrect. Even if we can calculate it accurately in both cases, the work done depends on the magnitude of the external resistance, not simply on what arrangement is used to produce the resistance. More significant is the fact that there are action-specific neuromuscular programmes that will distinguish between the training effects of springs and inertial resistance.

<<For example, on a Reformer, the spring is slightly extended at the start of the movement (possibly by 15 cm or so). The carriage can then travel up to 70 cm, or more, depending on the exercise and the flexibility of the individual, representing a possible 3-fold increase in resistance, from one end of the movement to the other. Imagine lifting a weight of 10 Kg from the floor, which gradually increases to 30 Kg as it comes to chest height, then back to 10Kg again as you lower the weight back to the floor. Clearly, this does NOT reflect ‘real life’. >>

***Without indulging in another scientific analysis of further inaccuracies in this extract, it is interesting that training on most Pilates machines, especially the gliding seat, spring-resisting ‘Reformer’, ironically also fail to reflect what happens in ‘real life’! The author continues to proliferate the misbelief that the only necessary and sufficient condition for general and rehabilitative conditioning is sport specific movement. Were this to be true, the use of all forms of resistance and supplementary training would be entirely redundant.

SOME PILATES WEBSITES

http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_04.17.97/fitness/macri.html

The following site proliferates the myth that Pilates training somehow produces a Pilates-specific type of longer, leaner muscle and that all strength training aims at increasing hypertrophy:

http://www.fitnesslink.com/mind/pilates.shtml

<<By learning the proper stance and correct body alignment, the client soon feels and looks taller and leaner. The muscles are stretched and strengthened uniformly, resulting in long, sleek muscles rather than bulk.

The idea of stretching and lengthening runs contrary to the methods used by most of today’s fitness professionals who believe that the only way to “tone” muscle is to increase the muscle diameter. But students of Pilates swear by his method and have even admitted to feeling taller, leaner and “better” after only a few sessions.>>

The proof in the above article? – Anecdote, hearsay and belief, relying on the very misleading idea that all strength training must involve bodybuilding bulking methods.

“Pilates based” training at home:

http://www.gocarolinas.com/living/health/fitness/1999/06/0628_pilates.html

This site includes an old ‘ab exercise’, the supine leg flutter, at which Pilates himself would cringe. At least the author states that “This really isn’t a Pilates exercise — it’s borrowed from the military — but it’s a fabulous ab-shaper.” Actually, the abs are contracted isometrically in this exercise and serve to stabilise the pelvis, rather than to exercise the abdominal musculature in the full range and manner that Pilates would have recommended. This is but one example of many Pilates teachers simply bastardising what Pilates originally taught and sometimes misrepresenting what the grand old man preached, so don’t think that if you attend a so-called Pilates class or “Pilates based” class that you are receiving the kosher article!

http://www.shapeshift.com/Articles/time.htm (Some Time Magazine rave trivia on Pilates)

Some final Pilates sites:

http://www.the-method.com/

http://www.pilates.uk.com/

http://www.shapeshift.com/articles.htm (Popular Glossy Magzine articles on Pilates)

http://www.shapeshift.com/Articles/mnf.htm (Pilates for Weightlifters and Athletes – filled with many errors about pelvic stabilisation and use during heavy lifting

In every single case where Pilates is compared with other forms of conditioning, it is measured against typical bodybuilding training and never against scientific strength training that has been used for many years in Russia and Europe to produce the world’s greatest athletes in many shapes and sizes, all depending on the specific needs of their sports.

Thus, there are some athletes who make Pilates adherents look thoroughly out of shape, just as there are others who make Pilates folk look like pictures of perfection. There are many slender, aesthetically built athletes who are considerably stronger, faster, more coordinated and more flexible that even the most seasoned Pilates practitioners, while there are bulky bionic-looking athletes whose all-round shape and performance is easily overshadowed by some Pilates fans.

It is apparent that far too many Pilates disciples seem to think that all resistance training is some narrow type of bodybuilding training which many years ago gave birth to that myth that all weight trained athletes are bulky, slow, inflexible and prone to injury. This sort of extrapolation from one small aspect of strength training to prove the merits of Pilates work betrays a serious lack of understanding and a very biased view of modern strength training.

In fact, if Pilates teachers were to learn more about what advanced strength training is about, they could raise Pilates methods to far greater heights. If any of them are genuinely curious to learn some of the methods of integrated West-East strength science, then let them examine references such as the following:

Zatsiorsky V “Science and Practice of Strength Training” 1995

Siff MC & Verkhoshansky YV “Supertraining” 1999

Bompa T “Theory and Methodology of Training” 1983

Yessis M “Secrets of Soviet Sports Fitness & Training” 1987

———-

Mel Siff