—————

PART 2

Silent Period and Reciprocal Inhibition

The “silent period” of muscle is the period of cessation of activity which
occurs when a twitch contraction is superimposed on a voluntary effort (e.g.,
electrically or by a tendon tap). Its normal range (in adductor pollicis) is
87 to 151 msec (Higgins & Lieberman, 1968). It also occurs following the
sudden release of a voluntarily innervated muscle provided a certain minimum
rate of shortening is achieved; if shortening is not permitted or is slow, no
silent period results (Struppler, 1975).

Struppler has shown clearly that the silent period is NOT the result of
reciprocal inhibition (autogenic inhibition); rather it is primarily due to
the cessation of facilitatory impulses in the primary afferent fibres from
the muscle spindles. At the end of the silent period, there is a rebound
burst of EMG activity. A sudden stretch of a relaxed muscle does not recruit
a monosynaptic (muscle-spindle) reflex in man (Marsden, Merton & Morton,
1976).

Garland & Angel (1971) showed that during a rapid voluntary movement, the
agonist produces two distinct volleys of EMG activity separated by a relative
silence. When the active limb was unloaded during the movement, the second
burst was significantly reduced. Apparently, the second burst is due to
spinal reflexes. The mechanical properties of the muscle were shown by
Agarwal & Gottlieb (1972) to have a significant influence on the duration of
the silent period that follows the electrically induced H-wave in soleus
muscle. The primary contraction in soleus (M-wave) coincides with reciprocal
inhibition of the tibialis anterior.

Yabe & Tamaki (1976) have shown the voluntary elbow extension is immediately
preceded by a silent period in the unexercised contralateral agonist
(“contralateral agonist silent period”), without any contralateral antagonist
contraction occurring. Obviously this occurrence cannot be a unilateral type
of reciprocal inhibition at the spinal level.

A different kind of silent period has been demonstrated in the muscles of
mastication. Single stimulation of the teeth induces inhibition in actively
contracting temporalis and masseter muscles with a 30 to 40 msec latency. The
same type of inhibition occurs from sudden unload of the muscles (Ahlgren,
1969; Beaudreau et al., 1969; Griffin & Munro, 1969). Munro and I (1971) more
recently demonstrated that the inhibition in all the elevators of the
mandible was almost synchronous; in most subjects there was a synchronous
burst of activity in the chief depressor muscle (anterior belly of digastric)
some 15 to 27 msec after initial tooth contact.

Hannam (1972) has demonstrated that an enhancement of the masseteric reflex
by voluntary contraction of the jaw-closing muscles may be due to autogenic
factors, synergistic factors or both. Stimulation of the muscle spindles and
facilitation caused by the voluntary activity before tooth contact must be
involved.

Effects of Cross Exercise

The hypothesis that there is a transfer of activity to the contralateral limb
during prescr ibed exercise on one side has been frequently postulated, but
now it is being seriously questioned. Probably it is invalid except in very
special circumstances. Gregg, Mastellone & Gersten (1957) of Denver,
Colorado, found that overflow to the unexercised, contralateral muscles did
not occur during simple non-resistive exercises or during isometric
contractions of one biceps brachii. As the exercise stress increased,
however, there was some “overflow” to the opposite triceps and, after even
greater stress, to the biceps. Increasing fatigue played an important role in
the “overflow” but was reversible, for after a rest of two minutes “overflow”
would at first be absent. Moore (1975) found overflow activity to be between
10% and 20% of the maximal intensity of activity in the exercised limb. She
believed that even this small amount of overflow gives sufficient
justification for it to be used in maintaining muscular tone in immobilized
limbs.

Samilson & Morris (1964) confirm the finding that in normal man activity of
one upper limb is not accompanied by activity in the contralateral resting
limb. However, in spastic children, there is such a spread. On the other hand
Podivinsky (1964) of Bratislava, Czechoslovakia finds a slight motor
irradiation occurs from the strong contraction of finger flexors to the
related muscles of the opposite limb (“crossed motor irradiation”).

This perhaps is related to the findings of Hellebrandt and her colleagues
regarding indirect learning, i.e., the improvement of strength in one limb by
exercising the opposite limb (Hellebrandt & Waterland, 1962a, b). Its
practical significance in ordinary life is unknown and appears to have been
exaggerated since the days of Scripture et aL (1894). We have shown that at
the finest levels of control in motor unit training the role of
cross-training is not significant (Basmajian & Simard, 1966).

Further, the crossed reflex phenomenon described by Ikai (1956) of Tokyo is
not really the same phenomenon as cross exercise. Ikai showed that the
crossed reflex of limbs in spinal animals can be reproduced under certain
conditions as a brief overflow of monosynaptic reflexes to the opposite limb.

Panin, Lindenauer, Weiss & Ebel (1961) seem to have delivered a serious blow
to the concept of “cross exercise.” In their extensive study they found that
the spread of activity was minimal to insignificant. Insignificant potentials
of low amplitude and frequency appeared in all non-exercised muscles in a
widespread distribution in all four limbs. They appeared most in areas
required for postural stabilization of the subject’s body. Even then the
amount of activity was so slight as not to constitute exercise effect.

Our own studies on quadriceps (p 250) and those of Sills and Olsen (see
above) largely confirm the conclusions of Gregg and his colleagues. We found
in our studies of spastic patients (p 83), however, that an exuberant
overflow occurs to the opposite limb. Walshe (1923) and, more recently, Hopf
et al. (1974) and Soto et al (1974) have written about a similar phenomenon
in hemiplegia. We must conclude that “cross education” is, at best, of
dubious value in normal subjects……

Motor Learning and Control

There is mounting evidence that motor learning and control are not a process
of accretion but depend on patterning of inhibition in motor neurons. Elect
rom yo graphic studies in health and disease indicate that the acquisition of
skills occurs through selective inhibition of unnecessary muscular activity
rather than the activation of additional motor units.

As noted in other sections, almost all resting muscles throughout the bodies
of adults, both human and general mammalian, fall to a level of neuromuscular
silence. This total relaxation occurs unless the muscles are needed to be
tensed for a posture or movement or unless the person suffers from
uncontrolled apprehension or neurotic and neurological disturbances. With
this in mind, MacConaill and I (1969) enunciated the principle that there
should be a minimal expenditure of energy consistent with the ends to-be
achieved. This self-evident principle embraces two laws:

1. The Law of minimal spurt action – no more muscle fibres are brought into
action than are both necessary and sufficient to stabilize or move a bone
against gravity or other resistant forces, and none are used insofar as
gravity can supply the motive force for movement;

2. The law of minimal shunt action – only such muscle fibres are used as are
necessary and sufficient to ensure that the transarticular force directed
toward a joint is equal to the weight of the stabilized or moving part
together with such additional centripetal force as may be required because of
the velocity of that part when it is in motion.

Control of Movement

The neurophysiological literature is encrusted with the barnacle that “the
brain does not order a muscle to contract but orders movement of a joint.”
Recently, Phillips (1975) made a concerted effort to dispel this myth which
has stultified research on the learning of motor behavior. In fact, the best
movements are performed with an economy of muscular movements dependent upon
impulses being sent to only one or two muscles or even a localized area of
one muscle. What the brain has “learned” is patterning of these actions by
means of a progressive inhibition of the inefficient mass responses that were
natural to the child.

Some movements are extremely economical in the well-trained person. For
example, most of us are fairly well-trained in turning our hand over through
pronation and supination of the forearm; in this learned act our nervous
system calls upon only one or two muscles to produce the movements.
Fortunately, the normally plastic human brain quickly adapts to shifts of
function; otherwise tendon-transfer operations would be useless.

Physiologists and even some kinesiologists do not appreciate that each and
every muscle has several (sometime many) component parts which are recruited
in different functions at different times. Many investigations with
intramuscular electrodes in many thousands of muscles lead me to believe that
this local activity is patterned by progressive inhibition of motoneurons
until an acceptable performance is achieved. Our studies of elbow flexion and
thenar muscles, which show the interplay of motor unit functions dedicated to
specific postures and movements, clearly indicate that the positioning of
limbs is predetermined by sets of motor units which are permitted to act for
that position. The same appears to be true for welllearned movements.

I believe that a mosaic of spinal motoneurons is dedicated to the learned
response of a specific posture or movement of a joint through space. The
ultimately superior performance of a skilled movement depends on the
reproducibility of the ideal, an economically spare mosaic of motoneuronal
activity (Basmajian, 1977).

With different objects in mind, Payton et al. (1976) put it slightly
differently: they found no statistically significant difference between
pre-learning and post-learning of a simple task in regard in the EMG
activity, movement time and range of movement. They concluded that all the
prime movers that are going to contribute to the final learned act take part
even before the skill is learned; thus as motor learning takes place, there
is a marked reduction of activity only in the auxiliary muscles while the
prime movers neither gain nor lose (Payton et al., 1976).

When I first described the precision possible in controlling single
motorneutons, I believed (as did many others) that this type of control was
the building block of motor performance. Given visual and auditory cues
through electronic amplification and feedback, subjects could be quickly
trained to consciously activate single motoneurons with great precision. But
conscious activation of single motoneurons in the single-motor-unit training
paradigm depends on the same principles as the learning of any other novel
task, that is, progressive (and sometimes rapid) inhibition of the
motoneuronal activity that adds no useful function in producing a desired
motor response (Smith, Basmajian & Vanderstoep, 1974).

Training, whether it is the unconscious process of the child learning simple
social motor responses or the preparation for a specific skilled act (such as
those of a musician or athlete), is a progressive inhibition of many muscles
that flood into play when one first attempts to produce the required
response. The athlete’s continued drill to perfect a skilled movement
exhibits a large element of progressively more successful repression of
undesired contractions. Among others, O’Connell (1958) has demonstrated this
convincingly. A group of physical education majors required to perform “head
stands” while being studied electromyographically could be graded as to their
actual experience by the amount of overflow of undesired activity in muscles
that were only casually related to the exercise.

The young animal has enormous amounts of overactivity and reactive
contractions in muscles that are serving no directed purpose in producing the
desired movement or posture. Among others, Janda & Stara (1965) demonstrated
in children a high incidence of mass responses in a predictable pattern even
in muscles that are far removed from those which produce a required movement.
As children mature, this overactivity disappears and is absent in normal
adults. It reappears in adults under psychological stress, but people can be
trained to inhibit it to varying degrees. In patients with diseases and
injuries of the central nervous system, the normal inhibition pattern is
lacking; then mass responses from local interoceptive and exteroceptive
bombardments of the motoneurons result in an exaggerated mass response
described as spasticity.

The Moscow investigators led by Yusevich (see, for example, Okhnyanskaya et
al., 1974) attribute normal motor hyperactivity in infants and children to
synkinesis or synergies of suprasegmental origin, pointing out the fact that
they normally disappear by the time a person is adult.

The patterning of the inhibition would seem to come in part from obscure
processes in diffuse centers of the cerebral cortex; since inhibition is a
central feature, one must consider the possibility that brainstem centres and
perhaps the cerebellum are critically important in the imprinting of the
learning. It is too simplistic to consider a schema where an impulse is
started at a tiny area of the cerebral cortex and is thence passed directly
along a facilitatory path to a desired set of motoneurons. The motor learning
process probably employs a neuronal network with the “main” pathway for motor
activation being almost a small part of the whole.

Proprioceptive Effects

Gellhorn (1960) has described electromyographic studies which disclose the
effects of central proprioceptive influences on movements elicited by the
electrical stimulation of the motor cortex. Movements so produced are
strongly reinforced by proprioceptive impulses which also determine, by and
large, the type of movement that results. He showed, for example, that the
contraction of triceps and flexor carpi muscles when stimulated through the
cerebral cortex is greater if the elbow is at 45 degs than if it is at 110
degs or 160 degs. Furthermore, a cortical stimulus that is below threshold
when a muscle is slack may become effective when the muscle is put on the
stretch…………

END OF SERIES

Mel Siff

————————–

PART 1

Coordination, Antagonists and Synergy

One often sees the owlish statement that the brain does not order a muscle to
contract but orders movements of a joint. As clever as it sounds, this
statement is only true in part. Under certain circumstances the movement is,
in fact, the result of contraction in only one or two muscles. This we have
shown repeatedly by our various studies.

For example, pronation of the forearm is usually produced by one muscle alone
- pronator quadratus – unless added resistance is offered to the movement;
then, more muscles are called upon (Basmajian and Travill, 1961). My
colleagues and I have found this to be true in elbow flexion too, where
brachialis alone often suffices, and in other movements. Therefore, it is
wrong and misleading to believe that nature always calls upon groups of
muscles to produce simple movements. On the other hand, there are complex
movements (such as rotation of the scapula on the chest wall during elevation
of the limb) which obviously call upon groups of cooperating muscles (see p.
191).

Antagonists, too, have been misrepresented in the normal functioning of
muscles. The unfortunate and incorrect impression has been fostered by many
physiologists and even more anatomists that during the movement of a joint in
one direction muscles that move it in the opposite direction show some sort
of antagonism.

The truth of the matter, first proposed by Sherrington as “reciprocal
inhibition” is that the so-called antagonist relaxes completely (Travill &
Basmajian, 1961) except perhaps with one exception-at the end of a whip-like
motion of a hinge Joint. Here, apparently, the short sharp burst of activity
in some antagonists occurs to prevent damage to the joint; this was first
implied by Barnett and Harding (1955) and later supported by our own work
(Basmajian, 1957, 1959) (see Fig 4.9) and that of Bierman & Ralston (1965).
These investigators at the Biomechanics Laboratory of the University of
California in San Francisco recorded the EMG potentials in rectus femoris and
biceps femoris while subjects had their knee moved passively and when they
actively performed flexion and extension of the knee (Fig 4.10).

When they turned their attention to what the antagonists are doing during
active movements, they found that toward the end of such a movement,
potentials occurred in the antagonist (Fig 4.10). They did not ascribe this
to a stretch reflex as such, but they did consider the action as a regulatory
one acting in proper timing through central feedback loops. They would agree
that this brief terminal activity in antagonists serves a protective function
to “avoid damage which such a force [in the prime mover] could produce.”

Equally concerned with antagonist function are a group of French workers
(Goubel & Bouisset, 1967; Bouisset & Goubel, 1967; Lestienne & Bouisset,
1967; Goubel, Lestienne & Bouisset, 1968; Pertuzon & Lestienne, 1968;
Lestienne & Goubel, 1969; Bertoz & Metral, 1970).

In summary, they find a pattern of responses in which low unsustained
activity occurs in antagonists at low speeds of voluntary flexion and
extension of the elbow; at middle speeds there are successive activities in
the agonist and antagonist, including common electrical silence; at high
speed of flexion and extension there was partial overlapping of phasic
activities in agonist and antagonist. They focus their attention not on the
speed per se, but on the tension in the agonist and draw attention to the
reflex activity during muscular recruitment especially in extension movements.

Patton & Mortensen (1970) also have studied the mechanical factors which
affect agonist-antagonist interaction at the elbow joint. Extension of the
elbow always causes more cocontraction of antagonists than does flexion.
Increasing load increases cocontraction during both flexion and extension.
Skilled subjects have reduced cocontraction. When voluntary cocontraction
preceded a movement, there was marked reciprocal inhibition in the antagonist
during an active movement. These findings assume an intermediate position in
the continuing dialogue concerning the existence of cocontraction and
probably come close to the truth in this complicated area of muscle
physiology.

Holt et al. (1969) found a reflex effect of antagonist contraction and head
position on the responses of the agonist muscle which, for example, was
augmented by prior strong contractions of the antagonist. Cohen (1970) goes
even further in demonstrating that what is being done by the opposite limb
affects the EMG of rhythmic movements in the studied limb in a varying
manner. Generally it is agreed that voluntary slow movements in normal man
do not cause stretch-reflex cocontraction of the antagonists, but rather,
when it occurs, it occurs with rapid movements (Patton and Mortensen, 197 1;
Angel, 1975; Hallett et al., 1975; de Sousa et al., 1975; Morin et al., 1976;
Jacobs, 1976).

In effect, cocontraction of antagonists occurs to greater or lesser degree in
some movements, in some people, at some ages and under some circumstances.
With increasing age and training and at slower speeds, it tends to reduce to
nil. When it occurs, it sometimes is due to reflexes and sometimes appears to
be extravagant overflow.

The oft-used term “antagonist” should be replaced, in my opinion, by the
companion word “synergist”. When “antagonists” act they really act just to
prevent undesired movement, and their only important application as
antagonists is in their acting against gravity. Because nervous coordination
is so fine, there is no need for muscles to act in antagonism to others
simultaneously. The rule, then, is for the “antagonist” to relax.

Wiesendanger et al. (1967) in a study on reaction-time at the elbow found
that the muscular activity of a volitional reaction movement was short and
usually showed reciprocal activity of the antagonist; in some cases there was
reciprocal inhibition. Triceps activity in the position of the antagonist
always was less marked than that of biceps as the antagonist.

One finds that the activity of muscles in the position of antagonists during
a movement is a sign of nervous abnormality (e.g., the spasticity of
paraplegia) or, in the case of fine movements requiring training, a sign of
ineptitude. Indeed, the athlete’s continued drill to perfect a skilled
movement exhibits a large element of progressively more successful repression
of undesired contractions. O’Connell has demonstrated this convincingly in
her unpublished EMG studies at Boston University. A group of physical
education majors required to perform “head stands” while being studied
electromyographically could be graded as to their actual experience by the
amount of overflow of undesired activity in muscles that were only casually
related to the exercise. (See also section under “Training,” p. 105.)

Hirschberg & Dacso (1953), on the other hand, would seem to disagree with my
opinion. In an early EMG study, they appeared to conclude that simultaneous
activity of agonists and antagonists is a common phenomenon, but
unconsciously they come closer to my own position with their almost
parenthetical statement that such activity is seen in ” . . . strenuous
motion or in tense experimental subjects.”

Furthermore, Lundervold’s extensive experiments (1951) referred to on page
84, appear also to contradict Hirschberg and Dacso. Miles, Mortensen &
Sullivan (1947) in an early study stated that potentials could be recorded
from topographical antagonists, but the circumstances of their experiments
were somewhat too specialized to make so sweeping a generalization today.

Dempster & Finerty (1947) in an early EMG study set out to determine the
influence of varying gravitational effects on the large number of muscles
that may cross one joint-specifically, for 15 muscles that cross the wrist
held in a horizontal position. Furthermore, they were concerned with the
influence of torques or moments of force at the pivot. Finally, they employed
rather esoteric calculations (of no interest to the general reader) to
explain their findings.

For static support, the torque at the wrist produced by gravity must be
balanced neatly by the torque of those muscles which are in an advantageous
position, i.e., crossing above the horizontal level of the wrist pivot.
However, Dempster & Finerty found that synergists were active as well and
these were obviously not in a position to exert an antigravity torque. This
activity in the synergists or stabilizers was about half that in the
antigravity or main group (which they referred to as “agonists”). Muscles
that were below the wrist pivot and therefore in no position to act against
gravity showed activity too; this was one quarter as much as that in the
agonists, according to Dempster and Finerty. They then unfortunately dubbed
these muscles “antagonists.” If indeed any true activity of this nature
occurs – and refined EMG techniques seem to deny it – the activity is not a
matter of antagonism to the agonists, for gravity does not require help.
Rather it must be due to secondary synergic and postural functions of the
muscles of the wrist and fingers.

By rotating the horizontally held wrist (supination and pronation) different
groups of muscles were brought to a superior position. Here they assumed the
burden of the gravity torque; others were placed in less advantageous
positions in which, however, they continued activity as synergists, but with
reduced intensity.

Using as a model the act of prehension of the hand, Livingston, Paillard,
Tournay & Fessard (1951) of Paris demonstrated the plasticity of synergists
during voluntary movements. Thus, the interplay of activity of the flexors of
the fingers and of the thumb with those of the forearm was shown during
normal activity to vary significantly depending on the information of
peripheral origin, e.g., position of joints, angle at which the synergists
act, the nature of objects grasped, etc. More recently, Weathersby (1966)
reported that there is considerable synergistic activity in certain forearm
flexors during ordinary movements of the thumb.

Missiuro & Kozlowski (1961) illustrated the ultimate plasticity of
synergists. In a study of rabbit muscle transplanted to the place of its
“antagonist,” they found the transplant took on the function of the
anatomical and functional “antagonist.” Obviously the nervous system is able
to adapt readily to such changes.

We know that many contractions of any one particular muscle may be
accompanied by synergistic activity in other muscles to steady the adjacent
joints. Gellhorn (1947) thus demonstrated the role of far-removed synergists
in movements of the wrist. While flexor carpi radialis was activated in very
slight flexion of the wrist, triceps brachii became active with the
increasing effort in the prime movers (the extensors of the wrist remaining
relaxed meanwhile). Only with very strong static flexion of the wrist would
activity-and that only occasionally-appear in the antagonists.

Gellhorn found three stages of recruitment of synergists, depending on the
stress:

1. In the first, the activity is confined to the agonist at the wrist.

2. In the second, action potentials appear in the agonist and a muscle of the
upper arm according to the following rule: biceps muscle becomes active with
flexion of the supine wrist and with extension of the prone wrist, whereas
the triceps becomes active with the reverse conditions (i.e., extension of
the supine and flexion of the prone wrist).

3. In the third stage, with excessive straining, some activity appears in
antagonists as well but it is never equal to the activity of the prime mover
and of the synergists.

The exact significance of Gellhorn’s patterns of recruitment are obscure but
may be of fundamental importance. In any case, they stress the concept that
“antagonists” are really only synergists.

Along the same line, experiments were done by Sills & Olsen (1958) in the
hope of demonstrating activity in the unexercised arm while the opposite arm
was exercised by normal subjects. There was, in these normal persons, little
if any such “spread” to the opposite limb musculature unless extremely
powerful movements were made. (See also our similar findings, p 257 and the
section under “Effects of Cross Exercise.”) Their conclusions effectively
demolish the basis for certain contralateral exercises that have been
advocated for developing muscles, especially for an injured limb too painful
or too immobilized to be moved itself. [Note the importance of this finding
for anyone who believes that modest training of an uninjured limb offers
significant "cross training" of the injured limb. Mel Siff]

Novel electromyographic studies of abnormalities in the plantar reflex
response have fallen neatly into this general concept, too. The “up-going
toe” of upper motor neuron lesions has been found by Landau & Clare (1959) to
be the result of an exuberant overflow of activity to the great toe
extensors; even though the flexors continue to contract, the extensors
overpower them (Fig 4. 11).

In the very young normal child and especially premature babies, the same sort
of phenomenon was demonstrated by Fenyes, Gergely & Toth (1960) with “flexion
reflexes” observed electromyographically. Both agonists and antagonists
contract in what they term a “co-reflex phenomenon.” The same is true in
spastic children with cerebral palsy during locomotion (Kenney and Heaberlin,
1962; Feldkamp et al., 1976). There is an abrupt onset of the agonists and a
rapid response of the antagonists with sufficient power to be obstructive.
Under considerable resistance, normal children give the same response of
exuberant (but wasteful or useless) overactivity of antagonists.

Rao (1965) has shown by EMG that, contrary to general opinion, *reciprocal
inhibition* does not occur with the ankle jerk reflex. But he confirms its
validity when voluntary actions are performed. Motor units in tibialis
anterior act as briskly as those in gastrocnemius when the tendon of Achilles
is tapped. He explains this reversal of normal inhibition in the
“antagonist” as part of the positive supporting reaction (PSR) in which the
principle of reciprocal innervation is not applicable. [Note that I have
discussed the PSR in previous posts -- it is also discussed in
"Supertraining" and in Guyton's "Textbook of Medical Physiology". Mel Siff]

Agonist-antagonist interactions have been widely studied in the Soviet Union
(Baranov-Krylov, 1969; Person, 1965, 1969; Kozmyan, 1965) from the viewpoint
of central motor controls. Person’s work has been the most thorough and
extensive. She showed that relaxation and tensing of an antagonist is learned
and can be trained to increase or decrease. Kozmyan revealed that the latency
of antagonist inhibition and agonist excitation varied most frequently during
movements responding to non-rhythmic stimulation. With rhythmic repetitive
movements, the latencies as well as dissociation of reciprocal inhibition
diminished. Thus, inhibition of the antagonist muscles were to be expected in
rhythmic activity with any element of supraspinal control or learning.

Bratanova (1966) of Sofia found essentially the same thing with rhythmic
activity of biceps and triceps brachii. In the “training” stages,
coactivation was common apparently as the result of excitation radiation but
later it was extinguished, Gatev (1967) also of Bulgaria, but working
independently, found that as infants mature the excessive cocontraction
typical of childhood diminishes progressively. This appears again to be the
result of learned or patterned supraspinal control eliminating “undesirable”
or “useless” cocontraction.

In a study of reflex reactivity of biceps and triceps in children at
different developmental stages, the Polish investigator, Missiuro (1963),
found a spread of electrical activity to other muscles of the same extremity.
With increasing age this decreases so that in adult life it is minimal.

Vladimir Janda (1966, personal communication) of Prague has shown a
significant linkage of EMG activity in certain separate muscle groups,
especially in children. During a strong effort in a particular muscle, he
finds a high incidence of activity (in a predictable pattern) in far removed
muscles of the same limb and trunk musculature.

Hellebrandt and her colleagues have convincingly drawn our attention to a
patterned spread of gross muscular activity to wider and wider areas during
forceful effort or exercise stress (Hellebrandt & Waterland, 1962a, b;
Waterland & Hellebrandt, 1964; Waterland & Munson, 1964a, b). Employing the
Fukuda Stepping Test, Waterland & Shambes (t970) showed that the
head-shoulder linkage of muscular activity was the key to body displacement
and rotational directions when allowed to respond spontaneously.

In insects, simultaneous EMG activity in antagonist muscles has been reported
(Hoyle, 1964, in grasshoppers; Wilson, 1965, in cockroaches and locusts).
These have no simple relationship and probably do not bear on the problem of
synergy in mammals. The only possible connection is in the findings of
Stuart, Eldred, Hemingway & Kawamura (1963) who showed that in shivering
there are synchronous contractions in antagonistic muscles of mammals….

END OF PART 1

————————–

Mel Siff

Science indeed has shown that each part of the cerebral cortex has a
different job to do, and when one region is attending to a given task, it can
interferes with the ability of its nearest neighbors to perform their
relevant tasks at a given time. I have already pointed out that this type
of “neurological confusion” is not caused just by using tasks that are not
specifically the same or very similar to the actions of one’s specific sport,
but that even greater confusion may be cause by tasks that are very similar
in nature.

I promised to offer some practical tutorials to let you experience firsthand
some tasks which can cause great neuromuscular confusion, so here we go with
some excellent examples from Discover journal at:

http://www.discover.com/

Take, for example, the motor cortex, where voluntary movements of your limbs
originate. Neurons that control your right arm and leg are located near each
other within the left “precentral gyrus” of the brain, while nerve cells that
command arm and leg muscles on the left side reside in the right precentral
gyrus.

Now, try a few experiments to see how cooperative these different regions of
the brain are.

EXPERIMENT 1: Ipsilateral Arm-Leg Interaction

Sit in a comfortable chair and hold out your RIGHT ARM, palm down, then
polish an imaginary piece of furniture, using a continuous counterclockwise
motion. As soon as you have a good rhythm going, start your RIGHT FOOT
circling counterclockwise in synchrony with the motion of your arm. After
mastering this coordinated effort, REVERSE the rotation direction of your
foot while keeping your arm on its original counterclockwise path.

Pretty difficult to do, isn’t it? When the neurons controlling your arm and
the nearby leg neurons work together, they don’t disturb each other much,
just as someone playing a radio right next to you doesn’t disturb your
equilibrium if it’s tuned to a station you like. But if the person next to
you is playing punk rock and you like country, one of you has to move.

EXPERIMENT 2: Contralateral Arm-Leg Interaction

If your right arm has not become too fatigued by the above exercise, keep it
polishing that nonexistent surface and repeat Experiment 1. This time,
however, use your LEFT foot.

Circling your RIGHT ARM and LEFT FOOT in opposite directions should be very
simple. That is because the control centres for the two limbs inhabit
opposite sides of the brain and don’t interfere much with each other, even
when executing conflicting motor tasks (i.e. ones that are not similar or
specifically the same).

EXPERIMENT 3: Head-Limb Interaction

Don’t stop polishing with that right arm just yet. To polish the imaginary
table to perfection, point your face to the floor and trace an imaginary
circle on the floor with your NOSE, first counterclockwise, then clockwise.

Now give your right arm a well-deserved break and repeat the nose-tracing
procedure while your LEFT ARM takes up the polishing chore. The movement of
your dominant hand should interfere more with the nose-tracing performance
than the motion of your non-dominant hand, even though the neck muscles that
move your nose in an arc are thought to be controlled equally by both sides
of the brain. Neuroscientists haven’t determined precisely why this happens,
but one plausible explanation is that dominant regions of the brain (the left
motor cortex, if you’re right-handed) take up more neuronal resources than
non-dominant areas and therefore are more inconsiderate neural neighbors.

Researchers examining these and other intra-brain interference effects hope
that a better understanding of the relationships between neighbouring regions
of gray matter will provide important insights into how the brain creates a
whole which is greater than the sum of its parts.

—————-

These basic experiments tell us more about how much more we need to learn
about the nature of “specificity” and intertask transfer of learning.
Other Supertrainers might like to share similar basic experiments which yield
us some insights into the nature of neural programming – over to you!

Mel Siff

<I am currently writing a research paper and am wondering if anyone has any
literature or references regarding the periodization of mental skills
training (psychological skills periodization). Any input would be greatly
appreciated.

*** In writing any research paper, it is vital to introduce the study by
providing some of the salient background, history, science and definitions.
In the case of your project, the entire concept of exactly what is meant by
“periodisation” needs to be summarised first in the “Introduction”.

Let’s begin with a point of technical pedantry. While it is possible to
refer to the periodisation of physical skills of all types, it is more
appropriate to refer to the organisation and programming of mental or
psychological drills or skills. This is because periodisation was conceived
as a method of long-term planning of sports training based upon fluctuations
in one’s physiological state, as I described in Ch 6 of “Supertraining”
(which also offers a great deal of information on many different types and
models of “periodisation” and “planning”).

Nobody has shown that cognitive processes follow some naturally varying
physiological (or psychophysiological) scheme, even though variations in
certain psychophysiological processes such as reaction time, arousal and
kinaesthetic sensitivity have been observed (e.g. see Fogel in
“Biotechnology” and other texts on ergonomics). However, these are not
cognitive in nature. Thus, depending on one’s individual abilities,
capabilities, training history and level of overall fatigue, one can execute
as many cognitive mental drills as is desired, presuming that the necessary
time is available to master them.

A fundamental characteristic of all periodisation models is the planning of
training to ensure that certain peaks in performance are achieved in specific
major competitions. Since mental skills do not change in a comparable way as
do physical quantities such as strength, power, speed and endurance, they
cannot accurately be periodised. That, of course, is why you will struggle
to find any valid research information on that topic. Before you can even
think of writing about mental periodisation, you need to find research which
validates any hypothesis that mental events fluctuate and reach peaks over a
prolonged period.

Maybe you would care to elaborate on the objectives and scope of your
intended project, so that some of us can better guide you in your labours.

Dr Mel C Siff

Previous investigations have reported training-induced increases in EMG
amplitude after concentric isokinetic training. The results of the present
study and those of Komi and Buskirk, however, indicated that concentric
isokinetic strength training did not result in significantly greater EMG
amplitude values. The reason for the discrepancies between the results of the
present investigation and those of others examining EMG responses to
concentric isokinetic training may be a function of differences in the
procedures used to analyze and quantify the EMG signal.

The lack of a significant change in EMG amplitude in the present study (Fig 3
) indicated that increased PT in the trained limb was not associated with
increased neural drive to the vastus lateralis. The reason for the increase
in PT in the absence of increased EMG activity is unknown; however, previous
investigations have provided plausible hypotheses:

(a) changes in neural drive to the other muscles or muscle groups involved in
the performance of leg extension, and

(b) muscle adaptations independent of EMG activity.

Changes in Neural Drive to Other Muscles or Muscle Groups

When performing leg extensions, many muscles in addition to the vastus
lateralis are involved. These muscles include (a) muscles of the stabilizing
muscle groups, (b) muscles of the antagonistic muscle groups, and/or (c) the
other muscles of the quadriceps femoris. Stabilizing muscle groups involved
in leg extension, such as the back, abdominal, shoulder, and arm muscles, are
essential for maximum peak torque production because they stabilize the upper
body and prevent flexion at the trunk .

Rutherford and Jones have suggested that the ability of the quadriceps
femoris to generate torque may be limited by the lack of coordinated
activation of these muscles. These investigators reported that an improvement
in PT of the leg extensors after isometric training did not occur until new
neural pathways that coordinated the actions of stabilizing muscle groups
were established. It was suggested that during muscular training,
coordination of the muscles that aid in the performance of leg extension are
involved in a learning process and that more complex movements may require a
longer learning process. Thus, it is possible that the training in the
present study increased the coordination of the stabilizing muscle groups,
which resulted in increased PT production.

Another group of muscles that may “learn” to aid in the expression of leg
extension torque are the muscles that are antagonistic to the quadriceps
femoris. Recent evidence indicates that the levels of antagonistic
cocontraction are modifiable with training. Carolan and Cafarelli measured
the EMG activity in the vastus lateralis and hamstrings after isometric
training of the leg extensors and reported that there was no change in vastus
lateralis EMG activity, but there was a decrease in hamstring EMG activity. A
training-induced decrease in hamstring coactivation in the present
investigation may have provided less opposing torque to the contracting
quadriceps femoris and resulted in increased PT production.

This hypothesis is not in accordance with the findings of Tyler and Hutton ,
who have suggested that since antagonistic coactivation reduces the neural
drive to the agonists through reciprocal inhibition, a training-induced
reduction in antagonistic coactivation would allow greater activation of
agonists. If the suggestion of Tyler and Hutton is correct, a
training-induced reduction in hamstring coactivation in the present study
would have resulted in greater activation and, therefore, greater EMG
amplitude in the vastus lateralis.

Measurements of EMG activity in the present study were made only for the
vastus lateralis. It is possible that there may have been changes in neural
drive to the other muscles of the quadriceps femoris, which could have
resulted in an increased ability to produce torque. Narici et al attributed
differences in the hypertrophic responses of the individual muscles of the
quadriceps femoris to differences in muscle activation after concentric
isokinetic training at a velocity of 120° per sec. These authors observed
preferential hypertrophy and greater EMG activity in the vastus medialis and
rectus femoris when compared with the vastus lateralis. Thus, there may have
been increased neural activation of the other muscles of the quadriceps
femoris, which resulted in preferential hypertrophy and increased PT
production.

Muscular Adaptations Independent of EMG Activity in the Trained Limb

Hypertrophic Factors:

As individual muscle fibers enlarge, their positions under surface electrodes
are altered. Therefore, it is possible that hypertrophy alone could have
influenced the EMG signal. Garfinkel and Cafarelli, however, hypothesized
that if electrode placement is constant, then the electrodes are detecting
EMG over the same area of muscle membrane and, therefore, hypertrophy would
not alter the EMG.

If the hypothesis of Garfinkel and Cafarelli is correct, hypertrophy of the
vastus lateralis could have occurred in the present study without directly
influencing the amplitude of the EMG signal. In addition to the vastus
lateralis, other muscles involved in leg extension (i.e., stabilizing muscle
groups, rectus femoris, vastus intermedius, vastus medialis, and other
muscles) may have hypertrophied as well.

It is possible that architectural factors that cause or are a result of
hypertrophy of these muscles, yet are independent of muscle activation, may
have contributed to PT production. Such factors include (a) increased
contractile protein content, (b) increased pennation angles, and/or (c)
changes in tendinous attachments.

Garfinkel and Cafarelli examined the EMG responses of the vastus lateralis to
isometric training and reported that there was no change in the EMG activity
but a 28% increase in PT production. It was proposed that the increase in
contractile proteins that accompanies muscle training could result in greater
PT simply because each hypertrophied muscle cell is able to form a greater
number of cross-bridges for any level of activation.

Another architectural factor that is important in the production of PT, yet
is independent of EMG activity, is the pennation angle. Recent studies have
shown that trained or hypertrophied muscles have pennation angles greater
than those in untrained or atrophied muscles. It has been suggested that an
increase in pennation angles would allow attachment of a greater amount of
contractile tissue to the tendon, which may result in increased PT
production.

It is also possible that the increased collagen synthesis that has been
observed during training-induced muscular hypertrophy may alter connective
tissue attachments. Jones and Rutherford have suggested that if new
attachments were made intermediately between sarcomeres in series and the
tendon, the tension would not only be transmitted through sarcomeres in
series, but also through intermediate sarcomeres, thereby, increasing torque
production. Thus, it is possible that muscle hypertrophy, either in the
vastus lateralis or other muscles involved in leg extension, occurred as a
result of the maximal isokinetic training and resulted in increased PT
production that was independent of EMG activity.

Nonhypertrophic Factors

Previous investigations have reported that there may be qualitative changes
in muscle fiber protein expression (i.e., fast fiber type conversions from
Type IIb to Type IIa) as a result of resistance training. Although it is not
known how these changes may affect strength, it is possible that the
intramuscular remodeling could contribute to strength gains in the absence of
changes in the EMG….

———————-

Mel Siff

This issue is of central importance in all strength training, because
increase in strength classically is recognised to be the result of:

(a) increased muscle mass (or cross-sectional area),
(b) increased neural drive, or…
(c) a combination of both of the above processes.

The matter of increased neural drive is regarded to be of special importance
during the early stages of training or retraining (after a prolonged
lay-off), because significant increases in hypertrophy do not usually occur
during such a stage of training, although increases in strength are very
common.

If we examine (a), this suggests, if the strength increase is not accompanied
by significant increases in electrical activity, that the same amount of
neural drive is able to activate a larger amount of muscle tissue to produce
larger muscle force.

In the case of (b), this also suggests two possible mechanisms, namely:

- if the strength increase IS NOT accompanied by a significant increase in
electrical activity, then the same amount of neural drive is able to activate
a larger amount of muscle tissue to produce larger muscle force. This, of
course, reflects an increase in efficiency or “quality” of activation.

- if the strength increase IS accompanied by significant increases in
electrical activity, then an increase in neural drive has increased the
number or frequency of muscle fibres becoming involved in the action. This
process does not reflect an increase in efficiency of activation. Instead it
is a matter of increase due to “quantity” of activity.

In addition, as I mentioned in “Supertraining” (2000, p 33), maximum strength
is produced by an optimum, not a maximal, frequency of nerve firing.

In the case of the article below, it would appear that the results reflect an
increased efficiency or “quality” of neural activation, rather than increased
“quantity” of activation. This, of course, is something which is fundamental
to what is known as “optimisation”, as opposed to maximisation in engineering
or production terms. Thus, the same or less electrical activity of a muscle
is not necessarily a sign of stagnation; it can also reflect greater
efficiency or optimisation of what you already have present. So, “less” may
be better, whereas “more” may not be better.

These conclusions are exceptionally important in strength and power training.
If only they would be more widely appreciated by coaches such as those who
work in American football or rugby, because the belief that bigger is better
and stronger is rife in such circles. More hypertrophy does not necessarily
mean greater strength, because, as I stated in “Supertraining” (2000, p20):

<Optimisation of force, torque, speed and power or the production of ‘just
the right amount at the right time’ of these motor abilities sometimes seems
to be forgotten, especially in the so-called strength, heavy or contact
sports. All too often, the solution to most performance problems in such
sports seems to be a philosophy of “the greater the strength and the greater
the muscle hypertrophy, the better”, despite the fact that one constantly
witnesses exceptional performances being achieved in these sports by lighter
and less strong individuals.>

———————

The Effect of Concentric Isokinetic Strength Training of the Quadriceps
Femoris on Electromyography and Muscle Strength in the Trained and Untrained
Limb

Evetovich TK, Housh TJ, Housh DJ, Johnson GO, Smith DB & Ebersole KT

J of Strength & Conditioning Research: Vol 15, No 4, pp. 439-445

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the present investigation was to examine the effects of
unilateral concentric isokinetic leg extension training on peak torque (PT)
and electromyographic (EMG) responses in the trained and untrained limbs.
Twenty adult men were randomly assigned to a training or control group. The
TRN group performed 6 sets of 10 leg extensions 3 days per week for 12 weeks
at a velocity of 90°·per sec. All subjects were tested every 4 weeks for PT
and EMG responses of both legs at a velocity of 90° per sec. The 3-way mixed
factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated a significant increase in PT
over the 12 weeks in both the trained and untrained limb for the TRN group
but no significant change in PT in either limb for the CTL group. The results
of the 3-way ANOVA for the EMG data indicated no significant change in EMG
amplitude in the trained or untrained limb for the TRN or CTL EMG may result
from hypertrophic factors and/or changes in the other muscles or muscle
groups involved in leg extension..

——————————

INTRODUCTION

It has been suggested that training-induced strength increases during the
first several weeks of a resistance training program in previously untrained
subjects are due, in part, to neural adaptations that allow for a greater
expression of strength. A number of investigations have attempted to identify
the physiologic mechanisms underlying these neural adaptations.

For example, Milner-Brown et al have reported more synchronous motor unit
impulses on electromyography (EMG) after isometric training when compared
with pretraining patterns. In addition, Rutherford and Jones suggested that
training establishes new neural pathways that increase the coordinated
activation of the muscle groups involved in a particular muscle action.

Furthermore, Carolan and Cafarelli proposed that reduced antagonistic
cocontraction of the hamstrings after isometric training of the leg extensors
may be responsible for the greater torque-producing capabilities of the
quadriceps femoris.

It has also been proposed that training elicits alterations in the excitatory
and/or inhibitory input, so that a greater inflow of impulses reaches the
motor neuron of the working muscle. Recent investigations have attempted to
determine whether training induces greater motor neuron activation by
monitoring EMG activity over the course of a resistance training program.

Some studies have indicated that EMG activity increases with training,
supporting the hypothesis of increased neural activation. Others, however,
have reported no such change. Thus, it remains controversial as to whether an
untrained subject is able to increase strength with training by increasing
the stimulatory input to a working muscle…….

Peak Torque:

The results of the present study indicated that the concentric isokinetic
training resulted in increased PT in the trained limb. The 15.5% increase in
PT across the 12-week training period (Fig 1) was consistent with the
findings of previous isokinetic training studies, which have reported
increases of 0.5-24%.

To Be Continued

Mel Siff

Let us ruminate for a moment from Noam Chomsky’s theory that all languages
are drawn from the same genetically established “deeper structures” of the
brain which explains why all humans can use language and do so in similar
structures if exposed to the appropriate learning situation in a given
society. What does this suggest for the learning of movement skills?

Before answering that question, let us return for a moment to an article whi
ch I wrote earlier today on “ballistics and language”, in which I discussed
Calvin’s theory that language may have emerged from similar brain structures
and processes that enable man to throw accurately. Let me now link that
speculation with the possibility that the brain may contain deeper structures
which provide the structural and functional foundation for any motor or
cognitive output. In the case of movement skills, beginning with the very
basics such as standing and ambulation, the environment entices and offers
the human the opportunity for producing specific skills via the use of these
“deeper structures”.

Thus, crawling, standing, walking and running emerge from the same basic
structural framework (“the hardware”) and, via constant experimentation and
practice, “write” into the neural circuitry the “software” which allows one
to execute many different skills efficiently. In this manner a power clean
or split clean may be seen to come from a similar program within the deeper
motor structures and, even if they are not identical or very similar to
jumping and running, they may offer some definite improvement in performance.

To offer some further insights in this regard, let us now turn to Calvin once
more, where he wrote in another book the following about learning to ride a
bicycle:

<http://www.williamcalvin.com/bk3/bk3day11.htm>

<….I suppose that transcendence is another name for sidesteps — Charles
Darwin’s “functional change in structural continuity” is most evident when
dealing with obvious structures such as feathers, but where it really comes
into its own is in behavior, involving structures that are hidden in complex
neuroanatomy. Our ability to ride a bicycle, for example, involves the
secondary use of neural machinery that was shaped by selection pressures for
things other than riding bicycles.

The pedalling is probably just the circuit governing two-legged walking,
temporarily modified within the range of possible strides. But the superb
balancing act probably comes from something like our underwater skills,
perhaps most extensively exposed to natural selection in an aquatic phase 6
million years ago. The combination of the two behavioral skills, walking and
balancing, yields a novel skill far more readily than the combination of two
digestive enzymes yields a new item available for the diet. Behavior easily
combines unlike elements. That’s why brains are such a powerful invention in
evolution….>

Whether this sort of speculation is on the right track or not, it serves as
useful stimulus for us to re-examine some of our notions about the learning
of skills and specificity in sport. Some of you might care to add some of
your own speculations on this topic.

Mel Siff

“The importance of ballistic activity to humankind recently has been shown to
extend far beyond the realms of
sport. Neurophysiologist, William Calvin, has proposed the fascinating
hypothesis that the brain’s planning of
ballistic movements may have played a major role in the development of
language, music and intelligence over the ages (‘Scientific American’, Oct
1994). He makes this proposal, since ballistic movements and language
processes involve some of the same regions of the brain, in particular those
associated with sequencing and planning.

In reaching this conclusion, he emphasizes that ballistic movements, unlike
cocontractive slower movements, require a great amount of planning and
problem solving. Slow movements may be corrected readily by ongoing feedback
information, but ballistic movements require the brain to determine every
detail of the action in advance by mentally planning the exact sequence of
neural activation for numerous individual muscles….”

For anyone who may be interested in reading more about Calvin’s theory, go to
the following web page:

———————–

A Stone’s Throw and its Launch Window: Timing Precision and its Implications
for Language and Hominid Brains

<http://www.williamcalvin.com/1980s/1983JTheoretBiol.htm>

William H Calvin

Did bigger brains for more precise throwing lead to language, much as
feathers for insulation may have set the stage for bird flight? Throwing
rocks even at stationary prey requires great precision in the timing of rock
release from an overarm throw, with the “launch window” narrowing eight-fold
when the throwing distance is doubled from a beginner’s throw. Paralleled
timing neurons can overcome the usual neural noise limitations via the law of
large numbers, suggesting that enhanced throwing skill could have produced a
strong selection pressure for any evolutionary trends that provided
additional timing neurons. This enhanced timing circuitry may have developed
secondary uses for language reception and production.

More articles on this same theme at:

< http://www.williamcalvin.com/1990s/1993Unitary.htm>

< http://www.williamcalvin.com/bk3/bk3day10.htm>

———————

Mel Siff

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Supertraining/

THE NEUROSCIENTIFIC CLAIMS

Among other things, Doman encourages parents to flick the lights off an on
after changing their infant’s diaper; to play an Institute-prepared tape that
includes loud, startling noises; and to prepare large printed flash cards for
reading, mathematics and hundreds of facts called ‘bits of intelligence’ that
somehow will subliminally be absorbed and adsorbed into the child from the
moment that the child can open its eyes.

How about this next one for early education?

For the Baby in the Womb -
Fetal Stimulation Using Math Dot Cards

“Take a moment to sit comfortably and center in your heart. Then speak
directly to your baby out loud. Tell her that you have Math Dot Cards to show
her. Ask the baby to use her ESP (clairvoyance) and to look at the cards
with you. Say the number of dots on the cards out loud and also try sending
the images to the baby mentally. If you don’t have this ability, by
practicing you may develop it. Go through as many cards as feels right to
you, as many cards as you sense the baby wants to see. Then move on to
addition, subtraction, multiplication and division.”

[At what age did Doman say functional vision begins? Maybe someone should
start teaching mathematics to one's sperms or ova even before mating takes
place! In this case, of course, one should teach them about multiplication
and division before all else, as is their nature. Mel Siff]

——-

Doman Proverb:

‘Our individual genetic potential is that of Leonardo da Vinci, Mozart,
Michelangelo, Edison and Einstein.’

Doman claims that up until the age of six, when brain growth slows, a child’s
intellectual and physical abilities will increase in direct proportion to
stimulation. Thus any child, given the proper stimuli, can become the next
Leonardo.

A summary of some Doman methods appears here:

<http://www.dlab.kiev.ua/edl/topic3-2.htm>

Doman Proverb:

‘Tiny kids would rather learn than eat.’

Doman claims that they’d rather learn Greek than baby talk, since higher
orders of complexity offer more stimulation. He makes the average adult seem
like a tree sloth in comparison with a two-year-old. ‘Every kid,’ he asserts,
‘learns better than every adult.’ Parents at the Better Baby Institute learn
to regard their mewling puking infants not so much with respect as awe. What
does Dr Benjamin Spock think of the better baby phenomenon? Like most
octogenarians he thinks the world has gone to hell; he argues that
competitive pressures are taking a psychic toll on most Americans, especially
young people, and blames ‘excessive competitiveness’ for the extraordinary
rise in teenage suicide over the last twenty years. Efforts to improve
‘infants’ cognitive abilities only prove to him that the scramble for success
has finally invaded the cradle.

So the question is now one of technique. How can parents create the kind of
brain growth that leads to expertise in reading, math, gymnastics, and the
like? Say you want to teach your six-month-old how to read. Write down a
series of short, familiar words in large, clear letters on flashcards. Show
the cards to your infant five or six times a day, simultaneously reciting the
word written on each one. With his extraordinary retentive powers he’ll soon
be learning hundreds of words, then phrases. The idea is to try to treat the
baby’s mind as a sponge. By the age of three, Doman guarantees, your child
will be entertaining himself and amazing your friends by reading ‘everything
in sight’. In like manner he can learn to perform staggering mathematical
stunts, or to distinguish and thoughtfully analyze the works of the Great
Masters or the classical composers.

————-

HOW TO TEACH YOUR BABY TO READ
By Glenn Doman

Extracts:

The trouble is that we have made the print [in most children's books] too
small. The underdeveloped visual pathway, from the eye through the visual
areas of the brain itself, of the one-, two- or three-year-old just can’t
differentiate one word from another. For the truth is that tiny children can
learn to read. It is safe to say that in particular very young children can
read, provided that, in the beginning, you make the print very big.

Throughout history there have been isolated but numerous cases of people who
have actually taught tiny children to read, and do other advance things, by
appreciating and encouraging them. It is very important to bear in mind that
these children had not been found to have high intelligence first and then
been given unusual opportunities to learn, but instead were simply children
whose parents decided to expose them to as much information as possible at a
very early age.

The process of brain growth matches the body growth but is on an even more
descending rate. This can be seen clearly when one appreciates the fact that
at birth the children’s brain makes up 11 percent of the total body weight,
while in adults it’s only 2.5 per cent.

When the child is five the growth of the brain is 80 per cent complete. When
he is eight the process of brain growth is virtually complete. During the
years between eight and eighty we have less brain growth than we had in the
single year (and slowest of the first eight years) between the ages of seven
and eight.

The question as to when to begin to teach a child to read is a fascinating
one. When is a child ready to learn anything?

Beyond two years of age, reading gets harder every year. If your child is
five, it will be easier than it would if he were six. Four is easier still
and three is even easier. One year of age or younger is the best time to
begin if you want to expend the least amount of time and energy in teaching
your child to read.

You can really begin the process of teaching your baby right from birth.
After all, we speak to the baby at birth – this grows the auditory pathway.
We can also provide language through the eye – this grows the visual pathway.

There are two vital points involved in teaching your child:

1. Your attitude and approach
2. The size and orderliness of the reading matter.

Learning is the greatest adventure of life. Learning is desirable, vital
unavoidable, and, above all, life’s greatest and most stimulating game. The
child believes this and will always believe this – unless we persuade him
that it isn’t true.

The cardinal rule is that both parent and child must JOYOUSLY approach
learning to read as the superb game that it is. The parent must never forget
that learning is life’s exciting game – it is NOT work. Learning is a reward;
it is not a punishment. Learning is a pleasure; it is not a chore; Learning
is a privilege; it is not denial…

————-

Doman Proverb:

Doman claims validity for his teaching methods based on his version of
WYSIWYG, but he calls it “WKIISBWDI … We know it is so because we do it”.
Many people question whether we SHOULD be doing it in the FIRST place.
Doman says that babies are learning all the time and can learn anything that
is presented to them, therefore, why not teach them skills that will give
them a edge, a head start, like arithmetic and reading; or why not teach them
how to recognize classical music and fine art, instead of nursery rhymes and
finger paint. He says that teaching children facts will exercise their brain
and make them capable of becoming more intelligent. “Wisdom, the tiny child
does not have; but the ability to take in raw facts – in prodigious amounts -
he does have, and the younger he is, right down to the early months of life,
the easier this is.”

*** On this basis why not teach the infant to learn Euclidean geometry,
relativity physics, quantum equations, electronic circuits, the Periodic
Table of elements, musical scores, computer languages, ancient Sumerian
writing, engineering equations and so forth so that these topics become
“child’s play” by the time the youngster reaches university? Learning the
raw facts such as trigonometric relations, the statement of all physical
laws, the appearance of the tensor equations from relativity physics, the
visual appearance of musical scores, engineering designs and the neatly boxed
layout of Mendeleyev’s Periodic Table should be done “right down to the early
months of life”, so that all of this becomes as easy as possible.

Doman makes many value judgments (prejudgements) about what needs to be
learned. It is his opinion that mathematical calculations and classical
music enhances “intelligence” more than nursery rhymes and finger painting,
but he confuses the content of the input with the importance of the
underlying neural processes which do not distinguish between the “quality” of
Mozart or the Beatles, even though different parts of the brain may become
active in different amounts when the senses input different sounds, sights
and touches. Even the early hopes for the so-called “Mozart Effect”
enhancing learning have not been found to be correct in the light of later
research.

—————–

*** Doman bases his methods on his interpretation of neural research,
claiming that learning is optimal when one is under 6 years of age and that
the brain completes its growth very early in life. Thus, there are
“critical” periods for learning. He also states that his approach to
learning encourages formation of more synapses and growth of neural tissue.
Researchers have shown that neural tissue, once thought never to regenerate
or grow from soon after birth, actually continues to grow throughout one’s
life and that there are no “critical” periods for learning. They have also
shown that increased numbers of synaptic connections or greater densities of
neural tissue do not necessarily correlate with increased performance or
greater efficiency. On the contrary, adults will have fewer synapses in the
same brain regions, as the body dispenses with superfluous connections and
processes, because this can increase efficiency markedly.

Doman implies that highly structured, methodical approaches to learning are
more important than the apparently trivial playing of “childish” games,
reciting of nursery rhymes, playing of chopsticks, drawing with crayons,
chasing the cat around the kitchen, etc. He forgets that children are
following the selfsame methods as top level scientists who are exploring the
world around them, using trial-and-error methods to solve problems, employing
many of the senses to probe the nature of things and to drift off into states
of intuitive reverie whence clues and solutions may arise.

CONCLUSION

What Doman says about learning in an atmosphere of joy and appreciation
facilitated by dedicated parents is more important than all of his theories
and claims. Given genuinely interested and interesting parents exposing
children to a wide variety of ideas, books, toys, reading activities, silent
activities, games, friends, outdoor events and other activities from a wide
array of subjects, be they regarded as “intelligent” enough or not, will
provide a highly nurturing atmosphere that will produce adults who are just
as intelligent and capable physically, mentally and socially as even the best
emerging from the Doman programmes – especially if all of this learning
allows for a great deal of personal exploration; loving discipline; respect
for fellow humans, animals and planet; and constant ethical upbringing
offered in a setting of good parental example.

If this is done, there is absolutely no need for any special “patterning”,
correctly timed input, superstimulation or any other Doman drills to produce
Mama’s special little genius and all the added anxiety and competition
associated with that quest. What Doman teaches has not been corroborated by
extensive scientific research or by extensive practical evidence – what other
ways remain to show that it really warrants its use? Nothing else
other than faith, belief, anecdotes and biased testimonials! Sound a bit too
much like TV commercials.

My next letter will address the use of Doman’s methods claiming to solve the
problems of mentally disadvantaged children.

Mel Siff

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Supertraining/

Some of you may have heard about Glenn Doman’s program intended to produce
child prodigies by means of what he and his institute colleagues deem to be
the best way of super-stimulating the baby (even before the child leaves the
womb) so as to become a physical superkid or mental genius. Some of you may
have heard of or read these books authored by Doman or Doman and associates:

How To Teach Your Baby To Read
How To Teach Your Baby To Be Physically Superb
How To Teach Your Baby Math
How To Multiply Your Baby’s Intelligence
How To Give Your Baby Encyclopedic Knowledge
What To Do About Your Brain-injured Child

Nothing really unusual sounding so far, except for the fact that no
independent long-term studies have ever shown that any of the Institute’s
claims have been achieved in practice to any greater extent than normal
development in conventional learning systems. Despite the fact that tens of
thousands of parents and children have been exposed to books, courses and
consultation promoting the Doman methods for more than 40 years, not ONE
internationally obvious genius in a single field of human endeavour has
emerged as an adult, not ONE physically superb child has won Olympic sporting
fame, not once has it been shown that children with brain impairment or
learning difficulties have been shown to make better progress with Doman
methods than other programs.

In short, it would appear that the vast majority of all these Doman produced
kids have gone onto become as anonymous and as ordinary as most other
children, even though their doting parents may think otherwise (don’t most
parents think THEIR kids are always better than others?)

THE RESULTS?

No peer-reviewed long-term studies by independent scientists have ever been
permitted by the Doman group, nor has the latter ever produced such
definitive studies themselves. Surveys of top scientists, doctors, lawyers,
engineers, musicians, leaders, athletes, artists, composers, authors and many
other professionals do not show the slightest evidence that Doman educated
children stand out or reach special pinnacles of achievement. Doman has
repeatedly been requested to produce such evidence and to counter claims that
his teaching methods are all based upon unproven science or misinterpretation
of neuroscience. The result? As barren as Mother Hubbard’s cupboard! If
Doman’s claims are even partially true, what has happened to all those little
geniuses? Why did they never seem to transmute their early toddling skills,
flash card recalls, musical instrumentalism, mathematical prowess and other
infantile signs of genius into something that became especially brilliant in
adulthood?

Several thousand new infant clients are trained every month throughout the
world with Doman methods, so that many parents and Doman teachers believe
that they have created a super-race of special little physical and mental
performers. If this is true, why are they more scarce than Loch Ness
monsters when they reach adulthood?

DISCOVERY CHANNEL DOCUMENTARY

During the past week on TV, the Discovery Channel (www.discovery.com) ran an
hour-long feature on Doman training, presenting the pros and cons of his
system, including interviews with some renowned neuroscientists, and
interviews with children 10-15 years after they had been through Doman
training. It was most revealing to note that one teenager could not even
recall one of the pictorial images displayed on flash cards to him daily as a
toddler for months by his mother. It was very obvious that this poor child
had gained little or nothing from his parents’ huge devotion of time, money
and disruption of other family activities.

It was rather pathetic to see other children brought in front of the camera
at the Doman institute to show their capabilities, which often happened to be
embarrassingly normal for any kid educated by any attentive parents not using
all the Doman techniques. To anyone not involved in the Doman teaching
scheme, the lack of focus and the body language by the children clearly
indicated that many of the kids were not even interested in being shown big
meaningless letters or pictures for a few brief seconds on flash cards. They
probably would much rather have crawled around exploring the room or chewing
the cards, as all kids will do when left to learn by the natural process of
self-discovery.

It was equally pathetic to witness a hundred “ooing and aahing” parents in
the auditorium hoping that their thousands of dollars per 5-7 day training
course would also grow up to be as “clever” as these trained seals
performing in front of them for publicity reasons. It was like a mutual
admiration society at some pet poodle show with trained kids filling in for
trained hounds.

———————

FROM THE HORSES’ MOUTHS

Here is Doman’s official website: Institutes for the Achievement of Human
Potential (IAHP)

<http://www.iahp.org/>

And here are some extracts from it:

The History of The Institutes

The Institutes (sic) was founded by Glenn Doman in 1955.

Since its inception, The Institutes has succeeded in changing substantially
the world’s attitude toward the brain-injured child. Some of the world still
continues to believe that to speak of making a brain-injured child well is a
contradiction in terms.

Originally the treatment program for brain-injured children was conducted at
The Institutes on an inpatient basis. However, the staff and the parents
working together discovered that a home treatment program produced greater
results in the child than even the finest inpatient treatment program.

The Institutes has led the way to a better appreciation of the central
nervous system as a sensory-motor cybernetic system. Many of the methods
pioneered by The Institutes, such as crawling, creeping, patterning, early
reading, math, and encyclopedic knowledge programs, the elimination of braces
and calipers, the oxygen enrichment program, careful nutritional program, and
many others, are now in general use.

Other methods developed by The Institutes are not yet in general use. Some of
these programs are coma arousal, respiratory patterning, pro-gravitational
and anti-gravitational environments, brain integration, and intellectual,
social, and language development programs. The Institutes also carries out
detoxification, the careful elimination of anti-epileptic drugs and other
medications such as tranquilizers and Ritalin.

[Incidentally, not one of these methods has been shown categorically to
produce any better results than any other methods of education. I will post
another article on this issue later today. Mel Siff]

The Institutes Developmental Profile

The Institutes Developmental Profile is a chart that delineates the
significant stages of child brain development through which normal children
pass as they progress from birth to the achievement of sophisticated
functions unique to human beings at six years of age.

The order in which the significant stages take place is a function of brain
development.

The time schedule is highly variable and depends upon the frequency,
intensity, and duration of the stimuli provided to the brain by the child’s
environment, which is notably and most often the child’s family.

The goal of treating brain-injured children or teaching well children is to
take each child through these stages of normal development in their normal
order and with the greatest possible speed.

The Institutes Developmental Profile is the progression against which each
child’s progress is measured……

The ‘Gentle Revolution’ proposes that tiny children have within them the
capacity to learn virtually anything while they are tiny. It proposes that
what children learn without any conscious effort at two, three or four years
of age can only be learned with great effort, or may not be learned at all,
in later life.

*** Both research and practice shows that this claim is untrue and
misleading, since learning competence proceeds throughout life, and a child
who learn even several years later manages to “catch up” very well indeed.
If learning competence declines so precipitously, then how does one explain
the learning of new subjects, skills and abilities well out of childhood and
often well into adulthood? In the physical world, an infant of 2-4 years of
age can never learn complex motor skills as competently as a child several
years older. In addition, some of the most remarkable learning achievements
accompany adolescence. Doman’s claim essentially militates against the
entire concept of adult learning. Doman suggests that unconscious learning
is necessarily superior to more aware learning, which contradicts educational
research showing that awareness of the learning process and understanding the
events involved can enhance learning.

The rest of the IAHP website is highly uninformative and serves little more
than a commercial of Doman books and courses. There are no scientific
studies, no educational essays, in short, nothing more than salesmanship. At
least, our Supertraining list has assembled more than 15000 informative
emails on numerous educational topics in little over a year!

Mel Siff