How much strength is enough?

Posted on by
Reply

In a post on Joel Jamieson’s 8 Weeks Out Blog coach Rob Paraniello raises an excellent question: How Much Strength Do Athletes Need?

Another way of saying this is – how much strength is enough?!

Coach P mentions the dominance of maximal-effort lifts in modern strength training, and gives a couple of personal stories about the “how much is enough” question:

Coach Parker and I then reminded each other of an incident that occurred during my years with working him at the old New York Giants stadium. At that time both he and I were also studying with a former Soviet Weightlifter and Soviet Coach, Gregorio Goldstein.

On this particular day, Coach Goldstein was also at Giants Stadium, where a Giant football player, David Megget had just easily squatted 427 pounds at a body weight of 178 pounds. When asking Coach Goldstein how to make Megget stronger he replied, “You don’t have to make him any stronger, you have to make him faster”. This comment had a profound effect on each of us to this day.

In a very recent discussion with another renowned Hall of Fame Strength Coach Al Vermeil, regarding a professional baseball player that I am presently training, I posed the question that I am often asked during the rehabilitation and/or performance training of an athlete, “How much strength is enough?”

How much strength does this professional athlete need to successfully play baseball at a consistent optimum level over a long season? This topic of conversation with these, and other legendary strength and conditioning professionals has enhanced my appreciation of this subject matter.

This is a critical question in general, I think.

Coach P goes into a lot of detail explaining different aspects of this question – for instance, the need for different levels of absolute strength depends on the specific sport demand – but I didn’t feel like he really got to the bottom line with his discussion.

Since Aaron Schwenzfeier and I were discussing this exact question this morning, I’d like to add some thoughts to the question, and provide my own answer.

One of the things I said to Aaron this morning was that I regret that the vast stores of data from Soviet and other Eastern Bloc sport-centers hasn’t been mined. The Soviets kept detailed records on every aspect of their athletes’ performance and training throughout entire careers.

In other words, there are detailed records of everything from diet, psychological status, strength programming and measures, sleep, etc., for hundreds if not thousands of athletes in various sport centers in the old Eastern Bloc and Russia.

In his article on coach Anatoliy Bondarchuk, thrower Martin Bingisser notes that the coach:

…does not find a significant correlation between any weight room exercises beyond 55 meters. The bench press is the one exception as it has a significant correlation for throwers until they reach 60 meters. Similarly, in the hammer throw, the correlations with weight room exercises are insignificant past 70 meters.

In an interview with Dane Miller of Garage Strength, Bondarchuk says:

Benching 150k at 8-10meter/second is much better than benching 250k at 1-2 meter/second. Slow, maximal training has virtually no transfer to the throw.

At what point should a shot/disc/hammer athlete stop training maximum strength?

Bondarchuk: A good measure for shot and discus is around a 160k bench, 200k squat, and 150k clean. The discus throwers could incline a bit more for development of the shoulders. At the average level, every exercise is good. Once the shot putter hits 19, 20 –22, the exercises and transfer need to have a much higher correlation.

Backward Causality
I frequently get the feeling that much if not all of what we’re doing in the strength-training and movement-training world these days is actually completely BACKWARDS.

For instance, most of the set/rep schemes we see are based on observed set/rep parameters used by people who have achieved certain outcomes.

That is, the person achieves a certain outcome, we find it desirable, and then we say to ourselves, selves, how did they get there?

We ask them, or dig back into their training logs, and find out exactly what they did to run so fast or lift so much or get so muscular.

Then we create a “training program.” The rationale is – do exactly what they did, and you’ll achieve those results.

Does it work?

Maybe 50% of the time.

The rest of the time it burns people out, alienates them, or otherwise doesn’t work at all…

Not only that, but then you find people with radically divergent “training programs” who have achieved similar results, or people with no “training program” at all who achieve spectacular results (for instance, check out the “training program” of a Tarahumara runner…there isn’t one).

Why?

Mostly because training comes from the soul of the individual.

The best training arises from the depths of the soul. It drives the person. It’s all they can do at that point to steer or guide that drive.

The “training program” becomes whatever is available at hand to train with. Whatever works, works.

Our training programs (for professional athletes, amateurs, and the lay-person who just wants to get fit) are dominated by a “bigger, faster, stronger” mentality driven by a numbers-oriented (OCD) cultural bearing.

Bodybuilding, Powerlifting, and Olympic lifting programs (with the goal of “ever-bigger, -faster, -stronger”) become de rigueur training methods – not because they’re appropriate for the athlete or individual, but because they’re easiest to track…you can “prove results” from them.

Meanwhile, the good movers, with their spirits bursting out of their eyes, who train with passion and…JOY?!…continue to “shock” people when they “come out of the blue” with “incredible” performances or results.

The numbers game is a simple one. Strength training at its best is simple.

Finding that inner fire, holding it close, and fanning it into a raging blaze…those are skills too often forgot, too often discounted.

And the fire of many athletes is extinguished in the vacuum created under the laboratory-glass of “athletic strength training programs.”

Why train?…and how? – Part 1

Posted on by
Reply

Why do we train? And when we do, what’s the “best” way?

For me it’s helpful to understand what we’re doing in the large and small picture in training.

“Physical activity” is really (literally) simply any movement of the body. It’s better to define “physical activity” in these terms, and use other words to describe specific types of physical activity.

For instance, “exercise” is a specific type of physical activity, one in which we seek to intentionally disrupt homeostasis toward a specific end goal or result.

Gyms or outdoor exercise areas are places we go to create specific types of stress on our systems.

Health
The number one reason for doing exercise is that our body requires exertion and movement to remain healthy.

To be “healthy” is to function optimally (really in all “categories” of human relationship – best defined by the Exuberant Animal Mandala – body, mind, spirit, land, tribe, ancestor) (health includes death). In “health” we disrupt homeostasis and then allow it to return.

If we were to look at “health” as the relationship between the disruption of and return to homeostasis, the variability in this wave (of disruption and return) in both frequency and magnitude (x and y axes) would be a good indicator of overall health. That is, as long as it is truly variable, and not chaotic (i.e., there’s a rhythm there…).

This tenet is true for all living systems. Environments that are more diverse and “variable” (like rain forests) have greater robustness, great resilience, and greater “health” than less-variable environments (like deserts).

Hearts that have greater variability between systole and diastole, or between heart beats, are healthier than hearts with completely “normal” waves (regardless of their amplitude).


click the picture for a fun paper!

Fitness
Fitness is not health or necessarily healthy. Fitness is the capacity to perform a specific task. A person or other animal may be perfectly “fit” for one task (like sitting in the car, at the desk, and on the couch), but completely unfit for another (like doing anything else).

We can train our relative level of fitness for a specific task by understanding the demands of that task, and by introducing those demands to our body in a gradual fashion (again, allowing for the disruption of and return to homeostasis).

Often, simply performing the task itself will get us more and more “fit” for that task. Sometimes this is a very hard way to go, however.

As you can tell, though, certain tasks might limit our variability. They might restrict our range of motion, or the particular ways in which we move. We might end up training ourselves right into a heart attack, knee or hip replacement, or chronic muscular pain.

Sport
This brings up the issue of sport, and sport-specific training. Much of the exercise advice out there is based on sport training, and much of the training advice I’ve seen is based on training methods for other sports (e.g., bodybuilding-type programs being recommended for basketball players, etc.).

Sport almost always demands an extremely high level of fitness in some specific qualities at the expense of all others. The only sport where this may not be the case is the Decathlon – also the reason that the World Record holder in the Decathlon has always been known as “The World’s Greatest Athlete.”

But of course, the decathlete’s general ability comes at a price. Only rarely will any decathlete beat a world record in a particular race.

Social and Cultural Definitions
To do “society” to relate and to create explicit and implicit definitions of relations (rules of engagement) within/among a group of people.

Doing culture, then, is believing, behaving, creating, and valuing in accordance with explicit or implicit socially-defined norms.

Our idea of health (even my very broad definition above), and fitness, (and beauty, and everything else), is socially and culturally defined, maintained, and conditioned.

General Fitness
So can there be such a thing as “general” fitness? I guess the decathlete would be the highest example of the most-generally fit individual. But even a decathlete’s training is very specific.

My short answer is no. All training is specific, whether you want to admit it or not.

Why Do It?
Humans have reached the top of the food chain (as long as we stay in our man-made environments, at least, or carry some powerful technologies with us into other environments).

We call exercise a “work-out” because that’s precisely what it’s designed to do for most of us – replicate the normal physical work our bodies need to be healthy.

Health itself is relatively simple. The most important component of health is happiness.

Happiness generally, and in meaningful relationship with body, mind, spirit, land, tribe, and ancestor. Don’t believe me? That’s okay. Go get really unhappy about it and I’ll meet you on the “other side” to discuss. But you might have to wait a while…

Regular, diverse, and varied movement is healthy. Bio-regional diet is healthy. But happiness is most important.

Want to know how to be happy? Just do it.

Fitness? Let’s save that for the next post!

More DNS thoughts…Punctum Fixum and Trigger Points

Posted on by
Reply

One of the concepts that DNS uses in assessing and treating movement or activation dysfunction is called “punctum fixum.” I may or may not have mentioned it in the three-part series on DNS I posted over the past week, but it’s summed up nicely in this quote from Jeff Cubos’ blog:

The “Punctum Fixum” as taught within DNS by the Prague School are the specific areas where movement begins. They are places in the body that act as stable bases for movement. The direction of muscle pull, in general, project toward these regions and the choices of support zones that our body makes depend on the initial position of that body.

These are also the “special points” that DNS creator Pavel Kolar holds during his manual therapy on the patient in this video (see 15:47, this full sequence begins at 14:00).

Charlie Weingroff had this to say about the “punctum fixum” concept:

Kolar’s integration of Vaclav’s work is through Reflex Stimulation. As babies transition to milestones, they require a “point of stability,” almost something to push off of to change position. For those that have little ones at home, they will see that this point of stability is bone. This force into bone causes morphological changes in the bone changing its orientation. For instance certain angles of the ribs that are posteriorly oriented in adults and anterior in infants. There is almost no femoral neck in babies. Poor development potentially causes anteversion or retroversion. Vaclav’s hypothesis was that it is this stimulation of bony changes that was the automatic starter for movement transitions. And in normal babies, there is always a standard for what “good” movement looks like.

I’ve long wondered whether or not trigger points in muscles could be nexuses of stress from (dysfunctional) muscular actions. What I mean by that is that a trigger point is a place where lines of pull from various muscle groups (from above or below) converge on a single spot.

In dysfunctional movement, those patterns are over-used, and the points harden into spasming bundles. Hence the referring pain when you press on them, and the “global” release when they are manually released.

But the other ramification of this view is that trigger points represent dysfunctional movement…not dysfunctional muscle. So the full treatment of a trigger point involves movement re-education.

I haven’t had any experience with the advanced levels of punctum fixum in the DNS model, but I’d love to hear from anyone who has on the possible connections between these concepts.

DNS – The Foundations of Human Movement – Part 3

Posted on by
Reply

This is part 3 of a 3 part series on DNS…for Part 1, click here, for Part 2, click here.

Part I covered the history and background assumptions of DNS, and went into reasons for its use.

Part II I’ll covered some of the process that I learned at the seminar.

Here in Part III I’m hosting a “philosophical” discussion about movement in the light of DNS and will include some observations of my own around assumptions we make regarding movement in our culture.

Corollaries
I think the second biggest thing that happened for me during the DNS seminar (the first being learning an approach to movement and motor organization that suddenly MADE SENSE) was the experience of multiple coincidences between DNS and other movement methods I’ve learned or been exposed to.

For instance, DNS is similar in ways to the developing field of Functional Neurology, which seeks to address and influence neurological (read: brain) structures through muscular and sensory stimulation.

Somatics
When you’re doing these “developmental” patterns, you can’t help but think of Feldenkrais, Alexander Technique, or the work of Bonnie Bainbridge Cohen or Annie Brook. Why? Because they based their work off an observation that these types of movement patterns are the ones we start with, and are ones that make us feel better.

If we were taking the stance that DNS is accurate we’d say that the principles all of these creators were recognizing were the reflex locomotor ontogenesis of the human animal.

The Big Difference, I think, is that DNS is organizing this approach under a very clear physiological (and developmental) framework, where most somatic disciplines I’ve been exposed to approach their work only from the felt-sense of the body.

Nothing wrong with that, and at the same time, DNS to me has the benefit of having a clear theoretical framework, that can be tested against across individuals. But don’t throw out feeling!

FMS/SFMA
Speaking of “somatics” and movement-based work, what about Gray Cook’s FMS/SFMA (Functional Movement Scree/Selective Functional Movement Assessment) and DNS?

Note – I do not have a certification in either the FMS or SFMA methods. Please correct me if I’m speaking out of turn here.

My take on FMS/SFMA is that they’re useful tools to standardize the assessment process of patients/clients. I’ve seen a good amount of video on these methods, and been taught the FMS assessment by a certified FMS’er.

The real value I see for these methods is that because they’re highly standardized they offer a good way to pass information along to other practitioners or to assess large numbers of people (e.g., teams or squadrons) at once.

Beyond that, though, I don’t see any difference between FMS/SFMA and any other assessment method. The practitioner still has to be skilled in identifying movement patterns and movement pattern dysfunction in order to do any type of quality work with the patient/client based on that assessment.

DNS helps the practitioner, I think, in offering a deeper perspective on what’s happening in the body.

For instance – one of the attendees is a certified FMS assessor. He has always had trouble with the shoulder mobility test, with one shoulder being much less mobile than the other in this test. In the DNS course, we had him put his scapulae into an optimal neutral position, and then perform abdominal coactivation the DNS way, and…voila…totally equal results from side to side on the shoulder mobility test.

How does this help? To me it showed that his “shoulder problem” was more about a lack of global stabilization. Working on good positioning for stabilization and proper “core” activation, and progressing those methods through movements, will likely “cure” this patient.

RKC/Primal Movement Patterns
Gray Cook has another series of videos out that are more RKC (Russian Kettlebell Certification) based that deal with “primal patterns.”

From what I’ve seen, now that I’ve been to the DNS course, Gray and Lee have borrowed DNS material and put it into various movements they feel are appropriate for RKC folks.

That’s fine, but what I’ve seen on the DVD’s doesn’t replace what you get at a DNS course, and doesn’t provide the full spectrum of information you need to (help other to) perform proper core coactivation through the use of the diaphragm, breathe well, or move through “primal movement patterns” effectively while maintaining core coactivation and breathing.

Martial Arts
Of course there are huge martial arts implications in DNS as well. After all, martial arts are usually ways of understanding the most effective (and often efficient) way to move your body when confronting another (or multiple others) in conflict.

I’ve always practiced internal martial arts (IMA’s), which rely on the manipulation of advantages of potential and kinetic energy in conflicts, rather than the direct use of potential and kinetic energy. Most IMA’s have some form of standing practice, and many do “Zhan Zhuang” (standing like a post).

Here’s Chen Taiji master Chen Xiaowang doing three variants of the Zhan Zhuang posture:

Here’s a baby exhibiting the posture that DNS calls Supine Sagittal Stabilization:

Connection not clear? Try this one:

Well that’s funny! If we look at the Zhan Zhuang posture from the side…it looks…well…

Now have a look at this image of a Skylab astronaut in weightless posture:

All so strangely similar, no?

Perhaps the similarities aren’t so strange after all. They all represent a foundational or primary postural “set-point” in the human animal. It is the posture from which we stabilize and begin to learn to interact with the forces of gravity.

The posture is determined by our ontogenetic (species-genetic) structure, which also determines the reflex neuromotor patterns in our central nervous system, and the ways in which our muscles are organized.

Chen Xiaowang is replicating a sagittal stabiliation posture (and doing proper breathing) in an upright position.

The astronaut is exhibiting a primary posture of structural stabilization while asleep in a weightless environment. You’ll notice that the astronaut’s head position isn’t “ideal.” I don’t know how long he was in space at the point the picture was taken, but eventually the flexor system begins to dominate in weightless environments, since the extensor system doesn’t have anything (gravity) to oppose.

Just as importantly, RELAXATION is emphasized in all of these iterations of this posture.

My friend and extremely experienced internal martial artist Scott Phillips and I had a chat once about the predominance of thoracic kyphosis (rounded upper back) in many older Tai Chi practitioners. Why were they developing that postural abnormality.

Scott said that it was due to a misunderstanding of the “sunken chest” prescription in Tai Chi postural cues. The goal is not to collapse the chest by rounding it in, but rather, to let the sternum “fall” or relax, while the shoulders stay broad and the upper back stays erect (as in Chen Xiaowang’s demonstration above). The head stays on top of an erect spinal cord.

This is precisely the type of relaxed posture we seek in DNS SSS. Laying on your back, allow your ribcage to relax down into the floor. Many people have a concept of good posture as the classic “military” posture – chest up, shoulders pinched back, etc. But this throws us completely out of whack and is a terrible posture for any kind of movement.

When you can attain this relaxed posture while maintaining coactivation of the “core” musculature and breathing well in a circular fashion (i.e., allowing your chest and abdomen to expand to the sides and back as much as to the front), you can start to add mobility.

Adding movement one step at a time reeducates the body regarding effective, efficient, and stable movement. That also equals powerful movement, since the expression of power depends on all of those things as prerequisites.

Going from one side to another can reeducate the body regarding bilateral deficiencies or compensations (which may have underlying sources in scar-tissue or unresolved tissue trauma…which should be treated).

Moving this posture into standing creates the “Grand Ultimate Fist” of Taijiquan.

Well…that wraps it up for now. If you have questions about DNS or anything else here, feel free to leave a comment below.

Thanks for reading!

DNS – The Foundations of Human Movement – Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

This is part 2 of a 3 part series on DNS…for Part 1, click here.

Part I covered the history and background assumptions of DNS, and went into reasons for its use.

Here in Part II I’ll cover some of the process that I learned at the seminar with reflections on similar movement patterns in other disciplines.

Part III will be a “philosophical” discussion about movement in the light of DNS and will include some observations of my own around assumptions we make regarding movement in our culture.

So let’s get going!

As discussed in Part I, the main observations to make at the beginning of DNS are whether or not the joint is functional – that is, centrated and capable of full ROM. If not, why not?

Karel Lewit notes that it’s important to remove any restricting lesions before beginning any other work. A “lesion” here means any neuromuscular block to normal movement. Lewit often refers to these as “scars” and has a definite method for releasing scars.

Once you’ve removed lesions or blockages to restoring mobility or centration, get to work.

But first thing’s first. Numero uno – check your breath!

This resonated with me very deeply since I’d just finished a Wilderness First Responder course a week prior to the DNS seminar. In first-responder scenarios after considering basic scene safety and triage, the first things to assess in a patient are the “A, B, C’s.” That is – What is the quality of their Airway, Breathing, and Circulation.

Life won’t continue long without any of those three. And life is certainly diminished when any of those are diminished. Consider the relative quality of life of any person suffering from airway, breathing, or circulatory disorders.

Adequate and efficient intake and distribution of oxygen is primary to the function of the body.

Check your breathing by doing the following – place your hands on the fleshy bits between your hip bones and your lower ribs, with your thumbs toward the back by your kidneys, and your fingers pointing forward toward your navel. If you can’t get into this position without restricting your shoulder movement (hunching forward) DO SOME SHOULDER/THORACIC MOBILIZATION FIRST (here, or here).

Now that you’ve got a grip on yourself, push out against your hands.

How? By using your diaphragm, of course. When your diaphragm pushes down, it presses against your guts, which have to squeeze out somewhere. When they push down and out, they should automatically trigger a “myotatic stretch reflex” in the abdominal and pelvic floor (and gluteal/deep hip) musculature.

This move is different from just pushing your belly out…or “belly breathing” as they like to call it. Instead, think in terms of breathing circularly. The entire hoop around your midsection should expand and slightly contract as you breathe.

Practice keeping that tension while breathing.

One key here is to RELAX. Let your shoulders relax, let your arms relax, let your brain relax. Relax all over. If your shoulders are hiking up when you breathe (or even if your clavicles or sternum are moving upward toward your head) you’re using accessory muscles to breathe rather than the diaphragm. RELAX.

Now put your hands up on your lower ribs, making sure they’re expanding and contracting laterally (out to the sides) with each breath. When you’ve got that (while keeping your core coactivation) move up to the upper ribs.

Once you’ve got your breathing functioning well again, it’s time to integrate that into some movement.

The 13:00 mark on this video shows clear application of the method in a supine sagittal stabilization (SSS) phase. Once you’ve got yourself stabilized, start adding slow limb movement.

If you get the limb movement down well, move on to transitioning from SSS through developmental patterns, starting with the ipsalateral/homolateral support pattern. Again, watch the video for the different patterns.

Remember throughout your exploration to maintain abdominal coactivation, “circular” breathing, RELAXATION, and focused awareness.

DNS – The Foundations of Human Movement – Part 1

Posted on by
Reply

Ever have the experience that you’re peering into the very foundation of existence?

Come one, you can admit it to me. Even if you were totally “altered,” it counts. Ever experience that?

Ever have that feeling that you were seeing something so simple, yet so immense, it was completely within your grasp and yet completely beyond your understanding?

If not, stop reading now and go get that experience.

If so, you can relate to what I experienced today at the DNS Sport seminar here in Seattle.

It’s funny, because I think as is true with most “profound” things, many people who attend a DNS course may feel only confusion, or disgust, or the feeling that the thing they’re seeing is so obvious that it’s meaningless…that they’ve already thought that or they already do that.

All great feelings, that need to be checked immediately as potential reflex responses to things that challenge your (perhaps limited) worldview.

This is going to be a three-part series on DNS, because I’ve got some ground to cover.

Part I will cover the history and background assumptions of DNS, and also go into its applications and use.

Part II will cover the process that I learned at the seminar with reflections on similar movement patterns in other disciplines.

Part III will be a “philosophical” discussion about movement in the light of DNS and will include some observations of my own around assumptions we make regarding movement in our culture.

So what the heck is DNS, and why should you care?

DNS stands for Dynamic Muscular Stabilization. It’s a therapeutic method developed by Czech physiotherpist Pavel Kolar and his colleagues at the Prague School of Rehabilitation.

On this page you can see/watch a ton of information on DNS.

DNS is based on what’s called Developmental Kinesiology (DK) – the study of the development of movement from conception through maturation of movement. Most DK work focuses on the organization of movement from the first day of life up through about one year of age, when walking begins.

DK rests on a few key developmental landmarks.

All of them are based on ontogenetic (species-wide) developmental patterns that are reflexive – they happen automatically according to a relatively fixed maturational schedule, and are triggered by external stimuli (like any “genetic” factor). The main ones are all based on human upright posture. Specifically, the following elements of movement:

Spinal straightening
Extension
Abduction and external rotation

The first organizational level is Sagittal Stabilization. This represents the child’s ability to organize movement around the midline, linked to optical orientation. The child learns to maintain an erect spine and develops control over limb abduction and external rotation.

The other is “phasic movement” which comprises stepping forward and stabilization/support.

The homolateral or ipsa-lateral movement (movement of the same-side limbs) aspect of stepping-forward and support happens first. When a baby rolls onto its side, the lower limbs become support limbs. The rest of the body moves over the supporting joints (i.e., the proximal joint facets move over the fixed distal/limb joints, or the fixed segment). This is usually called “closed-chain” movement – the distal end is fixed, and the body ends up moving on that fixed base.

The contralateral (opposite-side movement) pattern happens second developmentally, with opposite-side limbs acting as supports. In this type of movement, the distal portion is usually the free-end, and the distal part of the joint is moving on the fixed/stable proximal segment. This is usually referred to as “open-chain” movement, since the distal end is “open,” able to move whatever resistance it’s encountering. The body is the fixed base of support.

Rotation and creeping are the main stereotypes that cover postural development. They are the main patterns that organize the development of all skeletal muscle.

So what?

First off, what DNS is saying here is that all human movement develops from the basis of these reflex patterns. And because of those patterns and the way muscles attach to bone, all human movement evolves in a very particular way.

Think you might want to know about that?

Also, since these are developmental reflexes (embedded in the fabric of the nervous system), they can be reawakened at any time in healthy neurology. That is, if you have some sort of movement dysfunction, you can potentially “cure” that problem by returning to these fundamental patterns.

Why?

Because the patterns create optimal movement in a baby. That is, these are the patterns create healthy movement in a healthy human animal. Get out of these patterns, and things start going bad.

Breathing
Breathing and healthy diaphragmatic action is a key to postural stabilization. The diaphragm is not just the bellows of your lungs, but it’s also the most central “organizationally powerful” stabilizer of the spine.

Ideally, the abdomen is a solid cylinder. When the diaphragm pushes down on the abdominal contents, it creates what’s know as “Intra-Abdominal Pressure” (IAP). IAP creates reflex-co-contraction throughout the muscles of the abdominal cavity – all of the “normal” abdominal muscles, as well as the pelvic floor and even the gluteals!

DNS extends well beyond breathing, but always utilizes the central principles of IAP and reflex locomotor patterning, using positioning and manual contact to elicit response.

Joint Centration and Movement Organization
To be optimally functioning, the joint (cavity and head) must be centered. The forces on either side must be balanced.

Why does any of this matter?
This is how the body is organized. This is “functional” movement – that is, movement that is ideal in the organization of the body (and external object) with regard to gravity. “Mechanics” are optimal. Stress and shear are minimal (or “optimal”). Dysfunction is negligible.

This is how to move well.

It should be obvious that getting these patterns in good working order is literally the baseline state for good healthy movement!

So how do you do it?! Stay tuned!

The top 7 training tips for 2012

Posted on by
Reply

Just wanted to take a moment and share some thoughts and observations here at the beginning of 2012, that might help to guide you in your fitness pursuits this year.

1. Fitness is not Health
This has been said so many times and in so many ways it seems like old news – which is even more reason to say it again. I was reminded of this old rule watching Dan John’s “Intervention” DVD series recently.

Fitness means being fit to do a certain thing. Health means optimal functioning of the body. They are not the same. People can be extremely fit for certain tasks (and in very different ways) and not healthy at all. Think, powerlifter, or football linebacker. Very fit (for their respective tasks), not necessarily very healthy. Keep these separated when planning your training.

2. “Cardio” is not “Cardio”
This time of year, most people are asking me the best way to lose fat and tone up. “Cardio” is not it.

Traditional “cardio” (jogging, running, etc.) focuses on local muscular endurance in a few muscles. That’s what creates the “cardio” demand. Your muscles need oxygen. Heart, lungs, and veins deliver.

Bodyweight training circuits will deliver the same effect, while creating a greater demand on muscle groups, which will increase calories burned over time, and improve strength (BONUS!).
Using more muscles to create more cardiovascular demand = increased cardiovascular fitness and increased muscular fitness.
My favorite short workout is still the 5-minute Burpee Challenge. If you have a bar available, add a pullup on the up phase of the jump, and a straight leg raise when you get to the bottom of the pullup. I.e.:
squat down
kick legs back
do a pushup
bring legs back up under you
jump up in the air
do a pullup (or muscle-up if you can)
come down to hanging and do a straight leg raise
drop to ground
repeat

Could you do this workout everyday? Sure. Will you?…

PS…if you’re scared of that one, try a simpler 5-minute workout – jump rope continuously for five minutes.

3. Fitness is Simple (not easy)
The physiology of fitness is simple. Upset the homeostatic balance of the body by doing work of a certain type. Allow for the body to recover. Introduce a greater stimulus than last time. Recover, repeat.

What’s most important? Very simple things. See the diagram below from the IAAF:

Focus on the three main attributes 80% of the time, and their intersections 20% of the time.

Pushups or bench press or shot put? Running or jumping rope or rowing or spin-class? Yoga or hot yoga or shadow yoga or pilates or barre method? All exercises within any given “category” affect the same systems, with slightly different emphasis.

For instance, is it possible to do pushups that demand (and generate) “max strength” (i.e. 1-5 rep range)? Of course. For many people, a quality standard pushup will be a max-strength effort. If a quality stand pushup is too easy (meaning, you can do more than 1-5 repetitions), try elevating your feet. If that’s too easy, try 1-arm pushups.

What’s your relative level of ability in the Big Three (Max Strength, Speed, Aerobic Endurance)?

2012 is the perfect time to work on your weak-spots.

4. Diet is Simple (not easy)
Eat real food that’s bioregion-specific.

Need more detail? Go to your local farmer’s market or visit a farm or three. Read the book “Plenty.”

Use the interweb for something other than Angry Birds – find the farms within 200 miles of your home and eat from them for 80% of your food. Grow food at home. Cook simply with delicious ingredients.

5. Health and Fitness are a Personal Path
To paraphrase my friend Scott Phillips – “Any fitness path/system works.” It’s a matter of finding the one that resonates and sticking with it.

Want to “get in shape” – i.e. change your shape to another shape? You’ll have to find a reason that’s compelling enough to continue over time. Forever.

I met someone recently who “used to do Crossfit.” They even continued for a while after recovering from a shoulder dislocation (sustained doing Olympic lifts). But then, the magic faded, and now, they’re looking around again (and “out of shape”).
As Su Dong Chen says – “Seek possibilities, avoid seeking limits.”
Whatever floats your boat is great. Just make sure it isn’t the same thing that’s going to sink your boat. And, as Eben Pagan says “No matter how far you’ve gone down the wrong road – turn back.”

Shameless self-promotion – I’ll be releasing a new e-book shortly that will be a program anyone can follow for as long as they live that will continually create improvement over time. Buy it.

6. Health and Fitness are Culturally-Bound
If you know me, you’ve been waiting for this one. Not only are definitions of “health” and “fitness” culturally bound and determined, but the way those things are enacted are similarly so.

Recognize that your concept of the possibilities or limitations of your ability come from your larger culture (for instance, the US culture, which is largely capitalistic, mechanistic, reductionist, Protestant Christian, conservative, and detached from nature or natural cycles (and detached generally)), your individual culture (your “social circle” and family), and your internal culture (your own prejudices and beliefs…some of which may need further consideration).

Realize that your diet, your workouts, your work, your play, your entire life, all have been shaped by the cultures you were brought up in. Realize and recognize those influences, then choose the path you really want.

7. Stop Sweating the Small Stuff – Stick to the Basics and Keep Going
Finally, it’s easy, all too easy, to get lost in the minutiae. It’s what we humans are good at as animals. Finding things like “the one best way” or the “right” answer to questions is what we do best (even though we both create the question and the “correct” answer).

Stop worrying about “ultimate” “bests” and “corrects” and that stuff and go back to fundamentals. Go back to the most basic of basics for whatever it is you’re interested in. And do that.
It worked for John Wooden. It’ll work for you too.

Those are my tips for 2012! Want more info, drop me a line, or subscribe to the LIFT newsletter, or to this blog feed…

Yoga is killing you?

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve had a few folks send me this recent NYT piece – “How Yoga Can Wreck Your Body.”

There are a few things you should consider when reading that article.

First, it’s way too long.

But second, the author is as much a representative of American cultural trends as the way Yoga is practiced in America these days is.

This type of journalism is “sensationalist” in a sense, and not very magnetically written.

Here’s the formula:

Trend
Something that supports/counters that trend
Soundbite/interview
Another factoid
Soundbite/interview
repeat the above as many times as your word-count limit will allow
Semi-conclusion statement that leaves things totally vacuous…i.e. “makes the reader ‘think’”

Ever read a NYT piece that matches that description? I think every other writer in America has that template loaded on their desktop these days. It sucks.

And, of course, he has to mention “neurology” which is the go-to evidence of the day. Ten years ago he would’ve cited genetics as a reasonable cause for Yogic breakdown. Before that it would’ve been chemical precursors. Before that it would’ve been the humours in the body causing the pain.

“Hast thou pain from thy Yoga practise? Thou must be bled.”

As I mentioned above, the way Yoga is done in America nowadays is a cultural phenomenon. It reflects American relationships with the body, with teachers, with others, and with nature.

First of all, people are terribly out of shape generally. Yoga is not the discipline to get you “in shape.” I don’t care how “hot” or “power” it is.

But secondly, all of this ranting and raving against specific practices is leaving me wanting.

Any physical practice done poorly, by someone with little training, who has a limited history of movement (in their entire life as well as their daily life), who has little common sense or curiosity, is going to cause pain, dysfunction, and injury.

Basically, what I’m asking you to consider when you read articles like this one is a simple question:

What’s the real source of the problem?

Is the source of the problem actually that people are doing Yoga?

Or is it that our culture creates, engenders, and supports a manner of living that separates things into individual compartments, shuts down creativity and curiosity (and common sense), and generally debilitates people?

What’s so difficult about this is that, in order to confront it, you must confront your deepest-held convictions. You must go against the grain – in yourself and in your social life. It’s hard. It’s work. It’s hard work. Without support, it will drain you till you cry “UNCLE” at the top of your lungs.

But you have to try. You have to try to read through terrible mass-media articles about should’s and shouldn’ts. You have to work to educate yourself in all areas. And I have a suggestion for how you can start.

Most folks tend to define themselves or the things they do in terms, usually, of a single dominant preference. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, consider briefly that there might be a single word or phrase that would adequately describe the way you do everything in your life.

Now take that, and say that your guiding principle in life is to more fully express the potential embedded within your unique physiology. But in order to do that, you must understand that physiology thoroughly.

This is the start of the path.

Happy New Year!

Posted on by
Reply

Happy New Year everyone!

LIFT is growing and changing in exciting ways this year!

The main focus of my efforts with LIFT this year will be to expand on the outline in my book “Physical Culture, Personal Evolution.” I’ll be doing that a few ways:

1. Through meaningful training with an ever-expanding my client base here in Seattle and throughout the world.

2. Through cooperative work with an ever-expanding professional network here in Seattle and throughout the world.

and,

3. Through various media outlets (writing, video, etc.)…

In addition, I’ve been given the role of Exuberant Animal Jam Animal! Very exciting and I’m looking forward to leading a TON of Exuberant Animal Jams this year! If you aren’t familiar with Exuberant Animal, it’s a movement focused on making our lives and movement more Primal, Practical, and Playful. If you want info about Jams, contact me!

On a personal note, I will post some of my own fitness goals for 2012 shortly, and share my programming with everyone so you know what’s what!

Here’s to the best year yet!

Josh

Kstar and the MWOD, why aren’t you doing these?

Posted on by
Reply

Hi there.

If you haven’t heard of Kelly Starrett, or the Mobility Workout of the Day (MWOD), you’re missing something.

Kelly is a physical therapist and the owner of San Francisco Crossfit.

As much as I’m bored by Crossfit, Kelly offers a unique spin – TISSUE QUALITY TIPS AND TRICKS.

He uses some traditional physical therapy concepts and puts them into a format that ANYONE, ANYWHERE, can use to help to fix their tissues before, between, after, or during workouts.

Subscribe to his blog. Watch the video posts. Do the MWODs.

When you do those things you will begin to
Move better
Feel better
Recover faster
and maybe most importantly of all
Learn something about your body…

DO IT NOW.