L.I.F.T.

This post is about the story (or stories) we tell ourselves.

I just read Semiotics: The Basics, by Dan Chandler.

It was a fascinating book. Semiotics is the study of signs. Not just “traffic signs,” but anything that signifies something else, and how that signification functions.

There were bits and pieces throughout the book that have given me a new perspective on the way(s) we (actively) construct our world and our lives. One of the claims made by semiotics is that, in language (and perhaps in “thought”) we construct opposites like:
good/bad (or evil)
light/dark
male/female
science/art
reason/emotion
man/nature
nationalism/individualism

What’s interesting about such opposites is that one is always preferred over the other. I’ve put the opposites above in the preferred/non-preferred sequence (or at least, how I perceive those to be in our culture).

What’s even more interesting, is that, once we tell ourselves a story (with its inherent opposing-pairs), we eventually forget that we made up those opposites to begin with. That is, we determined the preference based on something. There is no “objective truth” to the determination of those opposing pairs.

What that forgetting leads to, is an assumption that our story is reality itself. But how “real” is this “reality?” As we’ve seen throughout history, the story changes. In different cultures, different realities, and different preferences within those opposing pairs, prevail.

Again, the story we tell/create/manufacture is what will guide the way we use whatever technologies we develop or embrace, and also how those technologies will use us.

The way I see this process is this – we experience something, then we create a “reason” for that thing happening – we tell a story to ourselves (and/or others) about what happened, and why.

As soon as we’ve told the story, we believe in it. This is called “faith” in certain circles. In order to believe in it, we have to forget that we created the explanation/story ourselves…that is, we made up the interpretation of events that we now accept as “truth” or “fact.”

Why do we forget? I think it’s a matter of efficiency. If we had to question every assumption or “rule” that we follow every time we follow it, we’d never get anywhere. We’d be stuck in a mire of endless self-reflectivity.

Beneath it all, is Reality itself. I think. Semioticians aren’t so sure of this (having accepted their story as reality). To me, there is a common ground that we experience – Nature, Reality…whatever you want to call it. It is how we can create language. We reference the same “ground.”

Are some “realities” (stories) more “real” than others?

I’ve often wondered why European methods prevailed over Indian ways in America. Why did the Indians not fight? Surely, for one, they couldn’t imagine what their future would look like. But I think what lies beneath this is a deeper story.

Science is a tool of the mind. It is a way of grasping reality, taking it apart, and using it to achieve our ends. Any “technology” is a tool – a way of taking reality apart – separating ever-flowing “being” from the process of continual becoming/unfolding – and using it.

Your Personal Story
The other book I’m reading on this, which I haven’t finished yet, is Jim Loehr’s “The Power of Story.” Loehr has taken this process of story-telling, and provided a way for readers to unearth and re-write their personal (or “business”) story. It’s a powerful book, a powerful technology. I highly recommend it.

Ultimately, our story-telling process, our sign-making process, is a technology. It’s a tool we created somewhere in order to be able to survive.

The end to which any technology is always used is that of Life itself. That end, or purpose, is – to expand, to live, to grow, to become.

If we look at all of life, it is all constantly striving to become more of what it is. It acts to LIVE, regardless, in spite of, or directly against the circumstances in which it finds itself.

Having given life to our technologies, they too, like Frankenstein’s monster, seek to grow, expand, become – to live.

Instead of “love will find a way,” “live” or “life” will find a way. And it does.

One thing that we tend to do, in our creating and forgetting, is to mistake the tool we create for life, or Reality.

Then the monster is the ruler. We are at its whim. We are helpless to change things. Until we wake up and see that that is a decision as well…to be helpless.

Recognize the stories in your life. The ones you tell yourself, the ones you were told. Recognize them as stories, and ask whether or not they are helping to create the world and life you want.

Then re-write them, so that they are.

Frank Forencich of Exuberant Animal points out an issue with the way we approach ourselves in the world in a recent blog post.

His complaint is that we (as individuals, and culturally) separate ourselves from our habitats to such a degree that we’ve lost touch with reality.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, I wonder how to go about changing this. And in this post, I ask for your feedback.

Below is my response to Frank’s blog post. Please let me know your thoughts on how to do this – how to get people reconnected with their habitat, with the land that gives them life, in a visceral way.

The oil spill in the Gulf is at least in part a result of our society’s (societies’) addictive use of oil…we can’t separate the drillers from the people for whom they are drilling.

People are so distracted from anything real (habitat)…what will bring them back to awareness? How does one engender awareness?

Science is a process of thought that relies on separating things. It takes dynamic systems and “analyzes” them – breaks them down into “constituent parts” – which is a fallacy. Once you’ve killed and dissected a dog, where is the dog? It isn’t there anymore…a bunch of “parts” are.

We extend this tendency (or habit, whatever it is) into philosophical, religious, economic, and political thinking…

That is, it always comes down to – “This piece is wrong/bad, we must fix it.”

Thus, from the get-go, we’re off on the wrong foot. If we interfered, and that’s what “broke” it, how can we “fix” it by interfering again?

Better to stop doing.

The Secret to your woes is not your body. It’s not the shape of your body. You may think it is, but you’re wrong.

It’s not your level of physical fitness. It’s not your athleticism, or lack thereof.

It’s not what kind of car you drive, or how much money you make, or what kinds of things you own.

The secret is your culture. It’s what you surround yourself with every day. It’s what gives deepest meaning and fulfillment, support and recognition, love and energy to your life.

That’s the secret.

Manipulation
I’ll use this word here, not in the commonly used negative connotation of the term, but in the various ways it’s defined by Merriam Webster:

1 : to treat or operate with or as if with the hands or by mechanical means especially in a skillful manner
2 a : to manage or utilize skillfully b : to control or play upon by artful, unfair, or insidious means especially to one’s own advantage
3 : to change by artful or unfair means so as to serve one’s purpose

Everyone is always being manipulated.

Your culture is your biggest source of manipulation. From the second you are born, people are talking to you. When they do, they are imparting their ideas about the world onto you. You absorb those ideas, and, over time, begin to resemble them in small and not-so-small ways.

Beyond that immediate source of change is your community. Your community shapes what you see. Your family will live among, but more importantly, associate with, families with similar values to theirs.

Your friends, for the most part, will have a similar socio-economic status to yours. They will value similar things to those that you do. They will think similarly about the world – look through a similar cultural lens.

Another step out is the larger culture you live with – your society. The society you live within has its own guidelines, it’s own rules and agendas.

Everyone always has an agenda.

Society’s agenda may or may not be aligned with your own, or that of your community. You may find your complaints go unheard in society at large. You may alternately find that you have no complaints, because you’ve accepted “the way it is.”

Further, your own agenda may not be aligned with your own! This is the most difficult piece to figure out, and the place where many people experience the greatest suffering in their lives. You have deep, sometimes hidden, feelings, desires, and needs, but outwardly live in accordance with your culture. The degree of difference between your internal feelings, desires, and needs, and the way you’re living, is the precise degree to which you suffer in life.

Support
If your community and family support you, if they form a solid base, a safety net, a place of love, security, and comfort, you will live a long and happy life.

If not, you will struggle. You will seek that base, that comfort, in other things, and never find it. It can be anything – drugs, sex, work, religion, hobbies – anything that gives the appearance of those most-fundamental needs.

Ultimately, though, you will not feel what you were looking for, and you will leave, turn to another path – or drown yourself in the pursuit.

Physical Fitness
Physical fitness is meaningless without a purpose for that fitness. Many people go to the gym and workout day in and day out. They may get into excellent physical condition, simply to go sit at a computer, or drive a truck, or stand behind a counter.

Their fitness is purposeless, which is why it cannot be the ultimate fulfillment they seek. If they have community, if they have support, they workout from that base. If not, they seek that base in fitness activities, or see fitness as a “counterbalance” to the activities they are seeking their base in.

Physiology
People in Western culture generally live to be 75-85 years of age – regardless – or in spite of – of their level of physical fitness, their diets, or their communities.

However, the people who feel fulfilled, and who are functional late into life, will be the ones who were happiest. The ones who had deep congruence with their community, or who found it somewhere.

If your physiology is in a negative state due to stress/bad mood/no love/etc., it doesn’t matter how good your diet is. Your food won’t be digested well, first. What is processed will be used inefficiently. Waste excretion will be poor.

Until you get out of that bad physiological state, the energy that is consumed will largely be used to further that state. That’s how the body works.

Longevity
So what is the key to longevity? The book “The Blue Zones” says it’s several things:
Family – Family is put ahead of other concerns.
No Smoking – Centenarians do not typically smoke.
Plant-based diet – The majority of food consumed is derived from plants.
Constant moderate physical activity – Moderate physical activity is an inseparable part of life.
Social engagement – People of all ages are socially active and integrated into their communities.
Legumes – Legumes are commonly consumed.

But I would put community, or culture – living in a familiar, safe, supportive, caring community – first among them. Everything after that is gravy. Because, really, if you have that, it doesn’t matter how long you live…

Of course, there’s also something to be said for sheer grit

Aight…if you’ve been reading recently, you may be wondering what all of my recent posts have to do with physical activity, health, or athletic performance.

It has come to my attention that most people seek personal trainers for motivation, support, or encouragement, over/above knowledge, instruction, or learning.

First, I think that this is a culturally-based bias. I think that because of the way we treat what we call “physical education” in this country.

Children (at least when I was a kid, in “one of the best school systems in the country” – Fairfax Co., VA) in PE classes are “taught” extremely little. The only instruction we received usually had to do with “rules” of various games we played.

There was one section of the class on “health,” which covered sex education, drug awareness (scare tactics), and something else I can’t remember.

But there was no real physical education happening. If I learned the names of any muscles in high school it was either in a biology class, or through my own readings. We didn’t learn anything about human physiology.

Worst still, we didn’t learn anything about our bodies from a somatic awareness perspective. For instance, what happens in our physical bodies when we experience a trauma (whether it’s an accidental bump or fall, a major accident, or the experience of abuse from some external source), how to trace that experience, how to allow our feelings to happen without judgment or restriction…

And then, how to help ourselves to heal, by playing between the feelings elicited by that trauma within ourselves and the natural healing responses our bodies create.

This is not “touchy feely” bullshit that I’m writing about. We can point, using “science,” to everything good about a somatic awareness practice.

For instance, it is well known that the body responds to distress with chemical flows that, if lasting, are incredibly destructive. Adrenaline and cortisol, while helpful in emergency situations, are killers if they are present for too long.

This type of ability, and the practice of it, go to the heart of everything we do. This ability is the foundation for the creation of lasting self-worth, self-respect, and ultimately self-responsibility – all of which are, in turn, the foundations for deep feelings of others’ worth, respect of others, and the holding responsible of others for their own selves.

As I’ve said before, emotions are physical states. They are characterized by particular postures/expressions (that is, muscular patterns), and by internal chemical profiles.

The body is always a two-way street. So, similarly (and again, as I’ve said before), if we hold certain postures/expressions, we reproduce internal chemical profiles associated with those postures, and “create” that emotional state in ourselves.

If you are in a “stressed” state, your body cannot perform optimally. The longer that state continues, the less-optimally you can perform.

If you experience a trauma that you do not resolve, your body sets into a self-sustaining cycle that, while it is attempting to resolve the trauma, reinforces the fact that you were unable to resolve it.

Play is one way out of this. Play is the ability to creatively approach situations. I don’t mean “play” as it is commonly construed (another problem with our society). I mean play as creativity, openness, vulnerability, expression.

As the cycle continues, it becomes a habit. Soon, your reaction to certain things (relationship problems, conflicts, physical challenges, etc.) “just happen,” and you “have no control” over them.

The only way to break the cycle is through an intervention. And the way we intervene in our own psycho-physiology is through awareness.

This awareness requires the ability to focus internally, on feelings as they are occurring, observing them as they happen, and sitting quietly with them. When we feel those patterns occur, of reactivity to stress, and can sit with them, we can feel their usefulness. We can feel their reality (are they still applicable to the now, or are they representative of a past event).

And then we can heal them.

I really appreciate Aaron Schwenzfeier’s recent post, quoting Carl Valle on athletes’ performance, posture, and motivation and confidence. Equally important is his earlier post on Emotional Movement Intelligence.

Oftentimes, athletes (or others) succeed in spite of the mental/physical/emotional blockages in their lives. But equally often, these successful people eventually – and when it happens, always tragically – succumb to these restrictions. It may come in the form of a torn ACL. Dog-fighting charges. Rape or murder. Suicide. Depression. Etc.

I have yet to see a single discipline that encapsulates all of the areas needed – physical, mental, emotional/spiritual – to address these issues. And perhaps such a discipline is impossible, due to the sheer amount of information needed to work in all of those areas…or useless, due to the incredible variety of individual experience in the world (i.e., “one size cannot fit all”).

But I encourage (and implore) you to explore your life in this way.

In addition to your “physical education” of working out, building muscle/strength/size/shape, or performing well, find a somatic practice that encourages deep awareness of your body and its movement, such as:
Feldenkrais Technique
Alexander Technique
Mattes Method
Hanna Somatics
Qi Gong/Chi Gong, Tai Chi, Yoga, and some other martial arts
Autogenic Training
Network Care

Here’s an example of what Network Care is about:

Similarly, seek out a method of psychological awareness that allows you to attune, listen, feel, release, and ultimately accept yourself, such as:
Meditation – Zen, TM, Buddhist, Taoist, Eckart Tolle’s works, etc.
Psychotherapy – Psychiatry, Psychology, Coaching, Therapy, etc.
Group Practices – Toastmasters, Religious groups, Wo/Men’s groups, etc.
Somatic Experiencing

Here’s an example of what Somatic Experiencing is about:

One size does not fit all, so you’ll have to do some searching to find what works for you. But please search. You can find videos about any of the things I’ve mentioned above on YouTube.

It’s worth it.

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.

Just read David Servan-Schreiber’s book “Anti Cancer, A New Way of Life.”

I thought it was a great book. It details David’s own experience with brain cancer. Being a surgeon, he has a unique outlook on the experience, and on his path into alternative therapies.

The thing I liked best about the book was the author’s use of the word “terrain” to describe the body. “How is your terrain,” a friend asked him after his first battle with the brain tumor (it came back).

Essentially, that view involves looking at your body as you would the earth. Are you dumping pesticides, poisons, etc., into your body? If so it will gradually lose the ability to repair itself, become clogged up, and develop terrible illnesses. If not, you’ll probably last a lot longer. [This view is also mentioned in Michael Odent's 1986 book, "Primal Health"]

So how does one take care of their terrain?

Diet
In short, eat organic, whole foods, cooked lightly. Get your veggies! Lots of garlic, cabbage, cruciferi, and everything else. Eat non-farmed/free-range grass-fed animals and their products. Drink plenty of pure water (he recommends a carbon filter), green tea (3 cups/day), and 1 glass of red wine per day (ONE?!). Avoid processed foods of any kind!

Exercise
30 minutes per day isn’t too much to ask. But he only asks for 30 minutes 3 days per week. I say 30 minutes per day. You can combine forces and do some sort of “intentional” exercise like yoga or Tai Chi to get the healing power of the mind involved (and get “deeper” into your body in the process).

Mentality
Meditation is the author’s answer, and I don’t disagree. I’ve always recommended Eckart Tolle’s book “The Power of Now,” or the simple, short book of exercises taken from that book. Shoot for 10 minutes twice a day to start. It’s easiest, usually, first thing in the morning, and later at night, when we’re not so busy. But a mid-day meditation session can give a huge boost. If you’re into “physiology tracking,” you can “meditate” while you exercise by following your body’s response to the movement…find the blockages, find the resonances…seek!

Social/Environmental/Spiritual
I think these all get tied together. While environmental toxins (avoid harsh chemicals in your daily life) aren’t necessarily related to your spirituality, your general environment is, and both are related to your social life. Make sure your environment is supportive and caring, full of love and good times. Laugh as much as possible. Do your best to resolve fears and unhappiness, in any way you can.

That’s about it. Read the book, it’s good!

It’s tempting to live in a world of black-and-white, yes/no, on/off. I’ve been a big user of this type of worldview over the course of my life, with varying results. It seems, for me, to be most common at the early stages of things. When I’m learning something new, or just starting a project. At that point, the only thing I can rely on is my past experience, and it is much easier to deal with the new thing in a binary, all-or-nothing fashion. It automatically excludes certain possibilities, and makes action easier.

Later, when doing that no-longer-new thing, the relationship has become more complex. Intricacies have been revealed that won’t allow for that dialectical approach.

This is true in any relationship I’ve had, hence “relationships” in the title. I mean personal relationships, relationships to my culture, myself, ideas, or activities.

I recently started reading the Yuan Dao again, which really highlights a concept central to “Eastern” philosophies – change. While the Tao Te Ching does the same, to me, it doesn’t expose an aspect of change necessary for change to happen a well as maybe the Yuan Dao (a commentary on and exposition of the concepts in the Tao) does – the constant underlying change.

There are two ways I look at this – First, there has to be a “ground” or framework from which something can change. There has to be a “normal” for you to notice “abnormal.” The second point, though, is that most of the distinction that we make between something in its original state, versus the “new” thing we end up dealing with is based on ideas of constancy we get from the way we use thought and/or language.

The trick, it seems to me, is that even the “constant” undergoes change. Heraclitus, the pre-Socratic philosopher, said “everything changes, and nothing remains still,” and “you cannot step into the same river twice” (because the river changes before you’ve stepped into it again).

Many Western approaches to his statements take the black/white approach – “oh, he only believed in change,” or “oh, there was nothing constant.” But if you read the rest of the fragments of his work, there is the concept of Logos, which seems to be the fount or wellspring of all things, and the “logic” of the process of change. I’ll mention this again in a second, as its something I think we need to start considering and teaching in our lives/practices/schools.

In the river example, by calling/naming it a river, we’ve created a static “thing” in our minds that we can refer back to. I think this is the “tool-making” process of language. By creating “things” out of processes, we create static entities that we can manipulate, that we can use or try to change the way we want to.

The reality is much different, however, because these “things” never truly transform into static entities. They continue to change every second, which may (or may not) cause us problems down the road, when we want that “thing” that we’ve defined in our mind to behave a certain way (the way it was defined when we “thinged” it), and it does not comply. The river changes course, constantly shifts, seeks its own path, and overflows its banks or bursts the dykes or dams we make to contain it. At the very least, the river’s flow wears down the things we put in its path, and we have to constantly do maintenance to our methods of control.

I think this happens sometimes for people as they age. They may have defined themselves based on the look of their face at the age of 28, or 18, or how fit they were then, or their athletic accomplishments (or failures). As they grow older, those things change, they fade, they become impossible or possible only in different ways.

By remaining attached to the earlier concept, the person causes themselves emotional pain and eventually they begin to suffer.

In our culture, now, when that happens, the response is often to continue to exert control. Get botox injections, take hormone replacement therapy, plastic surgery, etc.

In that approach, the lesson is lost. The meditation on change never occurs, except in a black and white mode, where change is the enemy to be destroyed.

Unfortunately, as with a couple of other things I’ve been talking about with friends recently (like the ability to create interest in yourself for certain things) we aren’t taught much about change in our schooling, or our culture generally speaking. Maybe it’s because it makes it more difficult to govern, our societies or our lives. Maybe the subject-matter is too deep (Heraclitus was called “the obscure”). But I wonder what would happen if we did begin to meditate on change more frequently, and the constant underlying change.

Not only that, but what would happen if we began to understand that our “constant”s could be malleable. That we could shift our understanding of some “thing” that we thought we understood…that we weren’t tied to the opinion or approach we first formed when we started something…

…that we could change.

This picture is so great, I have to share it. Borrowed from this Atlantic Monthly piece.

I love the look of exuberance! The cast-aside cane! The intensity!

More toys for the “old”!!!!!!!!

After my previous post about the possible loss of connection between human electrical fields and the earth-based field (or “geomagnetic field,” the GMF), I checked out this book:

The Geomagnetic Field and Life, by Aleksander Dubrov, outlines the myriad ways that the GMF affects terrestrial biology, and gives some suggestions as to how the GMF may have shaped the development of life on this planet to begin with.

I won’t go into details here. Too many to note. If you’re interested, Dr. Dubrov has actually posted summaries of all of his books online for free, here.

There’s a lot there, a lot to think about…take your time.

Frank Forencich, on the Exuberant Animal blog, asks “Have We Gone Mad?!”

He’s responding to an article in the New York Times that chronicles that author’s experience with flat feet and podiatrists.

Frank raises some good questions, I encourage you to head over there and check out his post.

I want to start here by talking about the social conformity experiments of Asch and Milgram back in the 1960’s.

Asch had people seated in a room, with a leader at the front. Six of the seven people sitting down were in on the experiment (“confederates”). Only one of them, number 7, was the “experimental variable.” There were cards with lines drawn on them, and the people were asked to identify the relative lengths of the lines.

When the subject was allowed to make his/her own decisions about the length of the lines, they were 99% accurate. When the other people (the confederates) were allowed to answer about the lengths of the lines first (incorrectly…as in, “A is shorter than B,” when it is not), the subject would conform to their answer 35% of the time.

In Milgram’s experiment, someone in a position of authority (a confederate) dressed in a lab coat, instructed the subject to ask questions to an unseen person in the room next door via a microphone/speaker system. Also, the subject was to administer electric shocks to that person if they gave incorrect answers.

The subjects would deliver “450 volt shocks” (there were no actual shocks administered, the screams and pleading of the person in the room next door were acted) 65% of the time.

Milgram said that part of the results were due to the conformity effect Asch noticed. But also, that part of it was due to “the agentic state theory, wherein, per Milgram, the essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another person’s wishes, and he therefore no longer sees himself as responsible for his actions. Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow.”

One of his later experiments combined conformity and obedience, and noticed significantly greater compliance in the subject.

Putting Your Best Foot Forward with Chuck Wolf
On Saturday, I attended a conference put on by the WAC Academy and the University of San Francisco, featuring Chuck Wolf, on the topic of “how the muscles and actions of the foot affect the hip, gluteal complex, and spine. By changing body angles, utilizing reaches, understanding how the foot functions, and applying the concepts from the Flexibility Highways, the fitness professional will come away with methods to enhance traditional exercises into a truly three dimensional chain reaction movement.”

Chuck was a really nice guy, and has a long history in post-rehab athletic conditioning. He walked around and said hello to everyone before the conference started, introducing himself and getting to know folks.

But…those shoes…
You know how they say that women often look at a man’s shoes to learn more about him? I do that too…for everyone. When I looked at Chuck’s, I was shocked. He had large, Adidas, what looked like motion-control sneakers on. What Mick Dodge would call “flower pots,” and Tom Brown would call “foot-coffins.”

I began to wonder what Chuck was going to tell us about the foot and ankle.

Been There, Done That
I’ve been in this industry long enough, and been to enough of these seminars, to know not to expect too much. Most of the time, the information you get is rehashed, recycled stuff from the PT world. Chuck, as it happens, works in a PT clinic in Orlando. He hangs with those guys. That’s his social crowd…uh…social conformity…hint…hint…

Starting out, he talked about the structure of the foot. The bony structure. We didn’t get into musculature, except for the gross musculature of the shin – gastroc/soleus, anterior tibialis.

Chuck actually said that “the control of the ankle comes from the shin.” While I agree with him to a point, I strongly disagree with him in every other way.

There are something like 25 muscles in the foot, and three layers of musculature within the foot itself. The bottom of the foot is laced with muscles. So, if you want to talk about things “from the ground up,” you need to start there. On the bottom of the foot.

Knee-Jerk Reaction
I’ll admit that I quickly tuned out. The other trainers there were doing some sort of social-conformity thing. They were very interested in speaking in PT lingo – “pronate, supinate, evert, invert, abduct, adduct.”

These last two, by the way, are apparently defined in certain circles, opposite to the normal understanding – that is, by judging whether a limb or body part is ab/adducting by the motion of the distal portion (furthest from the trunk of the body) of the limb to the proximal portion. I learned that abduction is when you move the limb or body part away from the midline, and adduction the opposite. And I’m not clear on the reasoning for the new definition. If you can enlighten me, please do!

Anyway, they wanted to “dig deep,” but only into what he was presenting. Not into the topic itself. Which I guess is fair. I guess.

Chuck said that flat footed people have a greater incidence of ACL tear. That may be, but why is that the case? He didn’t say. Actually, a few studies (here’s one) have shown that people with flat feet have lower risk of ankle injury than those with high arches.

Yes, I know the ACL is in the knee, not the ankle. So you’re saying the strain isn’t transferred to the ankle, but instead, goes up the chain to the knee. I guess I can understand that, to a point. But usually, soft tissues change structure to match kinetic patterns. So the argument that a person with flat feet automatically has pre-stressed ACL’s is suspect to me. If they had flat feet their whole life, wouldn’t the ACL conform?

Is it flat feet that cause ACL tears, or is it poor motor patterns?

Haile Gebrselassie hasn’t had any problem being one of the world’s greatest long-distance runners for years in spite of gross over-pronation:

The point of this section, though, is what gets missed when you skip over the bottom of the foot, and move straight to the calf and ankle.

Or, also, what gets missed when you skip over the most basic reflex patterns that stem from the stimulation of the bottom of the (bare) foot? See this paper for ideas about that.

Where’s My Cookie?
Look, I can see the multitude of perspectives there are on the human body. I can smell them and taste them too. I’ve touched those perspectives with my own hands. Trust me.

I have two problems with what happened to me on Saturday:
1. The body is not that complicated.

2. The way of addressing it in these complicated (and contradictory) terms, only causes confusion and dismay. And,

3. People seem to have turned off their brains…they’re just following anyone who stands up and says “follow me.”

I’ll explain the way I look at the body in another post…so STAY TUNED!!!

Sorry for the rant…hahaha…