L.I.F.T.

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.

Social Conformity Is Evident in This...hold on a sec...where'd I put my blow-dryer...

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.

Yeah...you tell em Sammy!

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.

4 layers of foot muscle...courtesy Frank Netter

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.

There it is! Right there! I can see it!

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.

This little cutie knows what I'm talking about...

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…

I recently read, for the first time, about the Peckham Experiments.

What, you ask, were those?

Well I’m glad you asked!

The Peckham Experiments have been a series of “experiments” on the effects of social solidarity and access to physical activity on a socioeconomically disadvantaged group (the “Peckham” region of London).

What happens, the originators asked, when a “deprived” group of people are given a place where they can have access to sporting events, physical health monitoring, and other workshops, at a very very low cost?

Very good things – that’s what!

People begin to organize themselves into small groups to achieve creative ends.  Health indices go up, and disease indices go down.

Everyone gets happier.

Shall we dance? Well...we are dancing!

A Class Divided

This next “experiment” left me shocked and amazed.  I hope you take the time to watch the entire 50-minute documentary about this incredible woman, and her experiment.

The incredible woman is Jane Elliot, formerly a 3rd-grade teacher in Riceville, IA.  The experiment involved separating the children in her class into two groups – those with brown eyes and those with blue.  Whichever group was judged to be “superior” on the first day was given special privileges, the other group had privileges taken away.

Why, you might ask, would someone do this?  Ms. Elliot was moved by the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., to teach her schoolchildren about racism and prejudice – by having them experience it firsthand.

While her method would not fly today, watch the video and see what you think about it for yourself.

I think both of these experiments reveal a glimpse of the profound effect that small changes in our environment can have on us.

My good friend Aaron Schwenzfeier asked me if I had read any books that talked about the information from my last entry – about the continuity of an animal with its habitat.  The rest of this post is my response, with some modifications.

The short answer is no, I haven’t read any single text that shows this continuity.  The closest I could come would be something like Lynn Margulis’ works, or James Lovelock’s and others’ works with the Gaia hypothesis.

In a world where everything needs to be validated by “science,” it’s no sufficient to use common-sense to combine the different principles you’ve learned into a coherent whole.

Please don't drop the ball!!!

Breakdown

The “animal-as-continuous-with-habitat” is an obvious thing, but who’s going to write about it?  What science would you cite? I’m not sure there is much.  There are some studies coming around about the importance of environment with regard to physical activity, even health (for instance, the Framingham study that correlates social group with obesity) but they’re few and far between.  It’s hard to quantify.  And that’s what science wants – quantities.  Qualities are still derided.

The other part, “eat in season, locally,” is the same thing – continuity with environment.  But dieticians can’t quantify that, again.  They can count calories, vitamin content, etc.  They can count other things (OCD), but they can’t count the effect of eating things from other places than your natural geography.

Activity levels waxing and waning with the seasons is as old as life itself.  All animals do this, not just human animals.  The squirrel hides nuts away for the cold winter, builds a large layer of fat to keep itself warm, etc.

Is there a way to measure that, though?

Meow...it's THIS big...

Happiness

Finally, how do you measure happiness?  A few studies have tried, and they create “scientific” versions of happiness – with plenty of “categories” to rate different aspects by.  Is that how happiness is made?  What about the feeling of safety and security that comes from living within your tribe?  How would you measure that.

And even if you could, what would happen?  What if you realize, through the course of your research career, that a feeling of happiness and safety was all that really mattered?  What would you say?  How would you say it?  How would a message like that be taken by your scientific colleagues?  By the general public?

The other thing, and perhaps the biggest impediment to getting real answers about things, about the true “optimal state” of the human animal, is revealed by this question – Why does science measure what it does, and not the other things?  What is guiding science?  Who gains from scientific research?

An ounce of gold, or a pound of lead?

You’re in The Cul-tcha

Culture dictates all.  So, what does our culture value most?  Money.  Our culture is built around the flow of money.  An economic depression is the most terrifying thing imaginable in our society (other than a nuclear holocaust).

I’d go so far to say that much, if not most, of science is guided by money.  You need funding to do science.  So you have to do science in a way that gets that funding.  If you can get funding for a particular research design and not another, you’ll choose the design that gets you the money.

Who is paying that money?  I would hazard a guess, again, that much, if not most of the money being donated to the pursuit of science is being donated by people who want to make more money from that science.

They are pursuing science for the sake of money.  Not for the sake of discovering “truth.”

A few examples of this, taken from the ideas in my post:
The studies done on continuity of animal with habitat are largely from zoo populations – trying to discover how to keep zoo animals alive.  Why would you do that?  What is a zoo for?  What does a zoo tell people who visit it?  How does a zoo treat animals?  I’ll let you answer those questions for yourself.

Studies of diet largely focus on quantity of micro/macronutrients and the physiology of the body.  Almost none involve the fact that that body is not a “physiology” without its habitat and social environment.  There is no isolated “body” to study…it doesn’t exist alone, in a vacuum.  But, further, and again – What is the purpose of dietary research, and to what ends is that research put?  Who gains from dietary research?

Our measurement of chronobiology has largely been to discover how to handle “shift workers,” and make them healthier and more productive.  There is some research on circadian and ultradian clocks, but it isn’t integrated into anything else.  It’s just “science.”  Another problem, I guess, that should be mentioned.  Science for science’s sake is even less effective than science for money’s sake.  It may produce amazing information, but what happens to that information, if it is done in a culture that is separate from the main flow of science?  It sits there.  It doesn’t get used or analyzed, or integrated into the big picture.

Studies of happiness and culture are similarly isolated from other science.  There has bee a trend in the past ten years to combine scientific zones of study, in fields like psychoneuroimmunology, or social ecology, etc.  But they aren’t really making themselves heard that strongly.