No announcement yet.

Science Sunday III

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Science Sunday III

    The elimination of the scientific method has not been easy and it has taken a long time, but was the only way that a return to what I've called "the medieval mind" that has overwhelmed many in therapy was to take place.

    Today, there is dry needling and "trigger" points to discuss - not that any discussion is permitted. Even the ideas around interpretation has been proposed by suggesting others read Why We Get Sick. "Evidence-based" is considered "gold" and science is used to sound "sciency" when describing things that go unexplained or confusing to many wonderful people.

    There's a scene in North Dallas Forty that depicts a defensive lineman being injured (illegally) by a couple of players from the other team.

    How has therapy followed this script?
    Last edited by Barrett Dorko; 02-07-2017, 02:02 PM.
    Barrett L. Dorko

  • #2
    Injury has been mentioned. Perhaps I should define that. Injury occurs when something requires "healing" or repair. Sometimes time is involved here. Any ideas here?

    According to a prolific writer here, healing means "to make whole." Do you have a problem with that? Is science involved here?
    Barrett L. Dorko


    • #3
      Injury has been mentioned. Perhaps I should define that. Injury occurs when something requires "healing" or repair
      And this raises the issue of how and to what extent "repairs" need to be made.

      For example, flexibility can have a negative impact on performance. Sue Falsone points this out in her analysis of what she learned working with a baseball pitcher. The athlete had a non-painful throwing elbow, but that elbow lacked 15 degrees of extension. She notes that nothing had happened and that the player hadn't injured himself, nor ever had surgery.

      The first reaction, and I can understand it, would be to think this deficit may be performance limiting, but in reality, that lack of range in that athlete was an adaptive change. When with therapy that range improved to about seven degrees above neutral, that pitcher began having difficulty locating his fastball.

      The analysis: he had gained enough range of motion in his elbow that is was changing his pitching release point and resulting in the ball coming out of his hand at a totally different angle.

      So what happened? The trainers stopped doing all of the their manual interventions. but then he began to stiffen up. and did begin to experience pain. Why? His elbow was now lacking about 25 degrees of extension.

      What happened next? They began working on his range of motion again, and noting that, at around 15 degrees short of elbow extension, he began to feel better.

      The conclusion: That player needed that 15 degree elbow contracture. If he improved it, his performance suffered, and if it got worse he experienced pain. They determined that 15 degrees above neutral was needed to maintain what was his normal motion of the joint.

      I guess "just right" is something we should have all learned from Goldilocks...


      • #4

        Improvement and correction are two terms I've used in the past. Reduction in discomfort seems too simplistic. Not sciency enough. After all, we're trying to sell something.

        Repair doesn't always involve surgery, but it sure seems to have helped.

        Goldilocks is a wonderful reference.

        I wonder when it will be misunderstood or no longer known.
        Barrett L. Dorko


        • #5
          The protective acclimatization you describe (15 degrees of flexion) in pitchers elbow points out, is this actually protective? Researchers (NSCA) are not sure, round shoulders for wrestlers too. Do we want to correct? Or leave alone?

          Currently, for their weight training (athletes), is to not reinforce the mechanism (round shoulders). On the other hand, probably not try to correct the protective mechanism (round shoulders) either.


          • #6
            The difference between performance and appearance is often tricky.
            Barrett L. Dorko


            • #7
              By the way, I say that healing requires time, position and metabolic economy. I read that somewhere and I say that last one because it makes me sound smart.

              The first is shortening more and more and the other two are almost or entirely invisible.

              Aside from what I mentioned about healing, are there other requirements?
              Last edited by Barrett Dorko; 03-07-2017, 12:13 PM.
              Barrett L. Dorko


              • #8
                Many are certain about an opinion they believe in.

                None of this follows the scientific process because in science all knowledge is provisional and an argument containing math (with "proofs") formed a basis for what was proposed. Prediction was given and "belief" might be affirmed but not given - until prediction was shown to be correct. If a "scientific" theory didn't predict something that didn't mean it was wrong. It simply hadn't included something or it had misinterpreted something. It can be way off, but if belief, certainty and opinion aren't involved, well, you know.

                In your experience, has therapy followed this model?
                Barrett L. Dorko