Tip Free online learning from leading meat experts(including the thoracic ring people)

[proud]

http://www.sportsrehabexpert.com/pub...affID=optimums

Hey, its' free and I bet quite interesting...

[Diane]

I wonder if closet organizing will come up as a topic.
I am recalling the interview by Karen Litzy of the Lees. How to make your way through the maze of clinical reasoning based entirely on meso reasoning, such that you need yet another course to learn how to organize all your clinical reasoning about biomechanics. Maybe a ring tree.

[proud]

All these meat philosphies/rabbit holes/wild goose chase things are sure to send participants heads on a fun filled,meaty carrossel, head spinning ride to nowhere land:

[Jo Bowyer]

I want to hear Dr Spina the Canadian chiropractor.

[PRPerformance1]

I have a curiosity when referring to the practitioners as meat experts and closet organizers.

Is it your contention that they are not considering the influence of the nervous system in their approaches?

Bill Hartman

[GregLehman]

I agree with Bill. As Keith has been writing it is important to respect everyone in our debates.

[advantage1]

I don't think the practitioners have been referred to as 'meat experts'. Its the treatment/assessment approaches that seem to be focused on the postural/structural model that appears 'meaty'.

However, it would be nice if one of these pracitioners could explain their use of manual tehrapy from a neuroscience perspective. I suspect that some of these interviews will discuss breaking adhesions and 'corrceting' posture/alignment.

(forgive spelling as I type between patients)

[GregLehman]

Rob wrote:

However, it would be nice if one of these pracitioners could explain their use of manual tehrapy from a neuroscience perspective. I suspect that some of these interviews will discuss breaking adhesions and 'corrceting' posture/alignment.

It sounds like you place "breaking adhesions" in the same category as "correcting posture/alignment". Both, in a bin that is not plausible or relevant to pain.

I still consider posture (or its dynamic analogue - form) relevant to pain. I try to change how people move, how they think about moving and get them to explore new movement patterns.

There is still some value in discussing this. There might even be some common ground and something useful about their approach.

[PRPerformance1]

I don't think the practitioners have been referred to as 'meat experts'. Its the treatment/assessment approaches that seem to be focused on the postural/structural model that appears 'meaty'.

However, it would be nice if one of these pracitioners could explain their use of manual tehrapy from a neuroscience perspective. I suspect that some of these interviews will discuss breaking adhesions and 'corrceting' posture/alignment.

(forgive spelling as I type between patients)

All due respect, the title of this thread directly refers to the practitioners as meat experts.

When you took their courses, did they fail to provide this rationale?

Bill

[Bas Asselbergs]

Greg, your take on "posture" is quite different than what we read and hear from the mainline ortho, muscle-balance, fascia, strength/weakness, alignment people.

You address prolonged held positions as bad all around, and promote corrective motion , if I am not mistaken.
Most if not all of the big meat-presenters address the "proper" posture from a cultural, biomechanistic and static ideal to reduce painful conditions.

I think we can put THAT particular posture scheme in the same pot as breaking adhesions.

[GregLehman]

Agreed Bas,

That's why I'd give some of these presenters the benefit of the doubt. They may try to do that as well. If not, we have a respectful debate.

Greg

[John W]

Hi Bill,
I don't think there's anything wrong with being a "meat expert", I just think we commonly see "meat expertise" misapplied in the treatment of painful conditions. The thoracic ring approach is a good example of that, in my opinion.

Recently there was a discussion on Facebook about an athlete s/p ACL reconstruction with persisent knee pain while running, and Jason Silvernail, a long-time member and moderator here, brought up the issue of extension loss that commonly occurs in these patients. He suggested that providing interventions that are directed towards increased knee extension might be appropriate for this patient. Since the knee joint is designed biomechanically to achieve full extension in order for it to function optimally, the loss of that motion- for whatever reason- might contribute to altered neurodynamics around the joint, nociception and then pain. Therefore, understanding the biomechanics of the knee joint is requisite to providing an informed plan of care.

The problem begins when so much emphasis is placed on biomechanics that clinicians causally link them to the patient's pain. A prime example of this cursory clinical reasoning around biomechanics in our profession has been referred to as "The Fatal Heuristic". In the example above, it's conceivable that some patients s/p ACL reconstruction have not achieved full knee extension due to some connective tissue changes associated with the surgery, but they were able to adapt for whatever reason and then not experience pain with the activites that they want to perform.

Many of us have been beating this drum for so long, and it seems to obvious to us, that in our exasperation we resort to some tongue-in-cheek descriptions of those who cling to this very dated and flawed model.

[Cupplesperformance]

I don't think the practitioners have been referred to as 'meat experts'. Its the treatment/assessment approaches that seem to be focused on the postural/structural model that appears 'meaty'.

However, it would be nice if one of these pracitioners could explain their use of manual tehrapy from a neuroscience perspective. I suspect that some of these interviews will discuss breaking adhesions and 'corrceting' posture/alignment.

(forgive spelling as I type between patients)

I would be cautious in suspecting what some of these practitioners may or may not say. As science changes and new information comes out, oftentimes one's stances/understanding/explanations change to account for this shift.

Is it fair to say let's listen to what the speakers have to say and then discuss that?

Many of the people on this list appreciate the nervous system's influence and intertwining that with other systems. See below.

1. Ron Hruska - I have taken many PRI courses; posture is not talked about causing pain. They do not even discuss posture in the traditional sense. I see the goal with these people is movement freedom and variability achieved via the autonomic nervous system a la breathing.

2. Val Nasedkin - The omegawave deals with measuring HRV, which is thought to correlate with the status of the ANS amongst other things...sounds neuro.

3. Andreo Spina - I cannot speak on his behalf fully, but I have heard this guy pulling a lot of research into his method. He has a few quotes regarding the nervous system here -

http://www.jeffcubos.com/2013/12/23/...-andreo-spina/

4. Gray Cook and other FMS/SFMA people - Gray based most of his system off of PNF...neuro

5. Linda Joy Lee - I may not agree with how the Lees assess/treat, but I have read her book "The Pelvic Girdle" and in one of the first 5 chapters (chapter 5 I believe) they talk a great deal about pain science and the nervous system.

6. Charlie Weingroff - Talks a lot about the nervous system and most of what we are dealing with influencing the ANS

"Ultimately, the nervous system is any part of the organs that allow for transmission of signal. It’s an exchange of volitional action or non-voluntary reactions on how a body does what it does, whether it’s movement or whether it’s homeostasis and just maintaining normal mechanisms of health and sustenance." ~Charlie Weingroff

7. Patrick Ward - Discusses much about the ANS and influences not just on pain but performance.

http://optimumsportsperformance.com/...-for-a-way-in/

It seems that at least a bulk of the group speaking appreciates the nervous system; so let's learn, discuss, and debate what is said once it is said.

[advantage1]

It seems that at least a bulk of the group speaking appreciates the nervous system; so let's learn, discuss, and debate what is said once it is said.

Sounds fair.

[proud]

I have a curiosity when referring to the practitioners as meat experts and closet organizers.

Is it your contention that they are not considering the influence of the nervous system in their approaches?

Bill Hartman

Well I will concede that the title was indeed provocative and that I titled it in that manner by design.

I will also say that perhaps referring to the presenters as "meat experts" was likley more harsh then it should have been. As John stated, it was a bit tongue in cheek really.

I respect all my colleagues and especially those who are invested in what they do. Respecting a colleague and agreeing with their premise are quite different though.

I will also be clear on something. I am really only familiar with the SFMA crew from a "taken the course" perspective. I recently attended the SFMA in Toronto with Dr. Plisky and I really liked the guy. Smart, engaging and a good presenter. But without a doubt there was barely a passing platitude towards the nervous system in that presentation and my efforts to find it within the SFMA group in general has been quite futile. So yes...I think they have some work to do with that model of evaluation...it is way overly meaty and participants are owed better than that in my estimation.

Some of the others I've followed for a while (Diane Lee...being a fellow Canadian PT for 20 years). I think the thoracic ring idea (debated here on a seperate thread...is waaaay wrong). I know it's not Diane Lee presenting but the two share the concept.

Will I be tuning in to the presentations? You bet...perhaps my perspective on the other presenters will change after. That's why I said it should be quite interesting...