Tweet
Geoff,
I think we have explained several times it is the why that we are concerned with, not the results. We have all seen "GREAT RESULTS" from our own work and from everyone selling or using a system. If you aren't interested in "why" then there isn't going to be much here for you.
and the rest:
I haven't seen much about Z-health theory, except what I've seen here but let me give it a shot. First, we need to accept the presence of the withrdrawal and startle reflex. The body is an organism geared to survival and it has inherent reflexes to protect itself. The startle reflex, for example is part of our fight or flight programming to cover up vital areas, it generally involves movements that we would consider flexion. In todays society we are often inappropriately activating the startle reflex without resolving the issue, and we are left in a "chronic startle state" (flexion), withdrawal can lead to a similar tightness caused by extension and the patterns can be observed for each. We also have a righting reflex, it keeps us upright and straight, it relies heavily on the visual system. We largely orient are bodies according to what we see, the eyes will seek to remain level, if they become unlevel, either due to dysfunction of either the eyes themselves or postural changes, (twisted pelvis, unlevel shoulders, forward or bent head position) the body will attempt to compensate to return them to level or to orient itself by the righting reflex to what it believes is upright given the input from the eyes. The next concept we need to understand is the integration of the whole body, each part affects the whole, the part where the dysfunction is felt is not necessarily the part that is actually the cause. There are some predictable and testable patterns that can be observed, people usually exhibit lateralization, and there are things such as Janda's crossed syndromes or that people sometimes walk swinging the same hand and leg together during walking. If we correct the pattern, we correct the dysfunction. One of the results of chronic withdrawal or dysfunctional movement patterns is activation of the arthrokinematic joint reflex (AJR), or joint protective reflex. This can be activated either by chronic dysfunction or by an acute episode, such as a sudden stretch, and it fails to resolve. If we take all the joints through their active ROM, in all planes and at different speeds, the nervous system recognizes that previously inhibited joint motion can now be moved safely. Once the nervous system recognizes the fact that all joints are healthy, the AJR is inhibited, allowing whole body movements to be done correctly and smoothly.
I could jazz it up some with terms like Type 1 and 2 afferents, cascading hormonal responses, oculocomotor, etc. but it would remain the same. Does it look familiar? Because to everyone on this list that has been here awhile it does. It is the simplified version of the same explanations that every other system gives, and it is, at best, surface dressing.
On the other hand, I came across z-health quite some time ago from Supertraining, at that time it just billed itself as an exercise system and I thought, and think, it was a good idea. It worked on things like body awareness, balance, flexibility, coordination and other attributes that were more neurological than muscular and I thought it was a good step in a direction that was largely being ignored. Scott Sonnon's Bodyflow, Egoscue's Patch, ProbodX, Crossfit were other systems that worked in more or less the same way and I liked them all to some degree. So I am not a critic of the system, for exercise, my criticism lies in the advertisement and claims I now see being made of it. That it is not only a treatment for medical and painful conditions, but that they border on the incredible. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof but I have seen no evidence, other than testimonials which every other system, even the most bizzare have plenty of. Exercise geared to them is beneficial to most people's pain states, so is self efficacy, motivation, touch, placebo, etc. What is needed is an explanation, of why z-health is different than other systems. What mechanisms are involved and how do you know this? How do you know the reliability and validity of your testing or even of your results?
Answers given as if parts of the system are already accepted aren't helpful. For example, we would open up the joints and then test the gait, the gait test showed great improvement. Neither the opening of the joints or the gait test has been show to have any validity yet, so referring to either isn't helpful.
Let me say that I know it is difficult to be in the position you are in now. You are facing what seems to be a difficult crowd. Understand, that you are not the first person to present this forum with a similar system based on similar evidence. If we are a bit impatient and maybe even short tempered about it, it isn't a result of this thread alone but also of many others and for some, over many, many, years. (I'm not calling anyone old, but some here ask "which one?" when you talk about what they were doing at the turn of the century).
Frankly, I don't have high hopes for this thread going anywhere, my only hope is that it remains friendly enough, or that everyone involves has the intellectual curiosity, to remain on this forum when its done.
I think we have explained several times it is the why that we are concerned with, not the results. We have all seen "GREAT RESULTS" from our own work and from everyone selling or using a system. If you aren't interested in "why" then there isn't going to be much here for you.
and the rest:
I haven't seen much about Z-health theory, except what I've seen here but let me give it a shot. First, we need to accept the presence of the withrdrawal and startle reflex. The body is an organism geared to survival and it has inherent reflexes to protect itself. The startle reflex, for example is part of our fight or flight programming to cover up vital areas, it generally involves movements that we would consider flexion. In todays society we are often inappropriately activating the startle reflex without resolving the issue, and we are left in a "chronic startle state" (flexion), withdrawal can lead to a similar tightness caused by extension and the patterns can be observed for each. We also have a righting reflex, it keeps us upright and straight, it relies heavily on the visual system. We largely orient are bodies according to what we see, the eyes will seek to remain level, if they become unlevel, either due to dysfunction of either the eyes themselves or postural changes, (twisted pelvis, unlevel shoulders, forward or bent head position) the body will attempt to compensate to return them to level or to orient itself by the righting reflex to what it believes is upright given the input from the eyes. The next concept we need to understand is the integration of the whole body, each part affects the whole, the part where the dysfunction is felt is not necessarily the part that is actually the cause. There are some predictable and testable patterns that can be observed, people usually exhibit lateralization, and there are things such as Janda's crossed syndromes or that people sometimes walk swinging the same hand and leg together during walking. If we correct the pattern, we correct the dysfunction. One of the results of chronic withdrawal or dysfunctional movement patterns is activation of the arthrokinematic joint reflex (AJR), or joint protective reflex. This can be activated either by chronic dysfunction or by an acute episode, such as a sudden stretch, and it fails to resolve. If we take all the joints through their active ROM, in all planes and at different speeds, the nervous system recognizes that previously inhibited joint motion can now be moved safely. Once the nervous system recognizes the fact that all joints are healthy, the AJR is inhibited, allowing whole body movements to be done correctly and smoothly.
I could jazz it up some with terms like Type 1 and 2 afferents, cascading hormonal responses, oculocomotor, etc. but it would remain the same. Does it look familiar? Because to everyone on this list that has been here awhile it does. It is the simplified version of the same explanations that every other system gives, and it is, at best, surface dressing.
On the other hand, I came across z-health quite some time ago from Supertraining, at that time it just billed itself as an exercise system and I thought, and think, it was a good idea. It worked on things like body awareness, balance, flexibility, coordination and other attributes that were more neurological than muscular and I thought it was a good step in a direction that was largely being ignored. Scott Sonnon's Bodyflow, Egoscue's Patch, ProbodX, Crossfit were other systems that worked in more or less the same way and I liked them all to some degree. So I am not a critic of the system, for exercise, my criticism lies in the advertisement and claims I now see being made of it. That it is not only a treatment for medical and painful conditions, but that they border on the incredible. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof but I have seen no evidence, other than testimonials which every other system, even the most bizzare have plenty of. Exercise geared to them is beneficial to most people's pain states, so is self efficacy, motivation, touch, placebo, etc. What is needed is an explanation, of why z-health is different than other systems. What mechanisms are involved and how do you know this? How do you know the reliability and validity of your testing or even of your results?
Answers given as if parts of the system are already accepted aren't helpful. For example, we would open up the joints and then test the gait, the gait test showed great improvement. Neither the opening of the joints or the gait test has been show to have any validity yet, so referring to either isn't helpful.
Let me say that I know it is difficult to be in the position you are in now. You are facing what seems to be a difficult crowd. Understand, that you are not the first person to present this forum with a similar system based on similar evidence. If we are a bit impatient and maybe even short tempered about it, it isn't a result of this thread alone but also of many others and for some, over many, many, years. (I'm not calling anyone old, but some here ask "which one?" when you talk about what they were doing at the turn of the century).
Frankly, I don't have high hopes for this thread going anywhere, my only hope is that it remains friendly enough, or that everyone involves has the intellectual curiosity, to remain on this forum when its done.
Comment