Deconstruction of "Z-Health Performance Solutions"

[GeoffNeupert]

My name is Geoff Neupert. The quote Keats excerpted that started this discussion is off my blog, geoffnsblog.blogspot

I will admit upfront that I have no knowledge of SomaSimple, Mr. Dorko and his works/systems, or the deep or even many simple workings of neurophysiology. (Looks very interesting though...) I am a trainer and former division 1 strength coach. I have trained athletes from the middle school level to the professional level. I have rehabbed individuals that PTs and chiros could not. My wife is a PT, DPT and graduated from one of the top three PT schools in the country (Just thought I'd throw that in there to show that I can relate to this tough crowd on some level).

I have had many orthopedic injuries which were not permanently alleviated using chiro (No surprise there, I'm sure, since this is a PT board!), PT, Physiatry, Orthopedic medicine, and massage. I was referred to Z-Health by a colleague and was very skeptical to the point of mockery at first. But you know what, it worked on my injuries, even doing it wrong.

I have been using Z-Health every day with myself and with my clients for the last 18 months. Some of the trainers who worked for me in my previous business used it daily (still do). I don't care what the names of things that work are, only that things work. If you're system is working for you, great. If it's not or not working as fast for you as your intuition is telling you it should, great. That's exactly how I found Z-Health. Also, although quite expensive to some, my business is doing well enough that $2000 is not that much money for me to spend on a cert/course.

So please feel free to ask me any questions you may have. I won't be able to answer them on a "deep science" level in most cases, but my experience in the field more than makes up for my lack of knowledge, that is, if you accept that anecdotal evidence is the beginning of the scientific method.

Thanks, and I hope to be of service.

Oh, yeah, and as unprofessional as this will sound, Z-Health's marketing "ploys" suck. I wasn't "sucked in" by the marketing, but by the positive experience of getting out of pain.

[Luke Rickards]

Hi there Geoff. Welcome.

Most of the regular contributors here aren't much interested wonderful results. Telling some people that aliens flew down and fixed them will 'work' for some people. We are interested in the How and whether that How has anything to add to our understanding of human physiology as it relates to practice.

Since you won't be able to answer any questions here in a scientific manner, your answers in this regard may not be of much help.

[Jon Newman]

Hi Geoff,

I'm glad you got better. It's curious that you got better even when doing Z exercises wrong. Perhaps you should give yourself more credit and less to the exercise program but that's just my take.

Oh, yeah, and as unprofessional as this will sound, Z-Health's marketing "ploys" suck. I wasn't "sucked in" by the marketing..

Actually I agree and as far as I'm concerned, marketing is the only thing that has been accomplished in this thread. I'm all for deleting the whole thing so as not to waste space or give any more eyes to this system. It's already got way more views than it's worth.

[toddhargrove]

Barrett,

Its possible that there isn’t a good connection between your concept of adaptive potential and Dr. Cobb’s concept of movement fluency. But here’s why I saw one.

I see that you have defined adaptive potential as a persons’ ability to have pain free tolerance of repetitive movement, a forceful blow or a prolonged position.

I interpret Dr. Cobb’s idea of movement fluency as being a similar idea. Simply that the more pain free options for movement that a person has, the less likely that they will suffer pain as a result of the physical demands of life.

To elaborate a little more on the “survival vocabulary” idea – I recall Dr. Cobb stating something to the effect that you can get by or “survive” in a foreign country with a vocabulary of a few hundred words. But that doesn’t make you fluent. He looks at movement the same way. Many people have only a survival vocabulary of movement, and when that vocabulary is exceeded by the demands of life, pain is a likely result. For example, if I don’t have good mobility and coordination in squatting, and I spend the whole weekend gardening, there’s a good chance I will experience some pain.

At the end of the weekend, I might say that the gardening exceeded my adapative potential, or I might say that squatting is not in my movement vocabulary. That’s the connection I see.

[nari]

Hi Geoff, thanks for posting.

Anecdotal evidence can be useful in that if it is very positive over a long period of time, it can lead to finding out the hows and the whys. That takes a lot of time and hard slog, and this has not been done by Dr Cobb on a level that is acceptable to scrutiny. If it has been done, then we were waiting for the list of references.

Have a think about why the drills still worked for you even when you did them "incorrectly". Does that suggest to you something odd?

I am not sure our answers to your questions would be helpful, and vice versa.

Nari

[Diane]

Since no science support was forthcoming after an entire page of posts, and it went to two pages of not much but "gee, it works", I've moved this thread back to the rubbish cube where I moved it once already, and took out the live link. C'mon, I'm sure you guys can do better. Dig. Dig. Give us some juicy plausible stuff, not just descriptions and anecdotes and testosteronimonials.

[Randy Dixon]

I think that Z-health may actually get some results for some people. As an exercise program it is better than quite a few others, but what is being asked for, and not given, is some scientific support for any of the claims made. I haven't seen any put forward and I doubt if any will be, although we might find some articles that deal with some of the issues being mentioned. What has been put forward is personal testimony of how great it is, in the interests of fairness I think we should allow equal time to other systems with similar testimonies and claims. I'll begin.

http://www.theprrt.com/
(I have some personal experience with this one)

http://www.probodx.com/index.html
http://www.totalmotionrelease.com/
http://www.appliedkinesiology.com/
http://www.quantumtouch.com/
http://www.crahealth.org/testimonials/testimonials.html
http://www.painreliefnatural.com/htm...echnique_.html
(EFT emotional ?? Technique)
Jason Silvernails Quantum Star Trek Fitness (Dilithium Crystals not included)
I'd be interested in this one but it needs some more testimonials.

The thing that all of these share are that people believe they work, and in fact they have worked, and in some cases they work pretty well and and could probably be demonstrated to be at least somewhat effective. What they all lack is any credibility or understanding of why they work.

[Luke Rickards]

Testosteronimonials

Diane, that's priceless.

[bernard]

Well,

I tried to found out some good news for patients and PT but failed.
The given evidences are so evident but doesn't give any clue neither a single connection with pain that I think (the crew seconds me) that this thread reaches a definite dead end.

Perhaps it is time to say that Z is just an abbrevation of... Zero.:thumbs_do

[Jason Silvernail]

Randy-
My Star Trek fitness program is trademarked. My Lawyers will be contacting you shortly.
And, the reason the crystals aren't included is that that comes later, and the third level of certification, the "D Phase". You haven't paid for the goods yet, and you haven't seen real results since you haven't paid the $2000 to get to see Romulan Disruptor Periodization Concepts - it will totally rock your training and it's based on the nervous system. [/sarcasm]

These supposed "systems" like Z-Health are great for snagging the great ocean of slightly educated fitness trainers and conditioning people out there. Here's why:
1. They unfortunately don't know what they don't know about the human body. And they know just enough to make them dangerous, and just enough to make this crap sound plausible.
2. They also have a very large toolbox mentality that encourages them to find what "works" (especially if works for them or their clients personally) without regard to whether it makes sense.
3. They talk to their clients about their aches and pains and problems, and absorb the complaints into their psyche, such that they tend to be very suspicious of standard medicine - in their eyes it's "failed" too many people. A result of this is that they tend to embrace with open arms anything that standard medicine and therapy isn't. My wife, a personal trainer, puts it this way: they like this stuff not for what it "is", but for what it "isn't".
4. After seeing people in pain have less pain when they are active and when they interact with a positive person (the trainer), they tend to feel qualified to give people medical advice and to attempt to make medical diagnoses and provide medical care. Needless to say, they are woefully unqualified for such work. This fact, however, is usually lost on them.

My wife and I talk often of the utter infestation of quackery in fitness and training, and those points are some of the top contenders. Part of why I like the NSCA so much is that they are well-educated trainers and coaches who don't go in for this type of crap.

[Barrett Dorko]

Well, Jason said it better than I could, and I agree with him entirely.

Geoff says, "I won't be able to answer them on a "deep science" level in most cases, but my experience in the field more than makes up for my lack of knowledge, that is, if you accept that anecdotal evidence is the beginning of the scientific method." This comment contains just about everything that's wrong with "alternative" approaches. "Experience" can never make up for ignorance and anecdotal evidence is not the beginning of the scientific method. In fact, it's been argued that there is no such thing as "the scientific method," but perhaps that's another thread. Geoff's comment is the kind of thing that perpetuated the use of bloodletting for "health" from 300 to 1875. I presume that no one here will say I am equating this "Z" stuff to bloodletting. I'm not, of course, but the absence of thoughtfulness promoted by ignorance is much the same. In health care this will prove troublesome and problematic at best, and injurious at worst. We can do better.

Jason chose some time ago to place a quote from me beneath his name and I will admit it makes me smile each time: "It isn't what you're able to do that requires your courage, but what you have come to understand and are willing to express."

Though courageous enough to place their opinions regarding effect on these pages, the "Z" people have yet to indicate that they understand anything about the systems they are treating and have freely admitted this. If Dr. Cobb understands anything he doesn't evidently teach that part and if he shows up here I will be amazed - I am unwilling to accept "too busy" as an excuse to defend the theory underlying the care I or anyone else provides. However, if I knew I didn't have a defendable theory I'd remain silent.

No courage is required for that.

[Diane]

Ditto Jason and Barrett. Here's another thing to add to Jason's list: Dream up a completely incomprehensible name that says nothing, like z health, and wait for people to ask you what it means, start explaining it to them and they will listenm, and start their nodding process. They are already half hooked into buying the training. The letter "z" is the hook, and the word "health" is the worm that covers the hook until it's too late, and you are 2000 dollars out of pocket for a recombined package of flim flam.

[GeoffNeupert]

I should've known the can of worms I would open by posting late at night and using phrases like "deep science."

First, in my defense, I am not a healthcare provider. I am not in the medical field. Nor do I wish to be. I am in the fitness field. I do not look to replace the role of the PT or anyone else in the medical field. The blog that was excerpted was my private blog for my thoughts on Z-Health and its role in rehabbing my multiple injuries and getting me back on the weightlifting platform. What it has evolved into is an internal commentary on all things that relate to Z-Health, including the role this system plays with my clients.

Second, by now it should be obvious that I will not be providing scientific abstracts here to substantiate my claims. If you need these to proceed, stop here. What I will do is try to put forth some scientific concepts, without sarcasm, innuendo, or personal attack that we can all hopefully agree on that will give us some common ground upon which to not only stand but to move forward in understanding what Z-Health is and what it does.

Third, I think we can all agree on a few things here. We are all in the same profession: helping enhance human performance.

As PTs, you deal with altered/broken/faulty human performance and as a trainer I deal with altered/substandard human performance.

Can we all agree on that?

If so then we can all agree that human performance is nothing more advanced than movement and varying degrees of movement. Unfortunately, most trainers want to load substandard movement either through force or velocity. We have fancy programs we design that are micro-periodized and that train multiple motor qualities, etc, etc, etc...But what we fail at is understanding movement in it's simplest form. What is that? I'm guessing it's gait.

The Z-Health R-Phase Assessment is based on a gait analysis. That's it.

Proprioception. Hopefully we can all agree on what this is. I'll offer my definition in its simplest terms (I don't go for fancy--if you're looking for that, you'll be disappointed): The body's 3D map of itself. Z-Health, particularly R-Phase, seeks to increase proprioception via active joint mobility drills that focus on creating a full ROM in each joint. Why focus on the joints? Because of the large amount of mechanoreceptors found in the joint capsules. The mechanoreceptors are the largest, fastest propriocpetors and they send the quickest signal to the brain. They have the largest ability to impact the body as a whole. How does this improve proprioception? If a joint has lost full ROM, then the body no longer has access to that movement or any movement patterns that result from that particular movement. The body "forgets" how to move in that particular way. I believe Thomas Hanna coined this term "sensorimotor amnesia." If we can increase proprioception, then we can increase movement options.

Before I go on, I'll see what comes of this post.

And Mr. Dorko, if you wish Dr. Cobb to join this forum to explain his system better than I can, e-mail him at drcobb@ zhealth. net. He's a very easy-going guy. He may not even be aware that this resource exists.

[Diane]

Greg, on this forum we tend to look skeptically behind, underneath, through, upsidedown at everything. We have to or we're sc***ded.

Proprioception is one sort of input the brain uses to know where it's organism is in space. There is a whole bunch of other input (interoception of all sorts from every kind of tissue everywhere) that it uses to determine its "health".

I guess I am allergic to all this stuff mainly because of the chirohook thing. We've had lots of discussions here in the past about intellectual honesty and memes and memeplexes and so on. So let's deconstruct this a bit. The very first red flaggy thing that is apparent is the name of the system. What is that word "health" doing in the title?

In my mind, this system is for non-pathological people who are trying to optimize their performance levels. I don't question the term "performance" or that it's a "system" (not too sure about the term "solutions" frankly), but the inclusion of the term "health" to me just is needless bait to attract suckers to the training. And that use of the term "z" which appears to be perfectly meaningless, is the "hook", buried inside the bait. When someone asks what it means, the proprietor of the system has the asker nodding along while he's explaining it earnestly. It's already too late - the sucker is hooked and feeling the love, falling all over himself to spend $2000 or whatever on this training. Which may seem great to a fitness trainer or whatever, but around here we aren't too intrigued by any of this stuff. We are immune to the seductive charm of charismatic chiro snake oil sellers and it just smells pseudoscientific right from the start. It is so typical, such a standard tactic used by chiro types to separate people from their money.

At best, I'd sum the whole thing up by saying that it's all pretty much window dressing, repackaging of old stuff that is a novel stimulus to a fitness trainer's mind (it must get a bit boring, flinging that kettle thingy around after awhile..).

I mean you and the other posters on this topic no disrespect, but personally I am not especially interested in having this forum become a site that advertises by default a system that does not feed the scientific curiosity of PTs and instead focuses their attention back on mesoderm with only lip service paid to ectodermal unravellings. So we may actually lock the thread, disable the links, but leave it intact as an example of where we do NOT want this forum to go.

[GeoffNeupert]

Randy-
My Star Trek fitness program is trademarked. My Lawyers will be contacting you shortly.
And, the reason the crystals aren't included is that that comes later, and the third level of certification, the "D Phase". You haven't paid for the goods yet, and you haven't seen real results since you haven't paid the $2000 to get to see Romulan Disruptor Periodization Concepts - it will totally rock your training and it's based on the nervous system. [/sarcasm]

These supposed "systems" like Z-Health are great for snagging the great ocean of slightly educated fitness trainers and conditioning people out there. Here's why:
1. They unfortunately don't know what they don't know about the human body. And they know just enough to make them dangerous, and just enough to make this crap sound plausible.
2. They also have a very large toolbox mentality that encourages them to find what "works" (especially if works for them or their clients personally) without regard to whether it makes sense.
3. They talk to their clients about their aches and pains and problems, and absorb the complaints into their psyche, such that they tend to be very suspicious of standard medicine - in their eyes it's "failed" too many people. A result of this is that they tend to embrace with open arms anything that standard medicine and therapy isn't. My wife, a personal trainer, puts it this way: they like this stuff not for what it "is", but for what it "isn't".
4. After seeing people in pain have less pain when they are active and when they interact with a positive person (the trainer), they tend to feel qualified to give people medical advice and to attempt to make medical diagnoses and provide medical care. Needless to say, they are woefully unqualified for such work. This fact, however, is usually lost on them.

My wife and I talk often of the utter infestation of quackery in fitness and training, and those points are some of the top contenders. Part of why I like the NSCA so much is that they are well-educated trainers and coaches who don't go in for this type of crap.

Jason,

Unfortunately, I agree with most of your points. Unfortunately, I have not represented my thoughts well regarding Z-Health here up to this point. I'd like to address your points since they seem to be directed toward me.

Actually, your statement about uneducated trainers being snagged by systems like Z-Health shows your own personal bias and ignorance: Z "snags" trainers who are currently unsatisfied with the current offerings of some of the fitness programs out there "based on science" like Dr. Mike Clark's, (DPT, PT, MS) National Academy of Sports Medicine's OPT model and Mark Verstegen's "Core Performance" program and can poke holes in their models and tell you where the models broke down with their clients. (Ever notice how similar, almost identical these two programs look? Who's going to sue whom first do you think?)

1. It is true. I know that I don't know a lot about the human body, especially when it comes to neuroscience, etc. However, I am quite skilled and well versed on the musculoskeletal end of things and in manipulating the CNS thru loading to improve desired outcomes: speed, strength, body comp changes, etc. I see you are a DPT. So's my wife. That means that we probably have many of the same books on our shelves. I can and do read. I can also assure you that I am not dangerous and professionals in the medical field like physiatrists and orthopods can confirm that since they have sent me their patients and have liked the results.

2. What's wrong with using something without fully understanding how it works? Can you describe for us all the individual components of your car and what they do and how they work together to get you from point A to point B? (Please be as detailed as possible from the electrical system to the fuel pump.) If you can't, why do you drive--it could be "dangerous." (Arguably, we know it is dangerous that's why we impose limits and standards not only on drivers but on the operations of the vehicle.)

3. Actually, I believe whole-heartedly in standard medicine, when it's appropriate, like when I had my appendectomy. However, the cortisone shot in my hip only treated the symptom, which was inflammation caused by a torn labrum. It lasted 6 weeks. It didn't fix the underlying issues, which were movement (or lack thereof) related. The other option was surgery. I'm sure you can see why I wouldn't want to do that.

4. I don't give medical advice. I'm not a doctor. Or a doctor of physcial therapy. I recognize that I am woefully unqualified to give this advice. However, one of my very good friends is a family practice MD. He recognizes that he is woefully unqualified to give information above and beyond "move more, eat less" to his patients regarding exercise and nutrition. For the rest, he picks my brain.

5. Regarding the NSCA. I've been CSCS credentialed for 10 years. Last re-cert period I could've gotten the little *D after my CSCS if I chose to pay the extra $ and submit the requisite paperwork. (Now my words should carry more weight with you anyway...) However, I let my membership expire when 2 things happened: 1. In the monthly journal they published a program for improving mountain-biking performance that looked exactly like a football training program from the hang cleans to the agility drills; 2. When they elected a PT as the president of a "strength and conditioning association." If the irony of that statement is lost on you, well then, you're on your own...Not only that, I've met my fair share of CSCS's who don't know their C's from the S's, if you catch my drift. And just for future reference, if you don't know this already, a word of professional advice: never tell an olympic lifter how to squat--you'll only embarrass yourself. (I actually had a CSCS in the medical field try to do this to me...) What's my point in "sharing" this last part with you? We're all on the same team. We can all learn from each other. Just because you may have more letters after your name and more "formal" education then someone else only means one thing: You fit well into the teaching/learning model in our public institutions. You may not have heard this saying, but I believe it's appropriate here: The devil's not wise because he's smart, but because he's old. The point? Don't discount experience. Here's another thing: Right about the point in time when the PT was elected president, a bunch of the old-school coaches who belonged to the NSCA when it was The National Strength Coaches Association formed their own group called the Collegiate Strength & Conditioning Coaches Association which brought them back to their "roots." Why do you think they did that do you suppose?

By the way, I won't be buying your Star Trek fitness program. I'm not a big Star Trek fan. If you could design a Star Wars fitness program, you may be onto something...