Multi-Planar Movements - Modern Science disagrees?

[msimione]

I am having great success with intu-flow movements to include circles, figure-eights, flowing movements, and utilizing breath work throughout the movements. I recently was told from a chiropractor friends of mine that doing figure-8's and circular movements in a multi-planar fashion was bad for the neck and spine.

Of course, I did not try to defend anything because I realized the system is designed much differently than western strength and conditioning. And, I am not a therapist, doctor, or CST to defend these movements. However, I have always understood that energetic movements utilizing breathing and moving to tension is what builds strength and heals.

Need some help with scientific facts on multi-planar movements throughout the spinal cord. For my knowledge I want to understand the theories behind these movements from a western perspective. The energetic model is commom sense!

Marc

[Scott Sonnon]

I am having great success with Intu-Flow® movements to include circles, figure-eights, flowing movements, and utilizing breath work throughout the movements. I recently was told from a chiropractor friends of mine that doing figure-8's and circular movements in a multi-planar fashion was bad for the neck and spine.

Of course, I did not try to defend anything because I realized the system is designed much differently than western strength and conditioning. And, I am not a therapist, doctor, or CST to defend these movements. However, I have always understood that energetic movements utilizing breathing and moving to tension is what builds strength and heals.

Need some help with scientific facts on multi-planar movements throughout the spinal cord. For my knowledge I want to understand the theories behind these movements from a western perspective. The energetic model is commom sense!

Marc

Actually, the burden of proof falls upon your friend to prove that natural mobility is "bad" for the neck and spine (otherwise, it's like trying to make the argument that others are required "to prove God doesn't exist.")

There are of course times and conditions which make certain movements contraindicated until after healing. However, the notion that natural mobility is "bad" is ludicrous.

[Kathryn Woodall]

Marc,

I agree with Coach Sonnon. For people who don't have a condition which would contra-indicate it, Intu-Flow® is something that I recommend on a regular basis in my practice. I enjoy reading through current research so it would be a curiousity to see what your friend uses as research to confirm his/her comment that multi-planer motion is bad.

[Adam Steer]

Thanks Coach Sonnon and Kathryn. I have also run upon this type of blanket statement about certain ROM and have even met with disdain over the dynamic nature of Intu-Flow (moving freely through ranges of motion). My hypothesis is that in part it is a prejudice which stems from the ever increasing letigiousness of western society and the overarching desire in schools and other institutions to sanitize every activity against any possible risk. In the health club industry this obviously manifests itself in the "machine" craze. In school yards it is the banning of dodge ball, any type of contact sport, and I think any type of dynamic movement or movement through anything other than ordinary ROM. Our society seems to like to trade off a false sense of short term security for long term health problems.

[JonFrost]

It seems to me that the body is meant to move in every way that it can. I think in modern life we don't move enough through our complete range of motion. CST and programs like IntuFlow and the FlowFit series really drive this home for me. An example that I see is squatting (not as in weightlifting, but like the trinity squat from FlowFit). A lot of people will say that squatting is bad for the knees, but if you watch the Discovery channel many "primitive" cultures use that position to sit, eat, talk, etc. They are not fat and as far as I know don't have knee problems. My students (I teach TKD), adults in particular have a lot of trouble getting into a full trinity squat. I think it's because they never use a full range of motion in their daily lives. Incidentally, my exposure to CST and this forum has allowed me to improve the range of motion and flexibility in myself and my adult students DRAMATICALLY! Well, that may not have followed the topic of conversation very well, but those were my thoughts. Sorry.

Jon

[Coach Simon]

I agree with Kathryn and Coach Sonnon.

The initial cardinal range of motions of rotation may be well understood, but most health care professionals are not aware of translatory motions. Most do not include translations as goals in rehab.

Rarely do health care professionals recognize the need to recoordinate joint motions into whole body movements and even more rare, are programs that offer movement sophistication.

We are taught to routinely screen patients for insuffiency of blood flow to the brain by having them hold their breath, rotate, laterally flex, and extend their head and observe their response. If they have any adverse reaction to that type of maneuver, or have significantly uneven pulse or blood pressure, then we need to proceed with extreme caution when taking the patient to extreme cervical ROM either actively or passively, or we are warned to avoid that motion altogether.

If that ROM is permanently limited and never recoverable, then we should be talking about producing a rating of permanent impairment and possible disability.

However, even in most of these cases, we should not just give up on the person and sentence them to a life of increasing imprisonment in their physical body. They can still sophisticate their available, controllable, AROM into movements such as circles, figure eights etc., and intuitively, incremetally, and safely increase their ability to possess relative agility, grace and poise in this unstable 3-D gravitional environment.

Sophisticating movement is not an option, it is a birthright.

In this case, I believe that is not what the naysayers don't know that makes them ignorant, it is what they KNOW that aint so.

[Ryan Murdock]

Several years ago I was told by my physiotherapist that the press up variations (most of which I demo on my RMAX Powered Bujinkan Vol 2 DVD) were dangerous and possibly harmful. In fact, she looked at me with shock and horror when I showed them to her, and she seemed to scarcely believe that they were possible.

What is often missing in this case is the context. She hadn't seen the very Incremental Progression that went into strengthening my wrists in each of those degrees. Of course I would never recommend that someone jump into the more advanced versions (I'm very clear about this in the DVD), nor would I recommend these to someone with a history of injury, someone new to physical culture, or an older person with brittle bones. When I demoed the beginning stages and how I built this up incrementally, step by step, over the course of many months, it made much more sense to her (she was also intrigued with my Clubbells, and fascinated by CST in general - I wasn't an instructor back then, just an Athlete prepping for my first IC).

[Jarlo Ilano]

A little something I wrote a couple years ago.

http://www.rmaxinternational.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2469

In my opinion, it is not "modern science" that disagrees with combined movements. It is your chiropractor friend that disagrees.

[msimione]

Thanks everyone for offering your widsom and insight. I have come across situations like this before with ancient methods of strength and healing, and it is just plain lack of understanding and ignorance to open up to a bigger and better world of health.

I will ask about the science and methods that contraindicate this if he has it, so I can see for myself if he has proof or just judgment.

Marc

[Coach Gostnell]

Mitch wrote:
Sophisticating movement is not an option, it is a birthright.

A gem of a quote if ever there was one! Thanks, Mitch.