Martha Hawes improves her scoliosis w exercise

[Pooka1]

Looked this site over to remind myself of its content; from a laymans' perspective the information is clearly written, provides simple examples, and is occasionally funny! Now, if it was required reading for all of the folks who write articles, I wouldn't have to spend so much time digging through piles of manure to locate the scholarly work. --If this is objectional language, I will remove it.--

For the purposes of comparison, Science Buddies (www.sciencebuddies.org) is cookbook science. Though it has its place, it stops at a grammar school level of information--which is frequently the only science presented in twelve years of education.

FYI: I've pulled info from both sites to give to my daughters to read with regard to their science fair projects while in 3rd - 6th grade.

Nice post. I agree with your points.

I especially agree that there is obvious obfuscatory/obscurantist material in certain of the bracing literature papers. It is patent.

The bracing literature should follow the format:

a. what brace is being tested and what is the the wear protocol
b. description of test population and control population (or natural history)
c. how they measured/quantified compliance
d. the results sorted AT LEAST by curve type, chrono age, and any other factor that has been shown to affect progression
e. compare the results to the control population or known natural history

Nothing more, nothing less.

[flerc]

I suppose point C include the reduction in brace. Of course cases without enough reduction should to be excluded for every kind of analysis. Nobody may blame the brace if it not is used in the right way.

[Pooka1]

I suppose point C include the reduction in brace. Of course cases without enough reduction should to be excluded for every kind of analysis. Nobody may blame the brace if it not is used in the right way.

Nobody knows the "right way" or even if a right way exists. They need to test if 50% correction in-brace is overkill or not enough. This is why the people who obsess about being in the Spinecor brace are so sad... they don't realize the Montreal crowd are just picking a number and standardizing it in order to publish, NOT because 20 hours (or whatever) is the "magic" number that works and that 21 will NOT work and 23 is overkill.

Bracing is still in the research stage.

[flerc]

I did not read anything about that article and I don’t understand what have to do Spinecor, but if 100% would be the optimum (as common sense suggests) I cannot imagine how 50% may be overkill.. except a great effort would be necessary to achieve that reduction..
The same may be said about 24 hours.. but of course is clear it have a ‘cost’, so is logic to try to determine the minimal time in brace.. surely in the rest of the time, much care should to be taken in not loosing the vertebral alignment..
After 5 centuries, bracing is still in the research stage..

[sjmcphee]

Firstly they need to understand exactly how each curve pattern progresses before they can make braces that will be truly effective.

[flerc]

but it would not lead to different braces for different curve pattern?

[sjmcphee]

Yes, thats my logic.

[flerc]

Yes, thats my logic.

Is very reasonable your logic. I really have not idea how it could be implemented in a brace. For me a brace is something allowing to satisfy a necesary condition in a every corrective treatment: to keep the spine all the straight that flexibility may allow. Sometimes may be also a sufficient conditions and sometimes not.

[sjmcphee]

Hey Flerc,
The real answer may be that they need curve pattern specific braces, for both day and night... for bracing to be effective.
Something Josh (TOscoliosis) said about a week ago, that comes to mind that I agree with.
Scoliosis biomechanics is loaded differently for standing, sitting and laying.
Most importantly out of this, I believe that the load on the spine in the day -standing/sitting - awake is different to what goes on when your laying -sleeping.
In regard to the vicious cycle of loading:
I think during daytime and nightime the load on the curve pattern is doing different things.
In daytime it's giving the load of being in a bipedal state to the curve pattern.
Loading it up.
The curve pattern is adjusting to deal with this.
At nighttime the curve pattern tries to reset itself, to reduce and even out the load placed on it during the day.
But its not like a wave that just goes in and come back out.
In scoliosis once the loading up sequence starts,(moving into a bipedal state from sleeping) its changing the structure of the spine, and when it begins the reset part (laying down and going to sleep) it resets it in relation to the way it's loaded, (progression) rather than putting it back in the reverse of the way it loaded up during the day (reverse progression).
This is very much the vicious cycle of loading at work and how I believe scoliosis progresses - What it's doing.

Funny thing is if you stand up too long you get sore and if you sleep too long you get sore, anyone else notice that?

This is my theory of understanding one aspect relating to the vicious cycle of loading in scoliosis.
- although it does not take into account any DNA or genetic aspects of the condition and they may prove these ideas incorrect.

- Scott

Disclaimer: This is unproven laypersons folk science and may not actually relate to scoliosis at all !

[flerc]

Yes, I also think in what Joshua said about the difference among sitting and standing. Is an extremely logic conclusion that differences should to be because something in legs.. a great osteopath said me that differences in height in both sides of the hip may be sometimes because a difference in arches feet. A clear geometry reason!

Hey Flerc,
In scoliosis once the loading up sequence starts,(moving into a bipedal state from sleeping) its changing the structure of the spine, and when it begins the reset part (laying down and going to sleep) it resets it in relation to the way it's loaded, (progression) rather than putting it back in the reverse of the way it loaded up during the day (reverse progression).
This is very much the vicious cycle of loading at work and how I believe scoliosis progresses - What it's doing.

Sorry, I'm not understanding this, may you say it in other words?
Surely biomechanics is very different lying down. A very flexible spine should to be analyzed to determine what is failing that not allow the spine to remains straight as I was saying in post #99
That is what must to be analyzed, what exactly happen in the transition from one stage to the other (lying- stand)
If in the inclined plane in 90º, without doing forces in the same directions that brace does to hold the weight of the spine, the curve not arise again, it would be very reasonable to believe that is not a matter of vertebra deformity the impossibility to remains straight, so some other tissue would be failing. Mri was used to know that super flexibility is because ligaments http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlqD1OC9dss
Why nobody is using it to understand the problem?? It should not to be a traumatic experiment for nobody and probably ‘the last question’ may be answered
Even an inclined plane would not be necessary. Being lying down with someone holding the feet (simulating the floor) and someone pulling the shoulders toward the wall (simulating the gravity force) should to be enough to reproduce that transition using an Mri.

[flerc]

it would be very reasonable to believe that is not a matter of vertebra deformity the impossibility to remains straight, so some other tissue would be failing.

Surely is a claim according common sense.. Is simple to imagine a normal back with normal vertebras and what will happen if all the other components of the back would suffer some change and cannot contribute any more in a right way to maitain it straight.. even is not necessary to think in muscles, tendons or ligaments cutted or dics disolved to imagine a curve in the frontal plane arising in a short time.
Even imagination is not needed.. in some people scoliosis arise during adulthood aparently because a discs wear.
So is extremely logic to suppose that other tissues are not allowing the vertebras to reamins aligned. Which exactly may be? Is a simple question, the answer should not be so difficult to know. We live in the XXI century.. many miracles have been performed, extremely complex problems were solved and many mysteries were unveiled.. why cannot happen the same with this?

[sjmcphee]

Hey flec,
In regards to the quote:
I'm not sure I can explain any better.
My suggestion - go herehttp://translate.google.com/ paste in the text and translate to your native language.
Josh never actually said loading like I did, and I've been thinking about how I may have misquoted him, I think he said that posture is different in sitting, standing and laying.
I dont think we were talking about exactly the same things, but it's still in the same area of things.
I remember you bringing to our attention the idea of testing the spine muscles in different positions on an inclined plane.
I know that it sounds reasonable to you to do this and try and understand the changes, and for the most part it is a good idea.
I'm not sure if researchers have studied this or not, I'm sure they would have thought of doing things like this.
- My opinion though, is that I'm not sure they would learn enough from it to get them over the line.
1 - your knowledge has to be curve pattern specific,
2 - you have to be able to understand and exclude the factors that relate to growth
3 - you need to understand exactly what point in the path of progression you're at to be able to put the daily postural effects in the right context.

I categorized all of these ideas as "Daily Postural effects of Loading" as kind of a smaller part of the bigger picture.

But it occurs to me that if the daily postural effects of loading are very much part of the cause and effect chain, then you can't understand the entire big picture without also understanding the daily postural effects on loading and the part it plays.
So this is a chicken and egg thing in itself. (and so is trying to exclude and separate factors relating to growth - for that matter )
You cant understand the daily postural effects on loading without having a greater understanding of what the biomechanics of the individual curve pattern is doing, and you can't really understand what the biomechanics of curve pattern is doing without understanding the daily postural effects on loading.

We can around and around forever like this and still never achieve anything.

Flerc, I work under the assumption there's nothing wrong with muscle or bone in the spinal column to cause scoliosis, so theres no point looking there.
And your thinking to yourself - how can he say that - if not something wrong with muscle or bone there wouldn't be scoliosis.
Not the actual physical parts themselves but a matter of alignment of them - on the ribs - which control the angle of the verterbrae; and how the stretch and unstretch of ligaments affects neighbouring regions of the spine.

Let me try and put this whole thing for you in a different way.
Do you understand 'Facet Joints in Motion' - Flexion / Extension of the trunk ?
How verterbrae tilt, slide, tilt - (or something like that I cant remember) in the motion of either reaching up high or bending over.
Look at the natural curves of the spine - inward sloping lordosis in cervical - followed by - outward sloping kyphosis in thoracic - then another inward sloping lordosis in lumbar.
What do you think is going to happen if the normal working function of these natural curves is impeded?
- Or let me say it another way - what if theres a measure of axial rotation on a single vertebrae thats not supposed to be there?
The stretch and unstretch of ligaments affects the neighbouring region.
I don't think that there is just a single instance of vertebrae rotated in one direction inso far the underlying biomechanics.
rather its opposite direction axial rotation... it's difficult to explain - going on in different areas of the spine.

- I told you this stuff will turn your brain to mush... and we're barely getting started...

- Scott

[flerc]

Hi Scott, this is what Joshua said and I think is really logic:

I have noticed that it is not just the change from lying to standing that reveals scoliosis differently. It is also the change from sitting to standing. Structural Integration practitioners will have a person sit and stand when doing a visual examination. Sometimes we see that people's backs look more balanced when sitting than when standing. This tells us that there is something in the relationship of the person's legs to the rest of her or his body that is causing difficulty.

In my opinion people working with scoliosis could benefit from spending more time organizing a person's legs in relation to the rest of their bodies. A lack of balance in the legs is a contributing factor for why a person struggles to maintain a straighter body when moving from lying and/or sitting to standing up.

Something is provoking a worst posture (more degrees?) standing that sitting down. Surely you are focused in something else.

Hey flec,
In regards to the quote:
I'm not sure I can explain any better.
My suggestion - go herehttp://translate.google.com/ paste in the text and translate to your native language.

I know what means all these words, but I don’t understand what you means with this:

when it begins the reset part (laying down and going to sleep) it resets it in relation to the way it's loaded, (progression) rather than putting it back in the reverse of the way it loaded up during the day (reverse progression).

Sure we are referring to different things. I believe you are focused in (at least some part of) the cause-effect chain. I was only talking about the outcome of all those event, the last effect, that provoque in fact that some tissues cannot present a normal behaviour/properties in order to maintain the vertebras aligned (as lying down) when the back is in a vertical position. This is a fact regardless the cause, that probably may be because your theory.
Suppose we can know what component is failing in a greater proportion than all the others and would be possible to improve it in a really significant way. Then the vertebras can remains more aligned, so the curve would be reduced!. But is true that if the cause provoking that disorder in tissues persists (an historical cause being also a current one).. after some time, again the tissue would be wrong and all will be the same..except if we continues improving the guilty component.. and all would be as 2 opposite forces fighting.
We may think that surgeons did a simplification of that problem. Instead of seeing which component is the main guilty and trying to improving it (or avoiding a damage) in order to achieve a vertebral aligment, they decide to ignore them and did something to maintain the vertebral aligment for ever.
Sure the best would be as in every problem, eliminate all the current causes, but not always is possible. And in this case, suppose you may reverse the biomechanic loading problem.. but the tissue is already afected and not works as it should. Except the biomechanical change may recompose it, nothing would change.
Even suppose an absolutely flexible spine (0º, 0 rotation while lying down) and a perfect improvement of all the tissues.. the curve would dissapears, so the loading problem would not exists any more.. except if the first cause would be triggered again.

I have a really little knowledge about what you said, but I’ll try to think in it, it sounds true for me.

[sjmcphee]

Hey Flerc,
It does get a little difficult to try and convey ideas without the benefit of images and models.
Ultimately this is the reason why my research was never formally investigated.
A couple of scoliosis researchers certainly took interest, but without images and models I can only get so far in trying to get them to understand what I mean.
I'm sorry I can't explain better.
-Scott

[flerc]

Scott, I believe that the 2 works (finding the guilty component and Biomechanical analysis) should to be complementaries. Surely a great biomechanical understanding would lead to know which component should to be failing in a greater proportion and knowing that, the loading matter would be more understandably. May be an chicken-egg problem but anyway could be solved.

You mentioned something about ligaments, and yes, it seems to be the answer. Although discs seems to be the cause of scoliosis begining in adulthood, SEAS also point them and it seems to have an stabilizing fuction. In this case, all therapies focused in muscles would be a waste of time.. except muscles would be close in importance to ligaments or therapies improving muscles also improve ligaments. But which ligaments? Dr Kiester said about yellow ligament, in 2 very diferent senses. Even one of them refers to the cause of rigidity (turning into bone ) that is, exactly the opposite to problem of a lack of holding capacity
But this study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21989737 talk about transverse ligaments.. I’m not sure about what conclusion may lead in this sense.

Of course generalizations has not sense, but we may say that researchers are good people interested in the true, so surely they will help you in your work.. is a very good news.. I really hope that.