Muscles move the joints, don't they???

[Pooka1]

Watching and waiting is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. I equate it to: "well, your cholesterol is a little high right now, but we're not going to put you on any medicine until it gets worse." Instead of: "hey, you should watch what you eat and start exercising." It's the same thing to me.

But you see that is a very bad analogy because we KNOW eating right and exercising can lower cholesterol because we have EVIDENCE.

In re PT and exercise, we DON'T KNOW that those treatments can reduce a curve permanently or even halt progression for good. Rather have decades of evidence suggesting they can't do those things. Samdani seems to think there is very little evidence for PT halting or correcting curves and this is his field, not mine.

In my case, Schroth is exactly what I was looking for because I only have a moderate curve, and it improves my pain and physical appearance. I'm happy to commit a half hour to hour each day to my exercises. Hopefully it will continue to help me over time and stop any progression in the future. It's certainly better than doing nothing.

I hope it helps you also. Pain is one thing that PT has been shown to successfully address as far as I know.

[MissEmmyF]

more talking in circles...i don't think anyone is saying exercise will reduce a curve "permanently." it's not like, "hey, do these exercises for a few months and then you'll be straight as an arrow." it's more along the lines of "any reduction that you are able to achieve will have to be kept in check by continuing to do the exercises." that's the same thing with any exercise program. if you're trying to build muscles in your biceps, you achieve that over time, and then you stop doing weight lifting targeting your biceps, they will go back to their normal size.

[Pooka1]

That is the case for adults.

But I think the hope of PT with growing kids is to build muscle to not only prevent progression but to reduce curves already present. I think they are suggesting that you do the exercising until maturity and that will reduce or hold the curve even if the kid doesn't exercise any more.

That would be good if true. We'll have to wait and see if that is true.

But if the thought is the kid has to exercise the rest of his life, then what if he can't? IS all the hard work and any gain in reducing the curve lost?

[MissEmmyF]

That is the case for adults.

But I think the hope of PT with growing kids is to build muscle to not only prevent progression but to reduce curves already present. I think they are suggesting that you do the exercising until maturity and that will reduce or hold the curve even if the kid doesn't exercise any more.

That would be good if true. We'll have to wait and see if that is true.

That would be awesome if that were true! It might seem possible as long as you were able to catch the scoliosis early enough and then make the muscles surrounding the spine totally equal in strength.

However, I think scoliosis obviously has other factors to it other than just unequal muscle strength on either side of the spine. I would think any other factors involved in the scoliosis (like anything nuerological, for example) would also have to get fixed.

[Pooka1]

That would be awesome if that were true! It might seem possible as long as you were able to catch the scoliosis early enough and then make the muscles surrounding the spine totally equal in strength.

However, I think scoliosis obviously has other factors to it other than just unequal muscle strength on either side of the spine. I would think any other factors involved in the scoliosis (like anything neurological, for example) would also have to get fixed.

Yes you found a potential problem in that claim if it is the claim.

I wonder if building muscle can ever possibly work to hold the spine in place until maturity if physically holding the spine in place as with a brace hasn't been shown to do so. I mean the claim at that point would have to be that muscle strength is somehow superior than a brace in terms of holding the spine in a particular configuration. It sounds unlikely but what do I know?

[MissEmmyF]

I wonder if building muscle can ever possibly work to hold the spine in place until maturity if physically holding the spine in place as with a brace hasn't been shown to do so. I mean the claim at that point would have to be that muscle strength is somehow superior than a brace in terms of holding the spine in a particular configuration. It sounds unlikely but what do I know?

Yeah, I don't fully understand the whole bracing concept. Don't braces physically hold the spine in place using forced pressure? I don't see how that would do anything in the long-term unless it was on 24/7 for the rest of your life. Otherwise, when you take the brace off, won't everything just sink back into how it used to be? And, worse yet, meanwhile, while wearing the brace, your muscles are atrophying so that they're even weaker than they were to begin with by the time the brace is ready to come off. So, that gives you even less of a chance to "hold" any correction you've made from wearing the brace. Right?? Maybe I'm not understanding something.

I know the SpineCor brace is supposed to be different than any kind of rigid brace because it supposedly is more of a posture rehabilitation device - meaning the straps are there kind of as guidance to "nudge" you into proper alignment. So, I think the objective with this brace is that you actually strengthen your muscles by wearing because you're doing more of the active work and not relying on the brace. But, maybe I'm misunderstanding that too.

[Pooka1]

Yeah, I don't fully understand the whole bracing concept. Don't braces physically hold the spine in place using forced pressure? I don't see how that would do anything in the long-term unless it was on 24/7 for the rest of your life. Otherwise, when you take the brace off, won't everything just sink back into how it used to be? And, worse yet, meanwhile, while wearing the brace, your muscles are atrophying so that they're even weaker than they were to begin with by the time the brace is ready to come off. So, that gives you even less of a chance to "hold" any correction you've made from wearing the brace. Right?? Maybe I'm not understanding something.

I think the claimed mechanism of bracing is to physically hold the spine such that wedging can't occur. I think the claim is the brace can halt incorrect growth on the convex side and allow more growth on the concave side so that using growth, the spine can straighten. That's why braces don't work past maturity except possibly for pain relief.

Therefore braces don't claim to reduce curves but rather prevent progression. It is well known that the curve reverts if the brace comes off and isn't surprising.

I know the SpineCor brace is supposed to be different than any kind of rigid brace because it supposedly is more of a posture rehabilitation device - meaning the straps are there kind of as guidance to "nudge" you into proper alignment. So, I think the objective with this brace is that you actually strengthen your muscles by wearing because you're doing more of the active work and not relying on the brace. But, maybe I'm misunderstanding that too.

Any brace that takes over for muscle (that is ALL BRACES) cannot even in principle build muscle. You can only lose muscle in a brace. All braces. Not just from being restricted in movement but also because the brace is supporting you rather than your own muscles. If Spinecor is ever shown to be effective, it works in the identical manner as hard braces.

[MissEmmyF]

Ok, thanks. That explanation does make sense then.

[mamamax]

Any brace that takes over for muscle (that is ALL BRACES) cannot even in principle build muscle. You can only lose muscle in a brace. All braces. Not just from being restricted in movement but also because the brace is supporting you rather than your own muscles. If Spinecor is ever shown to be effective, it works in the identical manner as hard braces.

eh-hem .. sorry Sharon - Spinecor does not work in the same manner as rigid bracing and does not cause muscle atrophy. That is a fact. A fact well documented on the manufacturer's web page.

[Pooka1]

eh-hem .. sorry Sharon - Spinecor does not work in the same manner as rigid bracing and does not cause muscle atrophy. That is a fact. A fact well documented on the manufacturer's web page.

That is their claim. How did they prove it was a fact? Do you see the problem?

They might as well claim to have invented a perpetual motion machine.

[mamamax]

Well, i see the problem for you as a natural skeptic. But there is no problem for me and for those in treatment.

You propose in essence that the surgeon/inventors Rivard and Colliard are - what? Frauds?

[Pooka1]

Well, i see the problem for you as a natural skeptic. But there is no problem for me and for those in treatment.

You propose in essence that the surgeon/inventors Rivard and Colliard are - what? Frauds?

If most published articles in top shelf journals by top shelf researchers can be wrong, why can't a single claim made by folks trying to sell a brace on a non-peer-reviewed venue be wrong also?

Not everyone is lying. I think few are lying. But folks are routinely mistaken.

[mamamax]

Any brace that takes over for muscle (that is ALL BRACES) cannot even in principle build muscle. You can only lose muscle in a brace. All braces. Not just from being restricted in movement but also because the brace is supporting you rather than your own muscles. If Spinecor is ever shown to be effective, it works in the identical manner as hard braces.

Let's go back to your above statement. Can you produce any evidence of this regarding Spinecore? Or is this just a personal opinion?

[Pooka1]

Let's go back to your above statement. Can you produce any evidence of this regarding Spinecore? Or is this just a personal opinion?

It's how braces work.

Ask yourself if the brace is doing any work that your muscles were previously doing.

Ask yourself if you are restricted from using any muscles you were able to use out of brace.

You can figure this out for yourself.

[mamamax]

Originally Posted by mamamax View Post
Let's go back to your above statement. Can you produce any evidence of this regarding Spinecore? Or is this just a personal opinion?

It's how braces work.

Ask yourself if the brace is doing any work that your muscles were previously doing.

Ask yourself if you are restricted from using any muscles you were able to use out of brace.

You can figure this out for yourself.

Exactly! (i can figure it out for myself)

The brace is acting like a second set of muscles. In areas along my spine that were previously atrophied - these are strengthening and the strength holds out of brace (have been wearing near 3 months at this point). There is no atrophy being experienced - in fact the opposite.

Now - i still would like to know if you have any evidence to provide regarding your above statement.