Forms of Yoga and/or Pilates

[structural75]

Karen,
Did you post that on this forum? Where could I find it, as I'd like to read about it. Was it involving contraction of myofibroblasts?

Thanks,
structural

[Karen Ocker]

http://www.scoliosis.org/forum/showt...t=Polish+study

[BETall]

We wish we had known for sure that our daughter had scoliosis at 12. She was not officially diagnosed until 17 (~45/45), and we were also told no
exercise, bracing, etc. would make a difference. Bought Yoga for Scoliosis
DVD and workbook - she tried but was frustrated, "couldn't feel what 'normal' should be like", couldn't do it. I think it might be great if a kid had a few private sessions with an expert, though. Took her to the Schroth clinic in
Wisconsin - would definitely recommend that. She got that stuff down and
seems to be holding her own...Good luck with whatever you choose to do.
Feel good about whatever you decide as a family!

Hi : It is hard to believe that a person with scoliosis can rehabilitate his spine by watching a DVD with yoga poses . Please go to= www.scoliosistreatment-schroth.com and Sosort.org. Each scoliosis is an individual cases and needs a 3Dimensional approach.

[Writer]

In the case of structural scoliosis the bony deformities will be the primary limiting factor in non-surgical correction, stabilization or slowing of progression. So it will be of little or no consequence what you do to the muscles, or soft tissue.

Where are these assertions proven? If you make ex cathedra statements, you owe us authoritative sources.

Your conclusion is entirely unwarranted, contradicted by a significant body of published evidence. For peer-reviewed sources, search the scoliosis publications of "Weiss HR" at PubMed.

There is further contradictory evidence that while bone deformation, even ankylosis in severe cases, can constitute an important factor in some scolioses, it is not irreversible. Christa Lehnert-Schroth's Three-Dimensional Treatment for Scoliosis illustrates a case of Scheuermann's kyphosis where Schroth treatment began to normalize a severe deformed vertebra (Figs. 611-612) in a matter of weeks. The author comments: "This appears to verify the theory that a bone adapts to every change in pressure and traction applied to it." [page 216] In other words, if correct changes in pressure and traction are applied, which a Schroth therapist would understand how to do, then even the bones can begin to re-assume their normal configuration -- and of course the scoliotically imbalanced muscles and other soft tissue would as well.

[txmarinemom]

Where is this proven? If you make ex cathedra statements, you owe us authoritative sources.

Your conclusion is entirely unwarranted, contradicted by a significant body of published evidence. For peer-reviewed sources, search the scoliosis publications of "Weiss HR" at PubMed.

There is further contradictory evidence that while bone deformation, even ankylosis in severe cases, can constitute an important factor in some scolioses, it is not irreversible. Christa Lehnert-Schroth's Three-Dimensional Treatment for Scoliosis illustrates a case of Scheuermann's kyphosis where Schroth treatment began to normalize a severe deformed vertebra (Figs. 611-612) in a matter of weeks. The author comments: "This appears to verify the theory that a bone adapts to every change in pressure and traction applied to it." [page 216] In other words, if correct changes in pressure and traction are applied, which a Schroth therapist would understand how to do, then the bones can begin to re-assume their normal configuration.

Well, hell .. I guess if we all bought into Schroth, we'd all be cured. Amazing! How could I be so daft?

[Writer]

Sorry if anybody is offended, but you will notice that I cite chapter and verse from clinical literature to support my statements or objections. I suggest that others do the same if they are going to claim credibility when making broad statements. There are an awful lot of opinions expressed in this forum, often contradictory.

Opinions are most valid to me if they either come from actual, specific personal experience, or stem from credible research.

As for Schroth, none of its practitioners would claim it is a "cure." But it usually helps, sometimes surprisingly well. And it has done so since 1921.

[txmarinemom]

We can all grab PubMed Entrez or miscellaneous literature. I'd suggest you refrain from the pot, the kettle, black ... and blanket statements yourself.

It's possible to dig up studies that back up conjecture for ~anything.

If Schroth were such a miracle, this board would have no reason to exist. Perhaps you, alone, know something all the experts have withheld from the masses?

Since 1921, eh? Damn. What a shame SRS doctors don't pull the same articles - or have your ability to validate the studies!

It's well documented the result of NO treatment is comparative to *any* treatment for some.

Oh, and Writer? ... out of curiousity, is your data based on personal experience or what ~you deem "credible" research?

Quoting 1991 Weiss "data" all over these forums is, well, ~so 1991. Last I checked MY calendar it's 2008.

[Writer]

Damn. What a shame SRS doctors don't pull the same articles - or have your ability to validate the studies!

You're right, it is a shame. Of course they have the ability, and the access. Weiss's 1991 article was in Spine magazine, which orthopedists routinely see. But almost none of the surgeons seem to have bothered to read this or related literature on physical-therapeutic treatment. Otherwise the SRS would not continue to claim on its website that exercise does not work. Ask them why, I don't know why.

It's well documented the result of NO treatment is comparative to *any* treatment for some.

Where? Can you be more precise?

Oh, and Writer? ... out of curiousity, is your data based on personal experience or what ~you deem "credible" research?

Both. I have been treated by a Schroth specialist, and I have a lot of the literature on the topic, in English and in German (which I can read). And I am a very experienced researcher and academic journal editor, so I know how research is performed and evaluated.

Quoting 1991 Weiss "data" all over these forums is, well, ~so 1991. Last I checked MY calendar it's 2008.

Good point. PubMed is easy and quick to reference to, which is why I did it, and the 1991 article features a large patient sample (n=813). But Hans-Rudolf Weiss, M.D., director of the Schroth clinic, has published a lot of other studies and books up to 2007. See:

http://www.scoliosisxpert.com/uk/pageuk.php?va=3

Weiss is also editor of the SOSORT online journal at www.scoliosisjournal.com, where anyone, patient or orthopedist, can consult the latest literature on various kinds of conservative (not just Schroth) scoliosis treatment. These contributions are in English. As far as I can tell, that journal has published all the presentations from the recent SOSORT conference in Boston. The NSF, host of our forum here, was host of that conference.

I would urge everyone on this forum to investigate the Schroth and any other conservative treatment options before submitting to surgery. This is not an argument against surgery, merely that surgery should be the recourse of last resort, for obvious reasons.

[Writer]

We can all grab PubMed Entrez or miscellaneous literature. I'd suggest you refrain from the pot, the kettle, black ... and blanket statements yourself. . . . .

It's possible to dig up studies that back up conjecture for ~anything. . . .

If Schroth were such a miracle, this board would have no reason to exist. Perhaps you, alone, know something all the experts have withheld from the masses?

Yes, we can all quote articles. So let's do it-- or cite our own direct personal experience with a particular issue. This is scientific reporting. Otherwise a statement is not verifiable, it's merely a layman's opinion.

As for studies stating anything we want, it still comes down to stating the source, so interlocutors can examine the source. Again, scientific reporting.

Schroth has been underreported in the English literature partly because till relatively recently the reports on it were in German. But German is not an exotic language, and used to be the international language of science, so it is curious that the reports and books went unread outside Germany. Now that the Schroth literature in English is growing, there is absolutely no excuse for ignorance of the method.

This forum exists because people are looking for answers to non-trivial questions about a serious pathology that we or our children have. We want reliable reports about many aspects of scoliosis. Personal opinions are fine, but should be distinguished from statements that refer to clinical research.

Now let me ask txmarinemom a question: why the apparent hostility to a suggestion to document one's opinions? We all learned to do this in college, maybe even high school (it's been a long time...).

[structural75]

Writer,

Where are these assertions proven? If you make ex cathedra statements, you owe us authoritative sources.

Your conclusion is entirely unwarranted, contradicted by a significant body of published evidence. For peer-reviewed sources, search the scoliosis publications of "Weiss HR" at PubMed.

Wow, that came out of nowhere! Did you actually bother to read any of my following statements or posts? I think we're in agreement on the potential for positive bone deformation... . I'll quote some of my following posts to clarify my stance here. By the way, by "structural curves" I was refering to hemivertabrae, fused ribs, additional ribs, etc.... these types of 'structural' or congenital causes cannot be changed via non-surgical methods including Scroth. You can't reform half a vertabrae or fused ribs non-surgically. I'm sorry, but if you need documentation to back up that assertion then I'll have to ask that you do the tiring leg work yourself. It seems you're jumping the gun here a bit... I'm well aware of the potential for positive changes, with methods other than the Scroth as well. If you read all of my following posts you would have seen that I too recognize these potentials and the physiologic mechanisms at play. Scroth PTs are not the only 'qualified' or knowledgeable practitioners who recognize and work with these principles. Sorry for a little heated tone on this, but your approach was out of the blue and seems a bit premature.

I think I was in agreement that 'structural' curves probably cannot be helped much, if at all. But I also see what you're saying about less serious/dramatic structural types... wedging for instance or deformation of the spinous and transverse processes in rotations and lateral flexions... just to name a few. From a physiological standpoint, deformations of such variety that form over time in adulthood and are not present to start always contain the physiologic capacity to 'deform' again, but in a more positive direction. They certainly won't if the rotation/flexion is still present and progressive. But they certainly can change if you reverse the forces acting on them... there is no reason why it can deform more and more over time in one direction and not the other... you just don't see the other occur very often because the concept or reality of trying to change that process is difficult and under-recognized. But physiologically, it is possible... deformation happens as a result of the chronic positioning and imbalanced forces acting on bone... change those forces for the better over time and you will see a positive change in the bone... even if that just means slowing or halting the process at least.

As a practitioner, I've seen these confirmed with x-rays in cases other than scoliosis (kyphosis, spondylosis) so I like to work with the physiologic fact that these processes can go in one direction or the other... I won't resign myself to any other reality just yet, especially not by ignoring the biological facts involved. That's just my stance on it until the human body proves me wrong.

Tension of the soft tissue pulls the periosteum around the bone (muscles don't attach to the bone, but the perioteal layer of fascia wrapped around the bone). When this happens it sends a signal to the receptors in the periosteum to produce more bone at this site... Tension and compression can and will dictate where bone is formed and broken down. Change the degree of tension and compression and you change the physiologic processes at play. This is a known physiologic fact.

In the context of ideopathic scoliosis, structural should be viewed as the entire physical form seeing as there is no real 'structural' problem... as in hemivertabrae, fused ribs and such. What often arises as structural problems/involvement such as wedging, is a direct result of the soft tissue holding the spine in a curvature for an extended period of time thus causing bony deformation. So what starts as ideopathic with no structural problems will eventually lead to structural/bony changes with time.. which then commit the pattern to the confines of those shapings.

Remember, in the case of ideopathic scoliosis, soft tissue moves and re-shapes bones... Bones do not move by themselves nor do they re-shape without the necessary mechanical loads and tension to inform them to do so.

[Karen Ocker]

Schroth is not only exercises. Bracing is employed at the same time.

[Karen Ocker]

Schroth technique does not just employ exercises; it also involves bracing concurrently.
One large (Irish study I think) describing this technique, resulted in statistically fewer adolescents needing surgery. NOT all avoided surgery.

[structural75]

Writer,
Just one more comment, as I'm confused as to why you decided to challenge my view point, seeing as it seems to match yours. I concluded my first post on this thread by saying the following.

So I would say trust your skepticism about the Drs 'opinions' of exercise... Keep moving... the more intelligent and direct you can be in regards to the curvatures, the more likely you'll do some good.

The last part of that statement points to therapies such as Scroth... .

Opinions are most valid to me if they either come from actual, specific personal experience, or stem from credible research.

My "opinions" come from both (research, physiology and a professional clinical practice)... . Unless you work in the clinical setting everyday, I'd appreciate it if you would show a little bit of respect for what others are reporting... Although we actually agree on this 'disputed' topic, it's worth noting that it's not all in the 'literature', sorry to say.

all the best,
structural

[Writer]

Sorry, structural, I misread your statement as global denial of efficacy of properly designed physical exercises, which a number of people on this forum do, repeating what their surgeons have told them. In fact you were referring to structural scoliosis. Apologies.

[structural75]

Writer,
Apology accepted... .
structural