realitycheck44

Mobility WOD blog

35 posts in this topic

I did look at your links and went through a large portion of the whole website. Last I checked the body of an athlete and a non-athlete are the same. Or am I mistaken? So, in general, what works to heal or stimulate one type of human works to heal or stimulate another type of human. Because no matter what type of human they all have the same recuperative organs and hence why I can quickly discard irrational ideas in a short manner of time (as I remember Stephen Speicher did the same things on many subjects). Maybe one should be more connected to reality and recognize that the human body has physical limitations to what it's parts can withstand and stop doing activities that cause such injuries but that does not seem to be happening. It also seems that some people think that only athletes (elite ones at that) are the only group of pepole to have had injuries and learn from them, well they are not. I have had my shoulder dislocated, my right knee dislocated twice, my left knee once, many broken fingers, I broke my C3 and C4 in my neck and herniated a disc in the lumbar area of my lower back.

I agree with most of what you wrote. Thanks for checking out the links. (I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss that Mark Twight article though, because he, like you, spends a great deal of time thinking and analyzing exercise and the human body.) So how did you deal with those injuries? Just rest? Did you find NO other techniques that helped, besides "improving your metabolism?"

Also, please don't substitute "people" if you mean me. It's passive aggressive.

I define the entities under discussion to demonstrate what can be done and what cannot be done within their nature which is what most people fail to recognize and which has never been explained how one can overcome the nature of an entity. Or, do you not not agree with the law of identity (remember A is A) and non-contradiction? So, it seems to me that the information was overlooked as no one has made any mention of undestanding the nature of any of those items. We are at an impasse until people recognize the nature of those items under discussion and as of yet have been ignored along with the factual evidence place right in front of them. In slightly different terms, what fails to be recognized is the nature of the entities under discussion and hence why people come to irrational conclusions on what is really happening.
Ray, I'm not a stupid guy. But this seems like vague generalizations that do not make any sense to me. Maybe it's not, and I'm just not smart enough to get it.
For example, I have already discussed why simple movements can make one feel better but do nothing to help the area heal.
Uhh...I guess I'll have to search for this. No recollection of it at all.
Your statements about me thinking it is me against the world are fallacious as I have never stated that, but if that is what you think that could be stated about anyone, Ayn Rand included, when they stick to their fundamentals while having discussions. You see, the nature of an entity does not change, a tendon, a ligament, a bone are all inelastic, but slightly flexible entities and if they were elastic and could be stretched into all sorts of manners you would have no taughtness to move yourself and your joints would come apart.
Ray, my statement was based on the fact that you seem to turn every argument into an attack against your principles of exercise. This isn't a thread about exercise! Never was. You don't seem to respond to my actual arguments, but the arguments "people" make against your philosophy of exercise. Never did I say that tendons or ligaments (let alone bones) are semi-elastic, but somehow you found it necessary to imply that I did. Sticking to your fundamentals is great. But frankly, it seems like you rarely respond to actual arguments or questions, but respond to what "people" think.
The definition of intense is to do something to an extreme degree. So, by the very nature of doing something intensely it cannot be done for a long duration. Your mountain climbing was not intense if it lasted 19 hours as an intense mountain climb would be over with quickly. For example, one can sprint as intensely as possible for a short duration, or they can run for a long time with very low intensity. So, what has been demonstrated is that not only do you not understand my ideas, but that you also do not understand the nature of your body.
You misread my post. I never said that climbing for 19 hours was "intense." I said my workouts to gain strength (after climbing) were "intense," I was referring to short, intense workouts doing 1-2 exercises with 3-5 reps to failure.
Finally, it seems you have not learned much from your experiences or you would stop duplicating them and injuring yourself.
Most of my injuries are as a result of pushing the boundaries of sports. Knee was an under-rotated front flip of a 30 foot cliff. Collarbone reconstruction was a misjudged jump. The current wrist injury was a binding pre-release going about 60 mph. The finger was a result of pushing my limits in the climbing gym. You may say these are stupid things to do, but I don't think they're a result of duplication. I make mistakes, but I think my lifestyle is sustainable, at least for 10-20 more years. I went through a bad few years, but I'm learning from it. I sleep more and take many more rest days than I did when I was younger. My workouts have changed from 3-4 times a week of low intensity to one time a week to 1.5 weeks of high-intensity work. I eat 300-500 calories every 3-5 hours.

I'll read the book you offered. Thanks for the suggestion! Frankly, my personal experience make it difficult for me to believe the argument that the limiting factor is getting the liver to process the toxins and not getting bloodflow to the injured tendons/ligaments. Otherwise, all tendons and ligaments would heal at the same rate. But I'll definitely read the book and think about it.

As always, thanks for your time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll read the book you offered. Thanks for the suggestion! Frankly, my personal experience make it difficult for me to believe the argument that the limiting factor is getting the liver to process the toxins and not getting bloodflow to the injured tendons/ligaments. Otherwise, all tendons and ligaments would heal at the same rate. But I'll definitely read the book and think about it.

As always, thanks for your time.

I apologize for misunderstanding your statements on intensity.

I was going to write out a long explanation of why the liver plays the most prominent role in recuperation. But I hope the link below will give you some insight into why the liver, which has mulitiple hundreds of functions, is so important and cannot be overlooked, although it is not a definitive answer.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_functions_does_the_liver_have

I also offer that I am like you in that everything I do I do to my limit as I choose not to live in any other manner. For example I go hiking often because I enjoy it and there are some mountains around here to challenge anyone. I once went hiking with my family and I decided to climb the face of a cliff which my family did not want to do. After I got to the top my son challenged me to a race back down to the car, I accepted. I was probably 400 feet above where his starting point was, so I figured I had to move quickly. As I was running, yes I was running down the side of a cliff, I leapt onto a huge boulder that I thought could withstand the force I was about to put upon it, it did not. When I landed on the boulder it split in half and the part I was still on started sliding down the cliff, the other part flew up and hit me in my right leg causing a huge gash/wound that starting bleeding immediately. I jumped from the sliding boulder to another boulder and kept up the race. About 300 yards from our vehicle I passed my son while he was huffing and puffing, yet he still was able to yell out that I was leaving behind a blood trail. I did not join the Marine Corps so that I could become aggressive, I joined the Marine Corps because it fit my aggressive nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how did you deal with those injuries? Just rest? Did you find NO other techniques that helped, besides "improving your metabolism?"

Almost all of my injuries swelled up so badly that I could barely move the area for a few days afterwords.

My right shoulder was dislocated playing football. While I was tackling a player a 300 pound offensive lineman hit me and then landed on me causing my shoulder to dislocate. I heard a large pop and felt some intense pain but then rolled over and my arm popped back into joint (fortunately it reduced properly). I spent a couple plays on the sidelines getting taped up and went right back into the game. I did not lift weights during the football season as the sport is demanding enough. I did play every game of the season and afterwards took 3 weeks off to allow my body to recuperate before exercising again, I have never had another problem with it.

In 1990 I was on a night patrol and fell into a 12 foot hole and landed on my head and broke my C-3, C-4 and herniated the disc between L4 and L5. The patrol was of a high importance so I crawed out of the hole and carried on with the mission. The following morning my neck was causing me a lot of pain and my hands were semi-numb. I complained to my commander but he asked if I could wait until I rotated to Okinawa to be looked at as it seemed I was functioning fine. Well, that wait turned into a 22 month wait until after Desert Shield/Storm was fully over with and I returned state side to California at which time I had an MRI that showed the residuals of the injuries I mentioned. I was put on light duty, no field training nor running, but I kept lifitng weights. It is this injury that actually caused me to be discharged during October of 1998 as the degenerative discs were collapsing on my spinal cord and causing pain and numbness almost all the time. Since about nine months after I left the Marine Corps I have been mostly pain free.

My first right knee dislocataion happened while on field training at 29 Palms during a night patrol. My platoon and I were running through the darkness while returning from a recon-mission with full war pack and I stumbled on a rock twisted my ankle and landed on my right knee which caused the injury. I rolled over to grap my knee and it popped right back into place at which time I jumped back up and finished the mission. The following day my knee was very swollen and I wrapped it with a brace to give it some needed support. Within a few days the swelling went away and I waited to exercise for another week.

The second time my right knee dislocated was during close quarter combat training and I was hit in the knee with the butt of a rifle which caused me to fall down. I rolled over quickly to get away from the attack and my knee once again popped back into place which allowed me to attack the attacker. The result was similar to the previous time in which I had a few days of swelling and then waited about a week before exercising.

My right knee dislocated during a hike in which we had about 75 pound packs and it was pouring rain. The weather caused Marines to be falling and sliding into other Marines all through out the hike. Well one Marine fell in front of me and brought down multiple Marines into my leg and caused it to dislocate. Once again I rolled over (because I always landed on my face) and my knee popped back into place. I followed up this dislocation in the same manner as the other two and have not had any problems with any legs since.

I have been lifting weights and tracking items since May of 1982 and have only stopped for a few short periods such as the one's mentioned. I have always attempted to keep my body as strong as my nature will allow, I am no Arnold. I hope that answers your questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ray, you have a lot of experience training people and helping them progress and/or recover. Other people also do.

You have an impressive track record. Other people also do.

You sound convincing. Other people also do.

You yourself are very fit. Other people also are.

You write passionate and detailed posts. Others also do.

Since the actual scientific research is often lacking or contradictory, we the non specialists are left figuring out our course of action based on the credibility of the people we read and the strength of their arguments. When we can, we try things to see if it works for us. It's a non scientific, n=1 approach, but better than just do nothing or follow blindly anyone's recommendations.

Have you tried those flossing and voodoo band techniques? No you haven't. You claim that they cannot work, but you haven't tried to experiment with them. What you demonstrate to me more than anything else is your unwillingness to experiment, to try stuff. It's as if you had it all figured out, and honestly I don't think anyone has. It doesn't make me feel particularly confident in what you say.

What is the cost to me to try one of those approaches? Very little indeed so I'll keep using rubber bands and lacrosse balls, cold water and deep tissue massage as I find appropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you tried those flossing and voodoo band techniques? No you haven't. You claim that they cannot work, but you haven't tried to experiment with them. What you demonstrate to me more than anything else is your unwillingness to experiment, to try stuff. It's as if you had it all figured out, and honestly I don't think anyone has. It doesn't make me feel particularly confident in what you say.

I have been training myself since 1980 and I started training others a few years later. I have recorded thousands and thousands of of workouts and their effects (as a matter of a fact since May of 2000 I have personally trained more than 50,000 individual sessions). From the time I first began in 1980 I spent over 8 years trying all sorts of things, that were or are very similar to all the bogus ideas out there before I realized that that was not the approach to have and that almost none of it worked. So, please do not attempt to tell me I have an unwillingness to experiment as you have no idea what I have attempted nor what I experiment with now. But, just like learning that capitalism is the correct way to prosperity I have no need to go attempt bogus ideas that claim statism is a proper course because I undestand the fundamentals of both sciences. In different terms, I know that when people attempt to prove that statism works for prosperity that the truth is much different as it is always the aspects of capitalism that are carrying the corrupt idea of statism. Sure, many programs allow one to make some progress but it is most times misunderstood what the real cause of that progress is. And just like unfettered capitalism produces the greatest results, ideas that are unfettered with illogical ideas could produce even better results. So, if you want to be restricted in your progress go ahead and do as you want, I on the other hand know my time and resources are limited and so I choose not to waste them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bad analogy. Capitalism is a *whole intelectual system*. MobilityWOD addresses *small components* (mobility, range of motion, flexibility, etc) of a *biological* system, which is itself not an intelectual construct but something that has evolved over millions of years in a sometimes chaotic and illogical manner. There are plenty of aspects of biology that do not make sense from an intelectual / logical stand point (e.g., the human eye's cells with their nerve endings pointing to the inside of the eye instead of the brain, which results in a black spot).

You can derive capitalism from first principles (and even then it would be very hard to derive each of its *components* but presumably possible). You cannot derive a biology from the first principle of natural and sexual selections (several biologies are possible and indeed exist on earth), and you certainly cannot derive each component of a given biology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bad analogy. Capitalism is a *whole intelectual system*. MobilityWOD addresses *small components* (mobility, range of motion, flexibility, etc) of a *biological* system, which is itself not an intelectual construct but something that has evolved over millions of years in a sometimes chaotic and illogical manner. There are plenty of aspects of biology that do not make sense from an intelectual / logical stand point (e.g., the human eye's cells with their nerve endings pointing to the inside of the eye instead of the brain, which results in a black spot).

You can derive capitalism from first principles (and even then it would be very hard to derive each of its *components* but presumably possible). You cannot derive a biology from the first principle of natural and sexual selections (several biologies are possible and indeed exist on earth), and you certainly cannot derive each component of a given biology.

If I understand your statements from above correcty, especially the highlighted ones, then I disagree in the largest manner possible. To derive something means to deduce something, to reach a conclusion about something by reasoning. Biology is the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, origin, evolution and distribution. Well what would be the sense of studying biology if I could never derive anything from it, especially prinicples that would act as a guide in my thoughts and choices in dealing with organisms? So, I am in total disagreement with you as I think there are principles in every field although we might not know them nor understand them, they are there and a rational and logical mind can grasp them and use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course there are principles involved. As I mentionned, natural and sexual selection, and above that chemistry and physics. Each single component of our biology can be logically deduced, provided we have perfect information on (1) the previous stage of our biology, (2) the exact evolutionary pressures we're under, (3) the exact sexual selection pressure we're under. We do not have that perfect information. So although we can draw parallels and make assumptions (e.g., what we observe in mice biology when submitted to such-or-such drug might translate into human biology), we must then test that hypothesis. We cannot generalize findings made in a specific case to "adjacent" cases without testing for them.

In economics, we can say with near certainty that the effect of price controls on product A in country X will be similar than those observed in country Y because we can track back the logical chain of events all the way to Metaphysics. In biology, we cannot. We still don't understand how genes express themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course there are principles involved. As I mentionned, natural and sexual selection, and above that chemistry and physics. Each single component of our biology can be logically deduced, provided we have perfect information on (1) the previous stage of our biology, (2) the exact evolutionary pressures we're under, (3) the exact sexual selection pressure we're under. We do not have that perfect information. So although we can draw parallels and make assumptions (e.g., what we observe in mice biology when submitted to such-or-such drug might translate into human biology), we must then test that hypothesis. We cannot generalize findings made in a specific case to "adjacent" cases without testing for them.

In economics, we can say with near certainty that the effect of price controls on product A in country X will be similar than those observed in country Y because we can track back the logical chain of events all the way to Metaphysics. In biology, we cannot. We still don't understand how genes express themselves.

What century are you from? I offer that you read a lot more on evolution and genes and that before you do that that you read the two books linked to below.

http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Objectivist-Epistemology-Expanded-Edition/dp/0452010306

http://www.amazon.com/Logical-Leap-Induction-Physics/dp/0451230051/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1342899218&sr=1-1&keywords=the+logical+leap+induction+in+physics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course there are principles involved. As I mentionned, natural and sexual selection, and above that chemistry and physics. Each single component of our biology can be logically deduced, provided we have perfect information on (1) the previous stage of our biology, (2) the exact evolutionary pressures we're under, (3) the exact sexual selection pressure we're under. We do not have that perfect information. So although we can draw parallels and make assumptions (e.g., what we observe in mice biology when submitted to such-or-such drug might translate into human biology), we must then test that hypothesis. We cannot generalize findings made in a specific case to "adjacent" cases without testing for them.

In economics, we can say with near certainty that the effect of price controls on product A in country X will be similar than those observed in country Y because we can track back the logical chain of events all the way to Metaphysics. In biology, we cannot. We still don't understand how genes express themselves.

Sexual selection (which Charles Darwin discoursed upon) is a manifestation of free will in sufficiently sentient beings. The outcome of free acts cannot be deduced a priori.

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites