Furthermore, you mention being able to CONTROL the pelvis. As you probably know, at about 40-70 degrees of bending forward, the lumbar multifidus muscles relax. So bending beyond 40-70 degrees, you CANNOT control the pelvis as the muscles shut off.
"The person you describe is not using good biomechanics."
.............. Does that mean they are not holding correct pelvis position?
I have listened to both your videos and you mention "The lumbar spine maintains a normal lordosis". Sounds like you are saying correct pelvis position would have a normal lordosis. A rounded lower back would NOT have a normal lordosis so would be incorrect an incorrect pelvis position.
"The person you describe is not using good biomechanics."
.............. Does that mean they are not holding correct pelvis position?
I have listened to both your videos and you mention "The lumbar spine maintains a normal lordosis". Sounds like you are saying correct pelvis position would have a normal lordosis. A rounded lower back would NOT have a normal lordosis so would be incorrect an incorrect pelvis position.
Mine may be an opinion, but it is based on the opinions, research and clinical experience of a lot of other people much smarter than me. Pelvis rotated posterior with lumbar flexion is a normal movement of the pelvis. No one is neutral, posterior or anterior all the time. The person you describe is not using good biomechanics. That is a totally different conversation that attempting to hold the pelvis in "neutral" during all phases of the shoveling.
There is a neutral pelvis in standing that I reference based on several authors and researchers. Kendall and McCreary based their reference of a neutral pelvis on spinal alignment of a skeleton minus any soft tissue lying supine. Therefore, there is an ideal alignment of the pelvis during static standing. If you listen to both videos on the neutral pelvis, I reference that.
Correct, that is from Kendall and is also the definition of neutral standing pelvis used in activities like ballet. I would suggest your concept is also an opinion. Nothing wrong with that as long as people don't mistake it for absolute fact.
How do you define neutral pelvis in standing? Not motion, just static standing? You think there is no correct standing pelvis position and the concept is a myth?
Actually, that's Kendall's interpretation. Many other researcher's and clinicians don't agree with your "synopsis". So I'm afraid your 3 seconds does not address the differences in opinion or the fact that many practitioners attempt to have their patients/clients maintain a neutral pelvis through all forms of activity.
And yes, I'm actually quite familiar with those terms Chuck. Thanks for watching though.
Furthermore, you mention being able to CONTROL the pelvis. As you probably know, at about 40-70 degrees of bending forward, the lumbar multifidus muscles relax. So bending beyond 40-70 degrees, you CANNOT control the pelvis as the muscles shut off.
Wat do you think about that?
chuck123456789000000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Anthony wrote:
"The person you describe is not using good biomechanics."
.............. Does that mean they are not holding correct pelvis position?
I have listened to both your videos and you mention "The lumbar spine maintains a normal lordosis". Sounds like you are saying correct pelvis position would have a normal lordosis. A rounded lower back would NOT have a normal lordosis so would be incorrect an incorrect pelvis position.
chuck123456789000000 1 year ago
Anthony wrote:
"The person you describe is not using good biomechanics."
.............. Does that mean they are not holding correct pelvis position?
I have listened to both your videos and you mention "The lumbar spine maintains a normal lordosis". Sounds like you are saying correct pelvis position would have a normal lordosis. A rounded lower back would NOT have a normal lordosis so would be incorrect an incorrect pelvis position.
chuck123456789000000 1 year ago
Mine may be an opinion, but it is based on the opinions, research and clinical experience of a lot of other people much smarter than me. Pelvis rotated posterior with lumbar flexion is a normal movement of the pelvis. No one is neutral, posterior or anterior all the time. The person you describe is not using good biomechanics. That is a totally different conversation that attempting to hold the pelvis in "neutral" during all phases of the shoveling.
luv2bac 1 year ago
There is a neutral pelvis in standing that I reference based on several authors and researchers. Kendall and McCreary based their reference of a neutral pelvis on spinal alignment of a skeleton minus any soft tissue lying supine. Therefore, there is an ideal alignment of the pelvis during static standing. If you listen to both videos on the neutral pelvis, I reference that.
luv2bac 1 year ago
I see people shoveling snow with a tucked under pelvis and rounded lower back.
This is okay since neutral pelvis at all times is a myth????
chuck123456789000000 1 year ago
Correct, that is from Kendall and is also the definition of neutral standing pelvis used in activities like ballet. I would suggest your concept is also an opinion. Nothing wrong with that as long as people don't mistake it for absolute fact.
How do you define neutral pelvis in standing? Not motion, just static standing? You think there is no correct standing pelvis position and the concept is a myth?
chuck123456789000000 1 year ago
Actually, that's Kendall's interpretation. Many other researcher's and clinicians don't agree with your "synopsis". So I'm afraid your 3 seconds does not address the differences in opinion or the fact that many practitioners attempt to have their patients/clients maintain a neutral pelvis through all forms of activity.
And yes, I'm actually quite familiar with those terms Chuck. Thanks for watching though.
luv2bac 1 year ago
Neutral pelvis in the standard posture:
1) Anterior-superior iliac spines are in the same horizontal plane.
2) Anterior-superior iliac spines and symphyis pubis are in the same vertical plane.
Assuming you know these terms, wasn't that simple? Only took 15 seconds, not 3 minutes 16 seconds.
chuck123456789000000 1 year ago
SCIENCE !!!!! THOMAS DOLBY
central235 2 years ago