The Myth of Core Stability, Part 2
Print This Post
By Sal | August 5, 2009
WORKING THE CORE WHILE KNEELING OR LYING IS USELESS
Lederman correctly observes that most CS exercise involves strength training of the TrA performing while lying down or on all fours. The idea is that exercises performed while in this posture helps correct motor control and the process by which muscles fire to produce movement. This kind of exercise for CS is not effective because it contradicts the basic principles of how our bodies adapt and learn to move.
“In essence these principles state that our bodies, including the neuromuscular and musculoskeletal systems will adapt specifically to particular motor events. What is learned in one particular situation may not necessarily transfer to a different physical event, if strength is required – lift weights, if speed is needed – increase the speed of movement during training…” To simplify, if you spend most of your time upright, you should train in an upright position. Lederman goes on to write that training people to continuously contract their abdominal muscles in an attempt to train the core, “is to impose an abnormal, non-functional pattern of control,” which is counter to our natural, “protective control strategy that is as old as human evolution.”
A colleague of mine put it best when he said, “You can train a muscle to do anything, but that doesn’t make it the right thing.”
TRUNK STRENGTH AND BACK PAIN AND INJURY PREVENTION
The issue of trunk strength as it relates to back pain and injury prevention is a cause for more confusion and, according to Lederman, leads to two more assumptions:
- The loss of core muscle strength could lead to back injury
- Increasing core strength can alleviate back pain
The professor reveals that the force level produced by the trunk muscles is not very high (less than 1% of maximum voluntary contraction - MVC) in order to stabilize the spine during standing and walking. These muscles are minimally activated and the deep spinal erectors, psoas and quadratus lumborum are “virtually silent,” and in some subjects there is no detectable EMG activity in these muscles.
These findings indicate that since such low-MVC levels are required for stability, strength losses are not likely an issue in performing functional movement and, therefore, why strength exercises are not necessary. Furthermore, “most individuals would find it impossible to control such low levels of activity or even be aware of it. If they are aware of it, they are probably co-contracting well above the normal levels needed for stabilization. This would come at a cost of increasing the compression of the lumbar spine and reducing the economy of movement.”
You can download the complete paper, complete with references, at this link, http://www.cpdo.net/myth_of_core_stability.doc.
Next week I’ll wrap up my discussion of the “Myth of Core Stability.”
Related Posts
Topics: Personal Trainer Coaching, Training Education, Training Philosophy | No Comments »
Comments
« Five Questions for a Five-Star Fitness Professional, Eric Burkhardt – Head Strength and Conditioning Coach, Long Beach State | Home | The Myth of Core Stability, Part 3 »