I'm putting the word out that I've been asked to present at the 2010 Equine Affaire in Pomona California. I'll be doing two demos and two talks, two on Saturday and two on Sunday. I'll let you go to the Equine Affaire site http://www.equineaffaire.com and look at the schedule to see when and what, since I don't remember off the top of my head.
If you have any ideas--within the context of what's scheduled--about what I should present please let me know by commenting here.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Old Ideas Die Hard
I haven't written in awhile, mainly because I had a very busy September and October, followed by a month of pneumonia in November and a slow recovery up to now. I'm feeling great right now, with more energy than I've had in a long time. I made this huge mistake of thinking that I either had the flu--wasn't H1N1 what we were all worried about--or a really bad cold. I was wrong but I had my really good logic for being wrong and I kept repeating my logic for my only having a "cold" until it was mistaken for fact.
This happens a lot in our world, the repetition of an idea until it is mistakenly taken as a fact. It's how advertising works. The message is repeated until we stop thinking about it as a message and start to accept it as a fact. "How do you spell relief? ROLAIDS!". A number of years ago there was a test of some 4th. grade students where they were asked this question and answered this way!!!
There are a number of myths or messages that I have believed in around how bodies, human, canine and equine, should be structured, move and be used that have been exploded recently.
My son introduced--convinced me--to try a "new" way of exercising called CrossFit, which does not really comply well with my myths about how the human body should be used. One exercise in particular is the "squat" which ones learns to do using only body weight, later progressing to using free weights. I rebelled against the squat because my myth told me that it was bad for my achy knees. (This is a particularly important point. I rebelled about this new concept while my myth concept produced achy knees! Am I dumb or what?) After squatting the CrossFit way for a couple of weeks--it's part of my pre-workout warm up--I noticed that my knees didn't ache anymore, no pain going up stairs, especially if I changed my walk a little to a very un-rolf like movement.
I won't bore you with the details of a squat--you could look at almost any indigenous non chair owning culture and see it in everyday life, or look at olympic weight lifters--I'm leaving that for an article you can find at www.animalsi.com.
One thing I will say is that the squat mechanics are very much like a horse that toes out in the rear. You know that one that isn't cow hocked but had a rear leg sagital plane that's laterally rotated, which is considered a comformational fault. I wonder if these horses, like Olympic weight lifters, have adapted to this confirmation to be able to lift/move more weight without damaging their stifles?
What do you think?
This happens a lot in our world, the repetition of an idea until it is mistakenly taken as a fact. It's how advertising works. The message is repeated until we stop thinking about it as a message and start to accept it as a fact. "How do you spell relief? ROLAIDS!". A number of years ago there was a test of some 4th. grade students where they were asked this question and answered this way!!!
There are a number of myths or messages that I have believed in around how bodies, human, canine and equine, should be structured, move and be used that have been exploded recently.
My son introduced--convinced me--to try a "new" way of exercising called CrossFit, which does not really comply well with my myths about how the human body should be used. One exercise in particular is the "squat" which ones learns to do using only body weight, later progressing to using free weights. I rebelled against the squat because my myth told me that it was bad for my achy knees. (This is a particularly important point. I rebelled about this new concept while my myth concept produced achy knees! Am I dumb or what?) After squatting the CrossFit way for a couple of weeks--it's part of my pre-workout warm up--I noticed that my knees didn't ache anymore, no pain going up stairs, especially if I changed my walk a little to a very un-rolf like movement.
I won't bore you with the details of a squat--you could look at almost any indigenous non chair owning culture and see it in everyday life, or look at olympic weight lifters--I'm leaving that for an article you can find at www.animalsi.com.
One thing I will say is that the squat mechanics are very much like a horse that toes out in the rear. You know that one that isn't cow hocked but had a rear leg sagital plane that's laterally rotated, which is considered a comformational fault. I wonder if these horses, like Olympic weight lifters, have adapted to this confirmation to be able to lift/move more weight without damaging their stifles?
What do you think?
Monday, November 2, 2009
Form to Function
There's an old Osteopathic saying that Form dictates Function and Function will alter Form. What this means at its simplest is that a bird can fly because it has the form to do so, and that it's flying--the function--will contribute to this form.
We see this quite often when working with bodies, especially those that are injured in some way. Take for instance a horse that has a problem with its fetlock that makes it painful to use that joint. The nervous system will change the function of the leg to reduce the pain it experiences from the fetlock. The change in function will result in a change in the form. Initially the functional change will require some muscular effort, as this goes on the myofascia will change to support the new pattern without muscle effort. At some point in time the original pain may resolve but the new "holding pattern"--shortened myofascia--will mimic the painful gait with the appearance that the horse still has pain. Until the myofascial restriction is released the horse will move like it has fetlock pain. This could cause a lot of unneeded vet bills as myofascial phantom is chased down.
On the other hand there is the possibility that one of us therapists is called in to work with this horse. If we decide that the holding pattern is the culprit--that is our training--and release it only to find that the painful fetlock is still painful and the horse gets worse.
It's a Catch 22, damned if you do damned if you don't. What I do in these situations is explain this Form to Function principle to the animal's owner and let them take the gamble. Sometimes it works out fine that the horse--in this example--is much better after the release, sometimes they're worse, and sometimes they're worse and then get better.
When I say the animal is worse it's relative to how they were moving before you released the restriction, the body will rebuild that holding pattern over time. In fact if you are experiencing time when you are always removing the same holding pattern you'll need to look somewhere else for the cause.
We see this quite often when working with bodies, especially those that are injured in some way. Take for instance a horse that has a problem with its fetlock that makes it painful to use that joint. The nervous system will change the function of the leg to reduce the pain it experiences from the fetlock. The change in function will result in a change in the form. Initially the functional change will require some muscular effort, as this goes on the myofascia will change to support the new pattern without muscle effort. At some point in time the original pain may resolve but the new "holding pattern"--shortened myofascia--will mimic the painful gait with the appearance that the horse still has pain. Until the myofascial restriction is released the horse will move like it has fetlock pain. This could cause a lot of unneeded vet bills as myofascial phantom is chased down.
On the other hand there is the possibility that one of us therapists is called in to work with this horse. If we decide that the holding pattern is the culprit--that is our training--and release it only to find that the painful fetlock is still painful and the horse gets worse.
It's a Catch 22, damned if you do damned if you don't. What I do in these situations is explain this Form to Function principle to the animal's owner and let them take the gamble. Sometimes it works out fine that the horse--in this example--is much better after the release, sometimes they're worse, and sometimes they're worse and then get better.
When I say the animal is worse it's relative to how they were moving before you released the restriction, the body will rebuild that holding pattern over time. In fact if you are experiencing time when you are always removing the same holding pattern you'll need to look somewhere else for the cause.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Becoming and Artist
Lately I've had a desire to learn how to draw. This comes about when I'm trying to do an animation or an illustration for a course or article. The problem I'm having is that I don't think I know how to draw and therefore have to acquire a new skill set or sets that will accumulate to my knowing how to draw.
My Rolfing studio in Longmont has white boards all over where I can draw, make notes to myself, illustrate a point to a client. I even painted 70 sf (that's 7 feet by 10 feet) of one wall with whiteboard paint so I can draw on it. I framed this area of the wall with Japanese style Shoji panels
so it looks like you're looking through to the wall. I can draw little things on the wall like a landscape and when I don't like it I just erase it. An ever changing picture.
I also project things onto this during classes--like a horse--and point out, by drawing on the image, places where I see something of interest.
The problem I've had though is that I still think that I need to acquire something to be able to be an artist. What I forget is that there's the art that seems to add to something, like drawing or painting, and that which removes or uncovers the art, like sculpting in marble.
It's this later type of art that we practice in our body therapy work. We look at our client and "see" that there are things--adhesions, holding patterns...--that if removed the art form of the body will change.
There's a poet who writes his poetry by blacking out the words in a newspaper that he doesn't need for the poem. This is what we do, in our work. Don't you think?
My Rolfing studio in Longmont has white boards all over where I can draw, make notes to myself, illustrate a point to a client. I even painted 70 sf (that's 7 feet by 10 feet) of one wall with whiteboard paint so I can draw on it. I framed this area of the wall with Japanese style Shoji panels
so it looks like you're looking through to the wall. I can draw little things on the wall like a landscape and when I don't like it I just erase it. An ever changing picture.
I also project things onto this during classes--like a horse--and point out, by drawing on the image, places where I see something of interest.
The problem I've had though is that I still think that I need to acquire something to be able to be an artist. What I forget is that there's the art that seems to add to something, like drawing or painting, and that which removes or uncovers the art, like sculpting in marble.
It's this later type of art that we practice in our body therapy work. We look at our client and "see" that there are things--adhesions, holding patterns...--that if removed the art form of the body will change.
There's a poet who writes his poetry by blacking out the words in a newspaper that he doesn't need for the poem. This is what we do, in our work. Don't you think?
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Lifting Weights
I've been involved in an exercise program called Crossfit for a few months now. It started with my son, who's been doing it for a couple of years, convincing me to get involved. He's been my "coach" since he's taken weight lifting classes in school and was a TA for the instructor. But now that he's gone off to college I had to find someone else to be the coach.
To start off with CrossFit you go through a series of classes which introduce you to the exercises that are used. It's all free weights, no machines allowed, and pullups, pushups, squats... Each with their requirements for precision in how they are executed. It is dependent on the coach to assure that one learns how to perform these with precision, so you don't get hurt.
What I have found is that the language or jargon if you will, is very specific and associated with an ability to perform atheletically at a high level. For instance the Squat has a very precise set of requirements to be a CrossFit Squat: chest up, lumbar curve, tibia perpendicular to the ankle... If you aren't doing it this way, it's not a squat. Squat has a precise definition.
Our work with body's also has a vocabulary that is precise. The proper use of our precise vocabulary is one way that we can tell if one of our colleagues is well trained or educated. Becoming familiar with our vocabulary takes effort, that's what learning or education is; the expenditure of effort to acquire some new skill or knowledge. Once we've acquired the knowledge or skill its application requires much less effort.
To start off with CrossFit you go through a series of classes which introduce you to the exercises that are used. It's all free weights, no machines allowed, and pullups, pushups, squats... Each with their requirements for precision in how they are executed. It is dependent on the coach to assure that one learns how to perform these with precision, so you don't get hurt.
What I have found is that the language or jargon if you will, is very specific and associated with an ability to perform atheletically at a high level. For instance the Squat has a very precise set of requirements to be a CrossFit Squat: chest up, lumbar curve, tibia perpendicular to the ankle... If you aren't doing it this way, it's not a squat. Squat has a precise definition.
Our work with body's also has a vocabulary that is precise. The proper use of our precise vocabulary is one way that we can tell if one of our colleagues is well trained or educated. Becoming familiar with our vocabulary takes effort, that's what learning or education is; the expenditure of effort to acquire some new skill or knowledge. Once we've acquired the knowledge or skill its application requires much less effort.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Pushing a Rope and more Collection
When I was in engineering school to become an electronics engineer, we had a joke about mechanical engineering that the only thing you needed know about it was "you don't push a rope...".
This week I decided to re-arrange my horse paddock so that the gate to get out was closer to the manure pile. My son has left for college which means that I have picked up all of his chores as well as mine which has doubled my manure moving time. So, being the inventive type I decided that the gate being closer to the manure's final destination would save me time. I also had 20 tons of pee gravel delivered for the paddock and needed to open it so I could get the tractor in.
My ordeal was pretty simple: disassemble the panels, re-arrange them and re-assemble them. No big deal except the 12 foot long panels are pretty heavy and the ground isn't flat.
By now you're thinking what the heck does this have to do with collection? Here it is; the panels hook together with one panel having a fixed prong (male) on the bottom and a "U" shaped bolt the moves up and down on the top, while the other panel has two receptacles for these (female) that are fixed. What you do is pick up the the panel with the receptacle and drop it down over the prong on the other and then position the "U" shaped bolt over the top receptacle and drop it to connect the two panels. The problem is that when the ground is dropping away from the connection it's not easy to position the top attachments without raising the end that's dropping away. Easy enough when there's two people working on the problem, one lines things up while the other lifts the other end up so they come together. So you go from this ----|/---- to this ---||--- the right side needs to come up in this example.
What I found was it was impossible for me to be able to lift the weight of the panel by pulling from one end such that the other end came up. But this is what we are expected to believe happens in the "top line" theory of collection. The front of the horse is lifted from the rear by the back muscles.
I'm going to build a model of this theory and test the amount of force required. Of course I could just do the math, if I remembered how.
This week I decided to re-arrange my horse paddock so that the gate to get out was closer to the manure pile. My son has left for college which means that I have picked up all of his chores as well as mine which has doubled my manure moving time. So, being the inventive type I decided that the gate being closer to the manure's final destination would save me time. I also had 20 tons of pee gravel delivered for the paddock and needed to open it so I could get the tractor in.
My ordeal was pretty simple: disassemble the panels, re-arrange them and re-assemble them. No big deal except the 12 foot long panels are pretty heavy and the ground isn't flat.
By now you're thinking what the heck does this have to do with collection? Here it is; the panels hook together with one panel having a fixed prong (male) on the bottom and a "U" shaped bolt the moves up and down on the top, while the other panel has two receptacles for these (female) that are fixed. What you do is pick up the the panel with the receptacle and drop it down over the prong on the other and then position the "U" shaped bolt over the top receptacle and drop it to connect the two panels. The problem is that when the ground is dropping away from the connection it's not easy to position the top attachments without raising the end that's dropping away. Easy enough when there's two people working on the problem, one lines things up while the other lifts the other end up so they come together. So you go from this ----|/---- to this ---||--- the right side needs to come up in this example.
What I found was it was impossible for me to be able to lift the weight of the panel by pulling from one end such that the other end came up. But this is what we are expected to believe happens in the "top line" theory of collection. The front of the horse is lifted from the rear by the back muscles.
I'm going to build a model of this theory and test the amount of force required. Of course I could just do the math, if I remembered how.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Stretching Harms Horses?
In a recent study carried out in Britain and reported in the Veterinary Journal, horses can actually be harmed by too much stretching. I've written about my thoughts that stretching could injure a horse and my concern that there are so many books and videos on the market that show a rote routine for stretching that doesn't involve the animal. I wrote a chapter on "myofascial stretching" in my book because of this concern.
The study that was conducted used 30 horses in 3 groups: a control group no stretching, a group that received periodic stretching and a group that was aggressively stretched each day. It would be unfair to suggest that there is some universally accepted discription of stretching with controls on the range the leg is taken through, etc. that were used in this study, but there aren't and therefore we don't really know what the study's authors thought was acceptable.
The study concluded that horses that are stretched every day will actually begin to lose joint ROM, as exhibited in movement. Horses that are not stretched do not improve their ROM or lose it. Those that are not stretched every day will have a ROM improvement.
The authors of the study attributed the decrease in ROM in the everyday group to delayed onset muscle soreness or DOMS, which makes no sense to me. DOMS is what you feel a day or so after vigorous exercise which was once attributed to lactic acid--this is wrong--but is probably more likely attributable to muscle cell rupture and the release of histamines and calcium into the intra-cellular space.
What I worry about in the case of aggressive stretching is the violation of anatomical barriers both hard and soft. I'll put an article up on the website on this in the next few days.
The study that was conducted used 30 horses in 3 groups: a control group no stretching, a group that received periodic stretching and a group that was aggressively stretched each day. It would be unfair to suggest that there is some universally accepted discription of stretching with controls on the range the leg is taken through, etc. that were used in this study, but there aren't and therefore we don't really know what the study's authors thought was acceptable.
The study concluded that horses that are stretched every day will actually begin to lose joint ROM, as exhibited in movement. Horses that are not stretched do not improve their ROM or lose it. Those that are not stretched every day will have a ROM improvement.
The authors of the study attributed the decrease in ROM in the everyday group to delayed onset muscle soreness or DOMS, which makes no sense to me. DOMS is what you feel a day or so after vigorous exercise which was once attributed to lactic acid--this is wrong--but is probably more likely attributable to muscle cell rupture and the release of histamines and calcium into the intra-cellular space.
What I worry about in the case of aggressive stretching is the violation of anatomical barriers both hard and soft. I'll put an article up on the website on this in the next few days.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Moving Hay
It's that time of year around here where we have to find hay to buy, luckily this year there is plenty, and get it moved to our place. We purchase the hay in "stacks" of 160 bales and hire a retriever truck to go get it and bring it to our place. It not inexpensive at $0.50 a bale.
This morning I went out to the hay stack to meet the retriever, the hay is only about 1/2 mile from my place so I got a break on the cost. The retriever is a truck with, what looks like, a fork lift on the back with the addition of a set of "claws" to hold the stack.
The driver of the retriever is an artist in his field, it was a pleasure to watch him position the retriever at the stack, pick it up and place it. I was freaking out that he was going to run into a horse trailer parked near by, or knock over the stack of stacks, over spill my hay over the side. What I was freaking out about was the ease with which he went about his job and how precise he was in the execution of it.
The battery in my truck went dead so I hitched a ride back to my place with him to get someone to come jump me. As we drove I asked him what he did for a living besides moving hay. "This is it. I do this from January until November most years." That's how he got his 10,000 hours and became a Master at hay retrieval!
I watched again in awe as he placed the stack outside of my barn, within six inches of where I asked him to. Now I get to watch in awe as my 18 year old son moves 160 60# bales of hay the 60 feet from where it is to where it will be stored. This is his last chance to make money before he leaves for college in two days. which means I get to move the next stack myself. Having horses at home requires a lot of time and energy!
On another note, I've decided to start using Twitter, the link is www.twitter.com/animalsi
This morning I went out to the hay stack to meet the retriever, the hay is only about 1/2 mile from my place so I got a break on the cost. The retriever is a truck with, what looks like, a fork lift on the back with the addition of a set of "claws" to hold the stack.
The driver of the retriever is an artist in his field, it was a pleasure to watch him position the retriever at the stack, pick it up and place it. I was freaking out that he was going to run into a horse trailer parked near by, or knock over the stack of stacks, over spill my hay over the side. What I was freaking out about was the ease with which he went about his job and how precise he was in the execution of it.
The battery in my truck went dead so I hitched a ride back to my place with him to get someone to come jump me. As we drove I asked him what he did for a living besides moving hay. "This is it. I do this from January until November most years." That's how he got his 10,000 hours and became a Master at hay retrieval!
I watched again in awe as he placed the stack outside of my barn, within six inches of where I asked him to. Now I get to watch in awe as my 18 year old son moves 160 60# bales of hay the 60 feet from where it is to where it will be stored. This is his last chance to make money before he leaves for college in two days. which means I get to move the next stack myself. Having horses at home requires a lot of time and energy!
On another note, I've decided to start using Twitter, the link is www.twitter.com/animalsi
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Simplicity Accompanies Mastery
It seems that one of the Hallmarks of a master of any discipline is the simplicity in how they perform their particular thing. It doesn't matter what the thing is; painting a house, gardening or writing software.
When I was an engineering manager at Hewlett Packard, we had a joke about making our designs more simple. "Take out parts one at a time until the design stops working and then put in the last part. That's the simplest it can be." Of course that's a joke!
Think about this joke in the context of your body therapy work. How many times have you tried and tried with no change occurring, and then when you were about to give up the a shift in the tissue happened? I don't know about you, but I usually explain this as the effort prior to the shift was the setup--I call this chopping vegetables, like when you're cooking--and providing the needed opening for the change, when in reality it may just have been wasted effort.
But I also spend time--as I'm sure you all do--in reflection about my work with my clients. Luckily, after 15 years, I've been able to make changes to my work to the point where it is fairly simple and efficient and is predicated on a philosophy of less is more. (The book "Outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell explores this in great detail.)
In my courses I try and force simplicity in the way the participants work, by informing them
about the need to work within the animal's "adaptive capacity". Most of the time I fear that this
is simply too complicated a theory for people beginning this work. However, during the advanced course I've been thrilled with the "aha's" that the participants get, and how their work becomes much more refined. (I also force this in this course by having the participants work on fewer horses, trading off with each other. I tried this in some beginning courses this year with less impressive results.)
The point of this post is that we can all learn to be more efficient in how we work. To do this we need to reflect on our work, the amount of time we spend touching the client, the amount of time we think about what/where we are going to touch and the making the ratio of thinking to touching closer to 1. Simplicity = thinking/touching. capice?
When I was an engineering manager at Hewlett Packard, we had a joke about making our designs more simple. "Take out parts one at a time until the design stops working and then put in the last part. That's the simplest it can be." Of course that's a joke!
Think about this joke in the context of your body therapy work. How many times have you tried and tried with no change occurring, and then when you were about to give up the a shift in the tissue happened? I don't know about you, but I usually explain this as the effort prior to the shift was the setup--I call this chopping vegetables, like when you're cooking--and providing the needed opening for the change, when in reality it may just have been wasted effort.
But I also spend time--as I'm sure you all do--in reflection about my work with my clients. Luckily, after 15 years, I've been able to make changes to my work to the point where it is fairly simple and efficient and is predicated on a philosophy of less is more. (The book "Outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell explores this in great detail.)
In my courses I try and force simplicity in the way the participants work, by informing them
about the need to work within the animal's "adaptive capacity". Most of the time I fear that this
is simply too complicated a theory for people beginning this work. However, during the advanced course I've been thrilled with the "aha's" that the participants get, and how their work becomes much more refined. (I also force this in this course by having the participants work on fewer horses, trading off with each other. I tried this in some beginning courses this year with less impressive results.)
The point of this post is that we can all learn to be more efficient in how we work. To do this we need to reflect on our work, the amount of time we spend touching the client, the amount of time we think about what/where we are going to touch and the making the ratio of thinking to touching closer to 1. Simplicity = thinking/touching. capice?
Saturday, July 25, 2009
The Nerve of it All
One of the course subjects of the recent Equine Advanced course was working with the nervous system. This isn't working with a nervous horse, but rather working with the nerves themselves and understanding where they may be contributing to the many of the common issues we see in horses.
Anyone who has had a lameness exam to the extent that the vet does a nerve block, knows that the nerves contribute to the perception of pain. Hell anyone who's hit their "funny bone" knows this. What if many of the common movement problems we experience with horses are caused by a problem with entrapped nerves?
Eight years ago I started on a journey of working with nerves in my human practice when my friend and colleague Christoph Summer introduced me to this work. At the time the only book on the subject was in French.
Three years ago I attended a 3 day workshop developed by another rolfer and chiropractor Don Hazen, who has been investigating the implications of nerve entrapment in postural issues.
It was after this workshop that I started to develop the work with animals which requires some "translation" from the human context.
If you are interested in this check the website www.animalsi.com in the next couple of weeks or sign up for the newsletter on the site to be notified when new material is put up.
Anyone who has had a lameness exam to the extent that the vet does a nerve block, knows that the nerves contribute to the perception of pain. Hell anyone who's hit their "funny bone" knows this. What if many of the common movement problems we experience with horses are caused by a problem with entrapped nerves?
Eight years ago I started on a journey of working with nerves in my human practice when my friend and colleague Christoph Summer introduced me to this work. At the time the only book on the subject was in French.
Three years ago I attended a 3 day workshop developed by another rolfer and chiropractor Don Hazen, who has been investigating the implications of nerve entrapment in postural issues.
It was after this workshop that I started to develop the work with animals which requires some "translation" from the human context.
If you are interested in this check the website www.animalsi.com in the next couple of weeks or sign up for the newsletter on the site to be notified when new material is put up.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
I Learned to Moon Walk
I have a client who is a professional dancer and Michael Jackson fan. She told me that when she was a young girl she bought the Michael Jackson video where he revealed Moon Walking to us. I think it was Thriller?
She watched this video, over and over, rewinding it until she was able to pick out the particulars of how he did the Moon Walk. Me being me, asked her to show me. She Moon Walked across the carpet in my studio, not hard wood floors, carpet! Then she told me the secret and coached me in how to do it. I Moon Walked! Now this might not seem like a big accomplishment, but when you're as big as I am, it is impressive.
But that's not what I want to write about. In Malcolm Gladwell's excellent book "Outliers", he talks about the need to practice a craft--10,000 hours--to become competent in it. What my client did was analyze the video and the movement of Michael's feet to determine the mechanics of Moon Walking. She spent hours rewinding and mimicking his movements until she determined the secret and was able to pass it on to me.
This is what we pay teachers for. Those of us who teach spent hours studying, researching and practicing so we can figure out some of the secrets to our profession and pass them on to others so that it looks simple.
She watched this video, over and over, rewinding it until she was able to pick out the particulars of how he did the Moon Walk. Me being me, asked her to show me. She Moon Walked across the carpet in my studio, not hard wood floors, carpet! Then she told me the secret and coached me in how to do it. I Moon Walked! Now this might not seem like a big accomplishment, but when you're as big as I am, it is impressive.
But that's not what I want to write about. In Malcolm Gladwell's excellent book "Outliers", he talks about the need to practice a craft--10,000 hours--to become competent in it. What my client did was analyze the video and the movement of Michael's feet to determine the mechanics of Moon Walking. She spent hours rewinding and mimicking his movements until she determined the secret and was able to pass it on to me.
This is what we pay teachers for. Those of us who teach spent hours studying, researching and practicing so we can figure out some of the secrets to our profession and pass them on to others so that it looks simple.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
When pain limits your motion
I have a wonderful human client--I feel like I need to clarify the species--who has extreme shoulder restrictions on one side. I don't want to write about the mechanics of the human shoulder girdle--the most complicatedly orchestrated joint complex in the body--suffice it to say if one part of the girdle isn't working properly it can reflect pain to other parts of the girdle.
In the case of this client there was/is a restriction in the soft tissue scapula on thorax portion of the shoulder girdle which prevents the shoulder from rotating when the humerus is abducted over the head--the scapula has to rotate to accommodate the deltoid tuberosity's "bumping" into the glenoid fossa. What happens is that the nervous system rather than damaging the joint causes the arm to abduct across the clavicle when the arm reaches 105+ degrees.
The client wants to raise his arm. This is his measure of success or shoulder freedom. But each time he raises his arm to test two things occur: 1. the movement is prevented by the lack of scapula rotation so the arm is abducted across the clavicle 2. the pattern of abherrant motion is more ingrained in the nervous system.
I see the same thing happening in the horse world, where riders are not happy with their horse's foreleg extension and try to stretch the leg to increase this. The problem is that the horse's gleno-humeral joint has to accomodate the greater and lessor tuberosities and rotate out of the way. When we passively stretch the leg--the only kind of stretching we can do with an animal--we are not engaging the nervous system to rotate the scapula and can impinge, during the stretch, on the gleno-humeral joint.
Often these horses with restricted movement that have been "over" stretched will have over developped and hypertonic supra and infra spinati, which are gleno-humeral stabilizers.
To increase fore limb extension we have to assure that the horse has scapula that are free to rotate.
In the case of this client there was/is a restriction in the soft tissue scapula on thorax portion of the shoulder girdle which prevents the shoulder from rotating when the humerus is abducted over the head--the scapula has to rotate to accommodate the deltoid tuberosity's "bumping" into the glenoid fossa. What happens is that the nervous system rather than damaging the joint causes the arm to abduct across the clavicle when the arm reaches 105+ degrees.
The client wants to raise his arm. This is his measure of success or shoulder freedom. But each time he raises his arm to test two things occur: 1. the movement is prevented by the lack of scapula rotation so the arm is abducted across the clavicle 2. the pattern of abherrant motion is more ingrained in the nervous system.
I see the same thing happening in the horse world, where riders are not happy with their horse's foreleg extension and try to stretch the leg to increase this. The problem is that the horse's gleno-humeral joint has to accomodate the greater and lessor tuberosities and rotate out of the way. When we passively stretch the leg--the only kind of stretching we can do with an animal--we are not engaging the nervous system to rotate the scapula and can impinge, during the stretch, on the gleno-humeral joint.
Often these horses with restricted movement that have been "over" stretched will have over developped and hypertonic supra and infra spinati, which are gleno-humeral stabilizers.
To increase fore limb extension we have to assure that the horse has scapula that are free to rotate.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
More danger of anthropomorphism
Those of you who read this blog--thanks for your time--know that I am concerned about how we assume that therapeutic interventions used with humans are being taken without translation into the animal therapy world. I call this "anthropomorphism".
The latest trend in this has been in the idea of "core" muscular strength as a deterrent to back pain in humans. This idea is now being promoted in the equine world. There are now such things as equine "pilates" that are pilates in use of the name only. It is a sad situation to me, that two medical professionals decided that a series of stretches, using enticements like reaching for a carrot, to get the horse to move in a non-traditional way is the same as Pilates. This is an obvious rip off of a branded name.
But beyond this there is still the problem of taking the concepts of "core" strength and equating it to something useful for the equine, when, in fact, it is still a controversy in the human context as pointed out in this NY Times Article: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/core-myths/?em
Let me get off my soap box and state that anytime we humans or our animals can be encouraged to perform non-traditional movements our body will benefit from it. Getting up from the computer and stretching, teaching your horse carrot stretches or better yet clicker, taking your dog for a swim will all tend to increase the options for movement available to the body. Increasing the movement options--or as Rolfers say "adaptive capacity"--allows the body to choose from a greater repetoire of movements to remain energetically efficient.
Any thoughts?
The latest trend in this has been in the idea of "core" muscular strength as a deterrent to back pain in humans. This idea is now being promoted in the equine world. There are now such things as equine "pilates" that are pilates in use of the name only. It is a sad situation to me, that two medical professionals decided that a series of stretches, using enticements like reaching for a carrot, to get the horse to move in a non-traditional way is the same as Pilates. This is an obvious rip off of a branded name.
But beyond this there is still the problem of taking the concepts of "core" strength and equating it to something useful for the equine, when, in fact, it is still a controversy in the human context as pointed out in this NY Times Article: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/core-myths/?em
Let me get off my soap box and state that anytime we humans or our animals can be encouraged to perform non-traditional movements our body will benefit from it. Getting up from the computer and stretching, teaching your horse carrot stretches or better yet clicker, taking your dog for a swim will all tend to increase the options for movement available to the body. Increasing the movement options--or as Rolfers say "adaptive capacity"--allows the body to choose from a greater repetoire of movements to remain energetically efficient.
Any thoughts?
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Fascination
My dog, the star of my canine mfr video "Jake", has come up with a new game. He goes into our backyard. This causes the rabbits to run under the deck to get away from him. This in turn keeps Jake on the deck looking and smelling through the spacing in the decking to "chase" the rabbits. He runs from one place to another, chasing after the rabbits, as they move to avoid his scrutiny. If one of the rabbits decides that the best solution to the dog is to stay still he scratches at the deck to get them to move. It frustrates the you know what out of him but he loves it. Or should I say he's addicted to it. It's really not much different to my addiction to TV or the internet.
As I'm writing this Jake and me are outside on the deck. He's taking a break from the rabbits. Perhaps he got bored with his cure for his boredom, who knows why he's on break?
It has me contemplating how much of my time is spent in my habitual pattern. This is something we talk about in Meditation as well as Rolfing. How we become habituated to our simple activities, the easy ones, or easy way of doing things. I have taken this a little bit further to suggest that this is how we survive. Through the a minimum expenditure of energy to accomplish a task. If we habituate something than it becomes "natural" and easy. From the Rolfing body view we can say that this habituation originates in an avoidance of a restriction, which makes it easier to follow a certain movement path. In meditation we could say that each action plants a karmic seed which will come to fruition later when the same conditions arise. In other words if Jake scratches on the deck to get at the rabbits and I get mad at him this plants a seed of being mad. The next time he scratches--the condition--that karmic seed of mad can come to fruition. If through meditation I become familiar with my mind and its speed I can make a break the habit and decide if I want to get mad or ? That plants the seed of decision which eventually may over plant the seeds of mad. Complicated eh?
Back to the body's habitual patterns. My premise is that a body will not, should not change what we consider a habitual pattern if that pattern is energetically efficient, unless we propose to it one that is more efficient. We can experience this on the micro level as a guide to our work at a more macro level. We all approach our work with hoping to see a change in our client's structure, movement, etc.. This is the macro. We all have to try and translate this macro strategy into a series of smaller micro interventions that will hopefully accumulate into the resulting macro change. Unfortunately we sometimes get hooked into a habitual pattern while working with our client that is not supporting the micro.
What I am saying is that every micro intervention has to be accepted as an energy efficient change by the body to be accepted. If not than we risk depleting the client's available adaptive capacity and not getting the results we hoped for.
My suggestion to people who train with me is to make small interventions. If these are accepted--as evidenced by local tissue change--than continue with that. If they are not accepted stop and reconsider the local intervention in favor or a different one that is accepted.
This is contrary to what happens in most massage settings or anything that promotes a routine--read habituated pattern--that does not allow for local evaluation of efficacy. This is a sacrifice of the local in hopes of a larger global change--usually one where the client becomes "spaced" out. I'm advocating for local change in support of a more global one. With this strategy we are working with the body and allowing it to direct its own change, one that benefits it more energetically.
Any thoughts?
As I'm writing this Jake and me are outside on the deck. He's taking a break from the rabbits. Perhaps he got bored with his cure for his boredom, who knows why he's on break?
It has me contemplating how much of my time is spent in my habitual pattern. This is something we talk about in Meditation as well as Rolfing. How we become habituated to our simple activities, the easy ones, or easy way of doing things. I have taken this a little bit further to suggest that this is how we survive. Through the a minimum expenditure of energy to accomplish a task. If we habituate something than it becomes "natural" and easy. From the Rolfing body view we can say that this habituation originates in an avoidance of a restriction, which makes it easier to follow a certain movement path. In meditation we could say that each action plants a karmic seed which will come to fruition later when the same conditions arise. In other words if Jake scratches on the deck to get at the rabbits and I get mad at him this plants a seed of being mad. The next time he scratches--the condition--that karmic seed of mad can come to fruition. If through meditation I become familiar with my mind and its speed I can make a break the habit and decide if I want to get mad or ? That plants the seed of decision which eventually may over plant the seeds of mad. Complicated eh?
Back to the body's habitual patterns. My premise is that a body will not, should not change what we consider a habitual pattern if that pattern is energetically efficient, unless we propose to it one that is more efficient. We can experience this on the micro level as a guide to our work at a more macro level. We all approach our work with hoping to see a change in our client's structure, movement, etc.. This is the macro. We all have to try and translate this macro strategy into a series of smaller micro interventions that will hopefully accumulate into the resulting macro change. Unfortunately we sometimes get hooked into a habitual pattern while working with our client that is not supporting the micro.
What I am saying is that every micro intervention has to be accepted as an energy efficient change by the body to be accepted. If not than we risk depleting the client's available adaptive capacity and not getting the results we hoped for.
My suggestion to people who train with me is to make small interventions. If these are accepted--as evidenced by local tissue change--than continue with that. If they are not accepted stop and reconsider the local intervention in favor or a different one that is accepted.
This is contrary to what happens in most massage settings or anything that promotes a routine--read habituated pattern--that does not allow for local evaluation of efficacy. This is a sacrifice of the local in hopes of a larger global change--usually one where the client becomes "spaced" out. I'm advocating for local change in support of a more global one. With this strategy we are working with the body and allowing it to direct its own change, one that benefits it more energetically.
Any thoughts?
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Where have the Innovators gone?
I've been on this tantrum about the lack of adaptation of human therapies to animals. For those of you who haven't been bored by this in the past, what I mean is that too often human therapies are applied to animals without thinking about how they may need to be changed/adapted to better work with the animal. For instance, massage therapists who are taught to keep their hands on the animal for the entire massage, similar to what occurs with human massage training, with no thought to how this affects the animal's nervous system.
There was a time when we had some pioneers in the animal world who were willing to "translate" their human therapeutic specialty to animals. For instance Linda Tellington-Jones, who pioneered the use of Feldenkreis techniques to the animal world, especially horses. Some would suggest that Jack Meagher did this with the work of Travell and Simmons and Trigger Point therapy, but I disagree that this was translated--it was simple copied over with some mistakes, like "rotator cuff"...
Recently I saw two examples of simply taking a human therapy's title and applying it to animals: Pilates for Horses, Yoga for dogs. The Pilates for horses is really troubling to me, since as a Rolfer I am concerned when someone who is not trained in Rolfing calls their work this. (It's an irrational response but one I acknowledge having.) This so called pilates therapy for horses consists of some simple stretches that are induced by using a treat--this is the only way my horses get any "finger" food, they have to work for it by stretching. (When I was first developping my equine series I videoed my horse before and after while inducing these "treat" stretches since they repeatable and the tissue response was evidently different.)
Calling these new interventions by a name associated with human therapy--pilates or yoga--is a misleading way of subsuming the reputation of the human therapy and suggesting that these animal "versions" have the same therapeutic benefit as the human one enjoys.
This use of a human therapies branding leads to a dumbing down of the therapy when it is applied to animals, which in turn leads to a dumbing down of the therapist who applys these therapies with humans. What I mean is that the animal therapist stops their critical thinking about how the animal views the world, moves through the world and is motivated. I read another article in which an equine massage therapist was qouted as saying that horses will, I'm paraphrasing hold emotional stress in their shoulders. just like humans in stressful jobs will. Huh? To me this kind of statement can only come from ignorance of the difference in how humans and horses view their environment.
There was a time when we had some pioneers in the animal world who were willing to "translate" their human therapeutic specialty to animals. For instance Linda Tellington-Jones, who pioneered the use of Feldenkreis techniques to the animal world, especially horses. Some would suggest that Jack Meagher did this with the work of Travell and Simmons and Trigger Point therapy, but I disagree that this was translated--it was simple copied over with some mistakes, like "rotator cuff"...
Recently I saw two examples of simply taking a human therapy's title and applying it to animals: Pilates for Horses, Yoga for dogs. The Pilates for horses is really troubling to me, since as a Rolfer I am concerned when someone who is not trained in Rolfing calls their work this. (It's an irrational response but one I acknowledge having.) This so called pilates therapy for horses consists of some simple stretches that are induced by using a treat--this is the only way my horses get any "finger" food, they have to work for it by stretching. (When I was first developping my equine series I videoed my horse before and after while inducing these "treat" stretches since they repeatable and the tissue response was evidently different.)
Calling these new interventions by a name associated with human therapy--pilates or yoga--is a misleading way of subsuming the reputation of the human therapy and suggesting that these animal "versions" have the same therapeutic benefit as the human one enjoys.
This use of a human therapies branding leads to a dumbing down of the therapy when it is applied to animals, which in turn leads to a dumbing down of the therapist who applys these therapies with humans. What I mean is that the animal therapist stops their critical thinking about how the animal views the world, moves through the world and is motivated. I read another article in which an equine massage therapist was qouted as saying that horses will, I'm paraphrasing hold emotional stress in their shoulders. just like humans in stressful jobs will. Huh? To me this kind of statement can only come from ignorance of the difference in how humans and horses view their environment.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
How much translation is needed?
I've been working on a tantrum lately about how little the animal body therapy world is doing to develop itself as a unique industry. Rather than approaching the quadruped's body and mind as unique and requiring it's own approach, we too often just take the work being done with humans and assume that they'll work with animals--by this I mean animal quadrupeds.
In the past I worried that animal massage therapists were simply taking human techniques and applying them to animals without any translation for the structural and nervous control differences of between the species. Anthropomorphism in body therapy if you will. This even goes so far as to have the ridiculous measure of time--a marketing measure, not a therapeutic one--applied to the animal in the same way it is to the human. I mean where did 1 hour come about as anything more than a possible way to sell oneself? Chiropractors don't sell their services by time! Neither do medical doctors or dentists or farriers... but the animal therapist copying the human therapist sells their services by the hour, rather than the benefit or by surface area of the animal. OR, perhaps more appropriately the animal's ability to remain focused on the work.
The latest contribution to my tantrum is an article I read on "Pilates" for horses. This was a report on how one of my favorite researchers has fallen into the trance of thinking that work developed for humans--in this case core stabilization, which I'm not sure about--can be used with horses with translation. This requires that the quadruped's transverse abdominus acts the same in both species. The the quadrupedal "core" is the same as the human "core". (It seems to this simpe Rolfer that standing on two legs is more difficult than standing on four, and that human back pain may be caused by a completely different action than bi-pedal pain is.)
I'm really concerned that unless we animal therapists start to do our own research and develop our own methods that we'll be marginalized.
It's time to feed the horses and walk in the mud.
In the past I worried that animal massage therapists were simply taking human techniques and applying them to animals without any translation for the structural and nervous control differences of between the species. Anthropomorphism in body therapy if you will. This even goes so far as to have the ridiculous measure of time--a marketing measure, not a therapeutic one--applied to the animal in the same way it is to the human. I mean where did 1 hour come about as anything more than a possible way to sell oneself? Chiropractors don't sell their services by time! Neither do medical doctors or dentists or farriers... but the animal therapist copying the human therapist sells their services by the hour, rather than the benefit or by surface area of the animal. OR, perhaps more appropriately the animal's ability to remain focused on the work.
The latest contribution to my tantrum is an article I read on "Pilates" for horses. This was a report on how one of my favorite researchers has fallen into the trance of thinking that work developed for humans--in this case core stabilization, which I'm not sure about--can be used with horses with translation. This requires that the quadruped's transverse abdominus acts the same in both species. The the quadrupedal "core" is the same as the human "core". (It seems to this simpe Rolfer that standing on two legs is more difficult than standing on four, and that human back pain may be caused by a completely different action than bi-pedal pain is.)
I'm really concerned that unless we animal therapists start to do our own research and develop our own methods that we'll be marginalized.
It's time to feed the horses and walk in the mud.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Caution Pay Attention
I just finished instructing an basic myofascial equine course. We worked with horses at the Colorado Horse Rescue (CHR). The staff at CHR picked a number of horses, two per student, for us to work with, when I spotted one that I actually liked the look of. It turns out that this horse was a "surrender", which means that the people the had it previously gave it up voluntarily for some reason. The horse had a very bad wind sucking addiction, the horse would crib on every wooden post in the pasture. When I inquired about the horse to the manager of the day I was told he had a vicious habit of biting people.
In the fifteen years I've been rolfing horses I've drifted towards wanting to work with horses, or dogs, that are more "challenged" in their relationship to humans than to those that are simply having performance problems. So, the next day we brought out this troubled horse to work with him. When working these kinds of horses it's imperative that one be fully aware of what is happening. I like to work with them alone, in a round pen is best, with the handler outside the pen so I can fully concentrate on the horse.
I worked with the horse for two sessiosn with no real attitude problems. There were a couple of minor bucks when I tried to work around a vertebral subluxation, but nothing too dramatic.
By the third session the horse came up to the pasture gate to meet me when I went out to get him. I was really confident that he was sooo much better that I stopped paying attention to him as a potentially dangerous horse and worked on his back. It happened with lightening speed, all I felt was the teeth racking my back. Luckily--this is actually a terrible thing to say--the horse had cribbed so much that he had worn his teeth down to knubs and what I felt on my back was the knubs scratching my back. It was actually kind of pleasant. There was no aggression in what this horse did, it was just his way of protecting himself, and when it was over I, assisted by one of the students who is very fine horseman, was able to continue to work with the horses back, no more trouble.
Ok, a little more trouble came when I decided to work with the horse's adductors in a way I never work with them and I got a lightning face kick to the lower leg. It sounded horrendous, but didn't really hurt that much and in fact I don't even have a mark on my leg--thick boned Italian.
The point I want to make is that horses are fast and their size relative to us makes them dangerous. We need to always be aware of where we are with them and what they are telling us.
In 15 years I've been bit twice now and kicked twice, by two horses not a bad record, but I would prefer that it was still at one time instead of two.
Be aware and be careful.
In the fifteen years I've been rolfing horses I've drifted towards wanting to work with horses, or dogs, that are more "challenged" in their relationship to humans than to those that are simply having performance problems. So, the next day we brought out this troubled horse to work with him. When working these kinds of horses it's imperative that one be fully aware of what is happening. I like to work with them alone, in a round pen is best, with the handler outside the pen so I can fully concentrate on the horse.
I worked with the horse for two sessiosn with no real attitude problems. There were a couple of minor bucks when I tried to work around a vertebral subluxation, but nothing too dramatic.
By the third session the horse came up to the pasture gate to meet me when I went out to get him. I was really confident that he was sooo much better that I stopped paying attention to him as a potentially dangerous horse and worked on his back. It happened with lightening speed, all I felt was the teeth racking my back. Luckily--this is actually a terrible thing to say--the horse had cribbed so much that he had worn his teeth down to knubs and what I felt on my back was the knubs scratching my back. It was actually kind of pleasant. There was no aggression in what this horse did, it was just his way of protecting himself, and when it was over I, assisted by one of the students who is very fine horseman, was able to continue to work with the horses back, no more trouble.
Ok, a little more trouble came when I decided to work with the horse's adductors in a way I never work with them and I got a lightning face kick to the lower leg. It sounded horrendous, but didn't really hurt that much and in fact I don't even have a mark on my leg--thick boned Italian.
The point I want to make is that horses are fast and their size relative to us makes them dangerous. We need to always be aware of where we are with them and what they are telling us.
In 15 years I've been bit twice now and kicked twice, by two horses not a bad record, but I would prefer that it was still at one time instead of two.
Be aware and be careful.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Playing Hooky
I'm feeling a little guilty, since I'm supposed to be finishing an article for a magazine and instead I'm writing here. But that's not the only thing that's keeping me away from the article. I've been working in a number of animations for the online course, which leads me to what I wanted to write about.
One of the things I like to do, to get inspiration for doing the animations, is look at the work of other people. I was having a problem with a "particle system", which I'm using to illustrate an embryology concept--this is one of those things that Rolfers seem to all do when we are explaining fascia, that being we resort to embryology to show that the body is not made up of "parts"--and searched the net to see if anyone else had solved this problem. What I found was a great website for a film/media school that had a montage of their work. www.brandnewschool.com
At the beginning of the montage the video had a roll of welcome text in different languages. Each language was in a different color and each sentence was on it's own line. So, the first line in each language came first. Then the second line in the paragraph...so that the languages were interspersed and you had to pick yours out of each paragraph. At first this was really confusing to me, but soon, within one or two lines my eye was locked on to the white english text.
This really interested me, so I ran the montage again and tried to not read the english but the concentrate on the german. Again, my eyes locked on the english.
Now I'm fascinated and wonder if this is indicative of how we see things we "know" but don't see things we don't know. You know?
Do any of you know if there's research into this kind of thing--beyond "what the blib do we know..."?
Ok, back to the article.
One of the things I like to do, to get inspiration for doing the animations, is look at the work of other people. I was having a problem with a "particle system", which I'm using to illustrate an embryology concept--this is one of those things that Rolfers seem to all do when we are explaining fascia, that being we resort to embryology to show that the body is not made up of "parts"--and searched the net to see if anyone else had solved this problem. What I found was a great website for a film/media school that had a montage of their work. www.brandnewschool.com
At the beginning of the montage the video had a roll of welcome text in different languages. Each language was in a different color and each sentence was on it's own line. So, the first line in each language came first. Then the second line in the paragraph...so that the languages were interspersed and you had to pick yours out of each paragraph. At first this was really confusing to me, but soon, within one or two lines my eye was locked on to the white english text.
This really interested me, so I ran the montage again and tried to not read the english but the concentrate on the german. Again, my eyes locked on the english.
Now I'm fascinated and wonder if this is indicative of how we see things we "know" but don't see things we don't know. You know?
Do any of you know if there's research into this kind of thing--beyond "what the blib do we know..."?
Ok, back to the article.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
How much should we "dumb-down"?
When I decided to leave engineering for health care, I took a year long anatomy and physiology course at the University of Colorado. Since I was late in applying to school I had to get on the "wait" list for the class. There were 300 people in the auditorium when I went to the first class!
I asked the professor after the first lecture if there was any real chance to get in the class. He, told me to wait until after the first exam and there would be plenty of room. He was right. After the first exam over 50% of the class dropped since it was so hard.
When the professor was challenged about how difficult the exam was he responded " So many of you want to be doctors. If I ever have to go into surgery and one of you are the surgeon I will be very comfortable knowing you know your A&P.".
This is how I run my classes, they are for people who are willing to push themselves to learn what they don't already know.
It seems like we--this is the collective we of people who instruct others--try to dumb things down so much that I wonder if we know what we are talking about. This will only harm the field of animal body therapy.
I asked the professor after the first lecture if there was any real chance to get in the class. He, told me to wait until after the first exam and there would be plenty of room. He was right. After the first exam over 50% of the class dropped since it was so hard.
When the professor was challenged about how difficult the exam was he responded " So many of you want to be doctors. If I ever have to go into surgery and one of you are the surgeon I will be very comfortable knowing you know your A&P.".
This is how I run my classes, they are for people who are willing to push themselves to learn what they don't already know.
It seems like we--this is the collective we of people who instruct others--try to dumb things down so much that I wonder if we know what we are talking about. This will only harm the field of animal body therapy.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
What to do?
These days people are all trying to figure out how to make ends meet. This may mean that they won't be spending as much on their and their animals alternative health care. This will be mostly true if they don't perceive a direct relationship between the therapy and they achievement of some goal they may have.
When I worked for Hewlett Packard as an engineering manager the country went through another recession, companies weren't buying our products. During this time I heard about the strategy that Intel Corporation had for these types of economic downturns; they spent more money on the research and development to be able to produce better products and lead the market once there was a turn around in the economy.
We can and should do something similar to Intel, by investing in our own training. By gaining a new skill or, better yet, improving one we already have, we'll be poised to help our clients when they are able to afford our work again.
Spend time keeping in touch with your clients so they know you are still out there and that you are continuing with your development. You want to be on the "top" of their mind when they think about alternative therapies for their animals again.
Take time to get together with your colleagues and share our knowledge with them. If you belong to a discussion group participate in it. I recently started a discussion forum on www.animalsi.com please feel free to join it. I am asked every week for referrals to good body therapists, this is a way to make yourself known.
I like to spend my down time going over my course notes from my previous trainings, re-reading books, and looking for new ideas.
The most important thing is to stay involved with your work, keep your hands tuned up and let people know you're still out there.
When I worked for Hewlett Packard as an engineering manager the country went through another recession, companies weren't buying our products. During this time I heard about the strategy that Intel Corporation had for these types of economic downturns; they spent more money on the research and development to be able to produce better products and lead the market once there was a turn around in the economy.
We can and should do something similar to Intel, by investing in our own training. By gaining a new skill or, better yet, improving one we already have, we'll be poised to help our clients when they are able to afford our work again.
Spend time keeping in touch with your clients so they know you are still out there and that you are continuing with your development. You want to be on the "top" of their mind when they think about alternative therapies for their animals again.
Take time to get together with your colleagues and share our knowledge with them. If you belong to a discussion group participate in it. I recently started a discussion forum on www.animalsi.com please feel free to join it. I am asked every week for referrals to good body therapists, this is a way to make yourself known.
I like to spend my down time going over my course notes from my previous trainings, re-reading books, and looking for new ideas.
The most important thing is to stay involved with your work, keep your hands tuned up and let people know you're still out there.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
The 10,000 hour rule
When we look at the performance of horses in sports like racing, or sports that have a definitive measure rather than a subjective one, horse performance has not improved much over the years. This lack of performance enhancement becomes even more pronounced when we compare it to the advances in human athletic performance. I used to think that this discrepancy was caused by the fact that the coaches of a human athlete can communicate more effectively--verbally--with their athlete than a horse trainer can with theirs. I think this is a factor. But two things have happened in the last week to make me aware of two other possible causes: reading Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers" and watching Dr. G. Heuschmann's video "If Horses Could Speak" for the umpteenth time.
In Gladwell's book he dismantles our long held myth that high performing individuals--from athletes to the Beatles--are born with a natural talent that pre-disposes them to sucess. This myth leads many of us to believe that we'll never be extraordinary--except in our Mom's eye--because we weren't born with "natural" talent. Rather than natural talent being the deciding factor, Gladwell suggests that the opportunity to practice that thing that we'll be noted for. In the case of an athlete it's practicing their sport. For the Beatles it the opportunity to play music together. He further suggests that the amount of the time--therefore the opportunity--has to equal 10,000 hours; this is the magical number of hours we need to apply to become an "expert" in our chosen art. (I won't spend more time on the book; you can read it for yourself.)
The second event in my transformation was watching Dr. Heuschmann's video. I was asked to attend a showing of the video to a group of dressage riders by one of our local trainers, to help answer any anatomy questions, a very nice opportunity. While I watched the video I was struck by a point raised by one of the interviewed trainers on the difference in the way we train a dressage horse today and the way they train at the Spanish Riding School. At the Spanish School they wait until the horse is ten years old before starting them in any real training. This allows them to develop mentally and physically for the demands of riding. In the world of modern competition horses are started as 2 and 3 year olds. I have certainly bought 3 year old horses with 90 days of training on them thinking they were ready to move on. Has the Spanish School somehow learned the 10,000 hour rule?
Is this rule the reason Sea Biscuit did so well? In his early life he was used as a training aid to other horses, racing against them and forced to lose. The number of these races he ran could have gave him the hours he required.
The 10,000 hour rule doesn't just apply to rock stars and horses; it applies to dogs and body therapists. If you wish to become world class you need to put in the time in practicing your chosen art. But this is not just elapsed time, it has to be time with a feedback mechanism to assure you are on the right track. The Beatle's had their fans and the music critics.
Something to think about.
In Gladwell's book he dismantles our long held myth that high performing individuals--from athletes to the Beatles--are born with a natural talent that pre-disposes them to sucess. This myth leads many of us to believe that we'll never be extraordinary--except in our Mom's eye--because we weren't born with "natural" talent. Rather than natural talent being the deciding factor, Gladwell suggests that the opportunity to practice that thing that we'll be noted for. In the case of an athlete it's practicing their sport. For the Beatles it the opportunity to play music together. He further suggests that the amount of the time--therefore the opportunity--has to equal 10,000 hours; this is the magical number of hours we need to apply to become an "expert" in our chosen art. (I won't spend more time on the book; you can read it for yourself.)
The second event in my transformation was watching Dr. Heuschmann's video. I was asked to attend a showing of the video to a group of dressage riders by one of our local trainers, to help answer any anatomy questions, a very nice opportunity. While I watched the video I was struck by a point raised by one of the interviewed trainers on the difference in the way we train a dressage horse today and the way they train at the Spanish Riding School. At the Spanish School they wait until the horse is ten years old before starting them in any real training. This allows them to develop mentally and physically for the demands of riding. In the world of modern competition horses are started as 2 and 3 year olds. I have certainly bought 3 year old horses with 90 days of training on them thinking they were ready to move on. Has the Spanish School somehow learned the 10,000 hour rule?
Is this rule the reason Sea Biscuit did so well? In his early life he was used as a training aid to other horses, racing against them and forced to lose. The number of these races he ran could have gave him the hours he required.
The 10,000 hour rule doesn't just apply to rock stars and horses; it applies to dogs and body therapists. If you wish to become world class you need to put in the time in practicing your chosen art. But this is not just elapsed time, it has to be time with a feedback mechanism to assure you are on the right track. The Beatle's had their fans and the music critics.
Something to think about.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Are we stretching into injury?
Those of you who know me or have read my book, know I am not a big fan of strain and hold type stretching. One problem that occurs in the stretching of animals is the "anthropromorphic" view that they are the same as humans and will not allow us to harm them. I've seen photos on the covers of books where the animal's legs are being levered into an anatomical barrier.
Even without that the idea the we can simply stretch our muscles into some type of opening without engaging the nervous system is seriously flawed. This why I advocate for PNF stretching or Muscle Energy or what I called myofascial stretching in the book.
A study done by the Australian military--12000 army recruits in the study--where one portion of the study stretched before exercise and the other did not, resulted in a higher injury rate for those that stretched.
This article in the New York times suggests that same type of problem. So, the next time you think you want to stretch ourselve, dog or horse before a competition you may want to re-consider.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/sports/playmagazine/112pewarm.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=stretching&st=cse
Even without that the idea the we can simply stretch our muscles into some type of opening without engaging the nervous system is seriously flawed. This why I advocate for PNF stretching or Muscle Energy or what I called myofascial stretching in the book.
A study done by the Australian military--12000 army recruits in the study--where one portion of the study stretched before exercise and the other did not, resulted in a higher injury rate for those that stretched.
This article in the New York times suggests that same type of problem. So, the next time you think you want to stretch ourselve, dog or horse before a competition you may want to re-consider.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/sports/playmagazine/112pewarm.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=stretching&st=cse
Monday, February 23, 2009
More Collection
I received this email response to one of the entries here. This is pretty auspicious since I was going to write something about collection today for the blog. So, I thought I would answer it for a wider audience. I’ll have to write about what I wanted to say today later.
I was able to take a quick look at your blog and was interested in the
entry about collection. This is something I have been making a matter of
study for some time so it caught my eye. I am not a proffesional dressage
rider by any stretch, but classical riding and Haute Ecole have been a
personnal passion for many years. I have studied mostly the french and
spanish schools and find little to nothing of true colletion in modern
dressage riding.
I am by no means an expert in anatomy or biomechanics, so sometimes i
have to admit what I read goes right over my head and I can get confused.
I have been reading alot of Dr. Deb Bennets writings but I am also
increasingly a fan of Dr. Claytons. I recently purchased her "core
training' dvd.
I would love to get more of your opinion on Dr. Debs understandings, it
seemed from your post you maybe don't agree with her, or were you saying
you felt their was some truth in all three of the theories? I know deb
talks alot about raising the base of the neck and freeing up the
forehand,and I know a couple of her students that also study the work of
Dr. Clayton and I havven't heard anyone complaining that they couldn't
reconcile both.
Like i said though this stuff can go over my head pretty quickly and I can
sometimes think 2 people are agreeing with each other only to find out
later they don't agree, soooo if in all your free time (lol) you would be
interested in sharing anymore of what you have found to be similar and at
odds in these two theories I would love to hear from you.
Collection is probably THE most misunderstood aspect of horsemanship. If you haven’t gone to the website www.animalsi.com and read the chapter from my next book on collection (it’s coming out in the IASI Journal) I encourage you to do so, I’m going to write here assuming you have.
Before I start I want to assure you that I am a very big fan of Dr. Deb. I’ve been following her work for 30 or years, since she was writing for this Arabian Horse newspaper that I can’t remember the name of. I still think her three volume set on confirmation is the best, but disagree with her use of “woody” to describe equine movement.
The theories, or schools, of collection have three components to them:
1. when in the horse’s training they take place
2. how the body looks and acts
3. how to train the horse to arrive at collection.
(It seems like the latest part of training is the appropriation of the misguided idea of “core” strength from the human athletic training and applying it to the equine. I’m saying “misguided” because I’m not a believer in the core strength concepts and as such may be leading the parade of the misguided!)
One of the main problems with understanding collection is, as you point out, reconciling all of the confusing viewpoints and terminology that’s used; rounding the rear, pushing from behind, round frame… It’s like that telephone game where people get the message completely scrabbled by the time it reaches the end of the line. I contribute this to the westerner’s inability to listen. I have this problem in spades, I’m a visual learner so when someone says “round” that may mean one thing to them but a completely other one to me.
I thought that collection and round was the same thing, until I rode a collected horse! I used to take dressage lessons during the winter when I wasn’t conditioning my endurance horse on the trails. (From Dr. Deb’s confirmation books there is a description of how to attain “round” that I used to think was the way to collect a horse—squeeze into closed hands, like a toothpaste tube with a cap on…—but I now know this is inaccurate.) The feeling of riding a collected horse is one of power coming up through the withers. Do you agree? Not, of being pushed from behind.
To remove some of this confusion people have resorted to using bio-mechanical terms, which if they don’t understand them or if their audience doesn’t understand them, can result in more confusion. (I’m developing an online course which will explain some of the more commonly used bio-mechanical terms as well as the kinesiology.) Understanding physics, (statics and dynamics are called “mechanics” in physics) is a pre-requisite for fully understanding bio-mechanics.
To answer your question more directly, I think that the top line theory and the bottom line theory both have merit and problems.
The top line theory is what could be called “classic” where the idea is that the horse “pulls” the forehand back onto the rear end. (This looks quite a bit like a speed skater bent over while racing.)This was tested by Dr. Clayton’s lab with Paul Belasik riding the horse into a Levade. Obviously an upper level movement, which implies the horse, was in training for some time. Which insinuates; that many horses may have not been able to make it to the end of the training to where they could do this maneuver. There lies the rub for me in the top line theory, the dropout rate due to injury to horses in training.
The bottom line theory, I call it this only to contrast the two and in response to something Dr. Deb wrote that there is no top line muscular development required to achieve… This theory is based on supposition of a “ring” of muscles that encircle the thorax and cooperate to bring the rear end under the horse. There are two problems with this, one is the coordination required by the horse’s nervous system to achieve this and the actual inclusion of the psoas muscle as part of the ring. (The psoas is postulated as a prime stabilizer of the equine spine in this theory; I see it as a flexor of the femur and a reset mechanism for the spine’s rotation. So, this is where I have one basic disagreement.) Again, with this theory there is a lack of training methodology and long term general success.
Both of these theories seem to neglect some bio-mechanics, motivation for the horse and some basic musculo-nervous physiology.
The last theory is the thoracic sling theory that has been put forward by me since 1994, long enough ago that I don’t know who I stole it from, and by Dr. Clayton’s labs’ work, as documented in 2003? (I don’t have my references in front of me, or even behind me.) This theory, as I propose it not necessarily Dr. Clayton’s view, is that the thorax is propelled upwards and backwards by the rhythmic contraction of the thoracic “sling” muscles… I’ll let you read about this in the chapter that’s online at www.animasi.com.
In some sort of conclusion, I think that thoracic sling theory is the unifying theory for collection of the normal ridden horse and if training methods are used to free the shoulders that we will see more horses make it to the level of Levade. That both the top and bottom line theories describe places on this path of training, with the bottom line coming before the top line in the training cycle.
While this discussion is fun for me, I am not a trainer of dressage horses and don’t offer any real suggestions on how to train. What I am more interested in is how do the therapists that I train use this information to make intelligent well thought out interventions to help the horse. Freeing the shoulders is incredibly easy to accomplish and should be incorporated in all horse training.
Thanks for spending the time reading this and for sparking the discussion.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Signal to Noise
Have you ever struggled to tune in a weak radio station? Static fills the speakers as you strain to hear the station while tweaking the dial. Of course today's radios jump electronically to the station with the strongest signal when you push the next button. In electronics what determines a "strong" signal is the signal to noise ratio. Signal is also called intelligence. Noise is what we want to reject or filter out.
When we work with out client they are going through a very similar process of trying to determine what in our input/touch is intelligent and should be listened to and what is extraneous noise and should be rejected. Each time the client makes a decision about this their ability to adapt or change is reduced a little--I subscribe to the theory that we have only so much adaptive capacity and that it is not measured in time but in decisions like described here. If we are inputting a lot of extraneous noise into the client's body, through touching them with no purpose to the touch--petting--than they will use their adaptive capacity on filtering out that touch and not gain as much benefit. If on the other hand, no pun, we are sure about what we are trying to achieve with our touch than our signal to noise ratio will be high and the client will benefit more, if only in that we did the filtering for them.
The next time you are working with a client ask yourself before you touch them if you are sure of what you are trying to achieve with our intervention.
When we work with out client they are going through a very similar process of trying to determine what in our input/touch is intelligent and should be listened to and what is extraneous noise and should be rejected. Each time the client makes a decision about this their ability to adapt or change is reduced a little--I subscribe to the theory that we have only so much adaptive capacity and that it is not measured in time but in decisions like described here. If we are inputting a lot of extraneous noise into the client's body, through touching them with no purpose to the touch--petting--than they will use their adaptive capacity on filtering out that touch and not gain as much benefit. If on the other hand, no pun, we are sure about what we are trying to achieve with our touch than our signal to noise ratio will be high and the client will benefit more, if only in that we did the filtering for them.
The next time you are working with a client ask yourself before you touch them if you are sure of what you are trying to achieve with our intervention.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Collection Part 2
I finally got the video "If Horses Could Speak" which I ordered in December! The video goes along with the Dr. Heuschmann's book "Tug of War: Classical vs Modern Dressage". If you are a therapist reading this blog save the $60 and buy the book first. The video is more like a documentary of what Dr. Heuschmann believes to be "classic". It is a beautiful piece of work from a film perspective, and wonderful to watch. It won't however teach you anything that you can use in your therapy sessions. I buy these kinds of things to use in my course, so they pay for themselves in the long run. Even as a rider you won't learn any new or old ways to train your horse.
Dr. Rolf stated that if you wanted to come to a new conclusion about something you needed to start with a new premise.(Actually this isn't her statement, she was repeating it.) Dr. Heuschmann encourages us to come to an old premise in training our horses--which I totally agree with--while using old premises about anatomy and biomechanics--which I disagree with.
The old premise that Dr. Heuschmann keeps to is that locomotion is caused by muscular contraction, that muscles are separate entities within the body and that fascia is found in specific "spots". He holds to an old style anatomy view of a trained veterinarian. I seriously doubt if Dr. Heuschmann uses any type of alternative therapy with his horses. He most certainly doesn't discuss the skeleton, nerves or fascia, other than as mentioned above, in this video or his book. (I haven't finished the book yet.)
I have a lot of respect for what he is doing and would love to talk with him. I plan to go to a clinic if and when he comes to the US. Or, perhaps, I should try and go to Germany and work with his horses, they could certainly benefit from it.
The lastest on the collection front. There are 3 main theories which I will call: the topline, the bottomline and the shoulder freedom theories.
The topline is a theory that is proposed by the "old" school represented by Dr. Heuschmann and Paul Belosak and such. This theory holds to the pyramid of training which has collection as the last part of training of the riding horse. It holds the supple back as sacrosanct--I totally agree--and assumes that the horse's front is lifted up (dorsally) and back (caudally) by the muscles of the rear and topline. This was seen to be so in experiments carried out at the McPhail research center with Paul Belasik riding a horse in piaffe, which is an extreme dressage movement.
The bottomline theory is proposed and championed by Dr. Bennett. She proposes that collection occurs throught the contraction of the "ring of muscles" on the bottomline of the horse, with little or no activity in the topline. This hasn't been tested in a research setting.
The shoulder theory has two parts to it: the shoulder only theory and the shoulders as the instigator theory--this is my theory so it gets the tricked out name. In this the shoulder only theory, proposed by Dr. Clayton the soft tissue of the thoracic sling propels the front end dorsally and caudally shifting the center of mass towards the rear. In my theory it is the thoracic sling that "allows" collection--moving the COM dorsally and caudally--through the freedom of two forelimbs coming more vertically,and the contraction of the topline and bottomline--sans psoas. Maybe this should be called the unifying theory of how a quadruped can start to move like a biped.
Any comments?
Dr. Rolf stated that if you wanted to come to a new conclusion about something you needed to start with a new premise.(Actually this isn't her statement, she was repeating it.) Dr. Heuschmann encourages us to come to an old premise in training our horses--which I totally agree with--while using old premises about anatomy and biomechanics--which I disagree with.
The old premise that Dr. Heuschmann keeps to is that locomotion is caused by muscular contraction, that muscles are separate entities within the body and that fascia is found in specific "spots". He holds to an old style anatomy view of a trained veterinarian. I seriously doubt if Dr. Heuschmann uses any type of alternative therapy with his horses. He most certainly doesn't discuss the skeleton, nerves or fascia, other than as mentioned above, in this video or his book. (I haven't finished the book yet.)
I have a lot of respect for what he is doing and would love to talk with him. I plan to go to a clinic if and when he comes to the US. Or, perhaps, I should try and go to Germany and work with his horses, they could certainly benefit from it.
The lastest on the collection front. There are 3 main theories which I will call: the topline, the bottomline and the shoulder freedom theories.
The topline is a theory that is proposed by the "old" school represented by Dr. Heuschmann and Paul Belosak and such. This theory holds to the pyramid of training which has collection as the last part of training of the riding horse. It holds the supple back as sacrosanct--I totally agree--and assumes that the horse's front is lifted up (dorsally) and back (caudally) by the muscles of the rear and topline. This was seen to be so in experiments carried out at the McPhail research center with Paul Belasik riding a horse in piaffe, which is an extreme dressage movement.
The bottomline theory is proposed and championed by Dr. Bennett. She proposes that collection occurs throught the contraction of the "ring of muscles" on the bottomline of the horse, with little or no activity in the topline. This hasn't been tested in a research setting.
The shoulder theory has two parts to it: the shoulder only theory and the shoulders as the instigator theory--this is my theory so it gets the tricked out name. In this the shoulder only theory, proposed by Dr. Clayton the soft tissue of the thoracic sling propels the front end dorsally and caudally shifting the center of mass towards the rear. In my theory it is the thoracic sling that "allows" collection--moving the COM dorsally and caudally--through the freedom of two forelimbs coming more vertically,and the contraction of the topline and bottomline--sans psoas. Maybe this should be called the unifying theory of how a quadruped can start to move like a biped.
Any comments?
Saturday, January 10, 2009
The great collection debate
I put a copy--draft--of a chapter from my next book on the website wwww.animalsi.com. The chapter is on "collection" of the horse. Collection is a term/concept that is really misunderstood--one author called it "mythunderstood--and as such it is difficult for someone to know what to believe it is.
There are those people who go back to the classics and read them to gain a better understanding of it. Throughout my riding career, in taking lessons, I've been told that I/we need to "collect" the horse. Often this was accompanied by an indication that the horse should "round" its back to indicate it was collected. It didn't seem to matter that the horse may be round behind while tight along the top line as in some champion cutting horses I watched on TV last week.
In my research on what collection means anatomically, I've come across three main, what I'm calling, themes: 1. the topline, 2. the bottom line and 3. the shoulder freedom theme. I've always been a proponent of the shoulder freedom theme and designed my work around this. This theme has been backed up by research by Dr. Hillary Clayton as has the first theme. What I've come to conclude is that collection occurs through the interaction of these three themes.
I'll write more on the website, so I can add some illustrations and animations. If you get a chance to visit and read the chapter, let me know what you think.
There are those people who go back to the classics and read them to gain a better understanding of it. Throughout my riding career, in taking lessons, I've been told that I/we need to "collect" the horse. Often this was accompanied by an indication that the horse should "round" its back to indicate it was collected. It didn't seem to matter that the horse may be round behind while tight along the top line as in some champion cutting horses I watched on TV last week.
In my research on what collection means anatomically, I've come across three main, what I'm calling, themes: 1. the topline, 2. the bottom line and 3. the shoulder freedom theme. I've always been a proponent of the shoulder freedom theme and designed my work around this. This theme has been backed up by research by Dr. Hillary Clayton as has the first theme. What I've come to conclude is that collection occurs through the interaction of these three themes.
I'll write more on the website, so I can add some illustrations and animations. If you get a chance to visit and read the chapter, let me know what you think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
