|
|
   
Location: London, England | kulkarnn - 2006-05-28 4:21 PM
Nick: Now, you are talking! I wanted this to come from Horse's Mouth. That is one who actually performs an exercise with the name Ashtanga and one who also has knowledge of anatomy. I also agree with you that at least Senior Teachers have a responsibility to look after welfare, I mean at least anatomical of their AY students. What I meant by people messing up themselves is: Some (What? Lot off them!) know that they can not actually perform certain exercise, and they are actually injuring themselves. But, even then, they want to jump into a well of gold!
Hi Neel,
Thank you for your response. I think there are an infinite variety of reasons for people wanting that well of gold. But there is a tendency for yoga teachers and students to follow a path that is made rockier by the anatomical and physiological myths that have sprouted in the yoga world. to be truly proficent at helping people and knowing their antomy probably takes several years training-obviously this is never going to happen, because then the yoga teacher would be on the same wages as a doctor or lawyer. And people are not going to pay that much to keep fit.
Part of the problem is that our understanding of what is god for our bodies is evolving and becoming more accurate as time passes. I think that perhaps people who tried to analyze what yoga does twenty-thirty years ago were either not proficient anatomically, or not proficient yogically, so that they then were restricted in their understanding about what happens when we move any of the joints in our body. I know that my views would not be appreciated in the yoga world, because it challenges those who call themselves gurus, and also the blind faith of those who follow them.
Having said that, whereas twenty years ago people were being told to do sit-ups to get stronger abs to help with back pain, this has now been discredited, and may even contribute to back pain.
All is not lost, however. I'll send you a free copy of my book which intends to give everybody the chance to know what happens when they practice well, and some of what happens when they practice badly. As you can imagine, this is an enormous undertaking, and one which fills my life. But I will definitely send you a copy when I've finished-it'll make a useful door-stop if nothing else 
Nick
|
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Neel,
As an illlustration of the yoga world's misunderstandings about antomy, here's an excerpt from yoga journal's Julie Gudmestad's piece on developing arm strength:
"Biceps, which is Latin for "two heads," refers to the muscle's two sections; each has a tendon that attaches to the outer edge of the shoulder blade just above the shoulder joint. The other end of the biceps attaches to the radius, one of the two forearm bones, near the elbow."
No, she is supposed to know what she is talikg about, but any one who knows anything about anatomy will know that the biceps also attaches to the ulna through the bicepital aponeurosis (a kind of flattened tendon. The writer goes on to describe how the biceps helps you turn a screwdriver (which is why you should get left-handed friends to help with unscrewing tough old screw). This action is only available because of this flattened tendon-if the biceps only attached to the radius, then it would only bend the elbow, instead, biceps bcomes what is called a supinator of the forearm.
My point is that if this is the kind of information that is spread amongst the yoga world, what chance do they stand? people are always tellling me about wonderful anatomy articles that come out of yoga journal, and most of them are laughable. If I was a teacher, and was marking this article, the fact that Julie got this wrong would easily deduct her a lot of marks-she does not even know where biceps attaches, and she's writing an article about it!!
In fact, she goes on to compound her mistake by saying that biceps helps turn a screwdriver-She must have read this in a book, and not really understood it, otherwise she would have questioned how a muscle which bends the elbow can also twist it.
She then goes on to make a few more mistakes in the article, like work is done during isometric contractions (no work is done because no movement takes place). She also claims that the biceps does not get much exercise in yoga-shows she knows nothing of co-contraction, despite having mentioned it.
I only use this peice because i was reading it and was reminded of what we were talking about. So you will see that it is not just astanga yoga, but probably all forms of yoga which are negatively affected by disinformation. If you can find any articles that you would like to find out if they are true or not, send me a link and I'll give you an appraisal.
Nick
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
 
| Nick - I am not going to try to defend JG's writing. You have a far superior knowledge to mine in anatomy. I do however, know that a) she knows her stuff and b) things get edited out and/or oversimplified for publication all the time. I have rarely read any publication where I knew the backgound personally that was 100% correct. My bet is that if you had a chance to question her on these things you would both agree on the details. |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Glenda,
Fair point. I hate it when you're right.  I probably over-reacted. but my over-reaction comes partly from me being confronted with individuals who have been led to believe something that is false, with regards to teachers telling them to do the pose in a certain way, which the teacher bases on their understanding of anatomical alignment. I think that because so many yoga books are so sparing on the structure and function of the musculoskeletal system, it means that teachers who rely on these books/articles for inspiration are not armed with sufficient information with which to impart the yoga postures safely to their students. how many times have I heard teachers say that the knee only bends, that the ankle is capable of more than just flexion/extension, how many students have I met with SI instability which has been compounded by a teacher's instructions for good posture. The problem is that people believe these articles, and I think that all relevant information should be included, so that the teacher is properly armed to teach.
But you're still right..
Take care
Nick |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| I have to say though, that I am surprised at the notion the bicep isn't used much in yoga. I think we had that discussion here some years ago. My personal biceps are awesome compared to what they used to be, but then, I do spend a lot of time carrying toddlers around, so that could have something to do with it. They were pretty shapely back in the day when I had a clothesline, too. Lifting baskets full of wet laundry - the next fitness craze!  |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Glenda,
i am glad you said that about the biceps, because I deleted al ot of my last post because i was trying to go easy on JG's mistakes in her article. People always say lowering into chaturanga dandasana is a triceps exercise (eccentric contraction-enough muscle fibres are contracting to slow down our movement towards the floor). but the biceps is also eccentrically contracting-it is a shoulder flexor, and the shoulder is moving into extension, so it will be slowing that movement as well-the press-up is a triceps and biceps exercise (plus others)!!
Something that is extremely important for yoga practicioners is the concept of open and closed kinetic chain exercise-have we discussed this before, or have you heard of the term?
If we look at the leg instead of the arm, and look at the hamstrings, instead of the biceps, the importance of the open and closed kinetic chain will be easier to understand. The hamstrings flex the knee, just as the biceps brachii flex the elbow. but when the foot is on the ground everything changes. I think that because physical therapists and chiros etc test muscles in the open kinetic chain, this allows them to say whether a muscle is functional because they can isolate that muscle. but when the foot is on the ground it becomes impossible to isolate the muscle, because you cannot move the ankle without there being movement at the knee and hip.
The hamstrings connect to the tibia underneath the knee, and also to the sit bones on the pelvis. Imagine this-if you stand up, and bend your knees, then your hamstrings will be contracting eccentrically to let you bend your knee under control, they will work isometrically to sustain a posture, and will contract concentrically to allow you to straighten your knee again. now if the foot was off the floor, it would be the quadriceps which straightened the knee, and I think that it is partly because of the need for physios to isolate the muscle's function which has led to the blanket statement "the quadriceps straightens the knee, the hamstrings bend the knee."
If we now swap triceps for the quadriceps, and the biceps brachii for the hamstrings, yuo can easily see that in a situation where the hand is on the ground, the biceps functions with the triceps, not against it-as you bend your elbows, the biceps will eccentrically contract, and as you straighten your elbows, the biceps will concentrically contract. Notice that this meshes nicely with the statements at the beginning of the post. Phew!
So I do think that perhaps JG's training as a PT has made her think of the muscles in an open kinetic chain (much easier to understand) as opposed to what happens in real life-injuries and dysfunction often happen when the foot is on the ground or the hand is in contact with something (twisted ankle, wrist injuries in handstands, etc).
To say that the biceps bends the elbow is not accurate-it is grossly underestimating the true function of biceps, but allows PT's to make statements about a muscle's function-statements that are probably worthless, because they are only an observation of that muscle's strength, and this is no indicator of an athlete's function, or anybody's function, for that matter, Pele, Jordan, ronaldhino-all superb athletes who probably couldnt bench press much more than the average person-but their function in the closed kinetic chain allows them to move past their 400 lb bench-pressing opponents with such dexterity that they are/were considered the best.
Take care
Nick
|
|
| |
|
| Nick wrote: All is not lost, however. I'll send you a free copy of my book which intends to give everybody the chance to know what happens when they practice well, and some of what happens when they practice badly. As you can imagine, this is an enormous undertaking, and one which fills my life. But I will definitely send you a copy when I've finished-it'll make a useful door-stop if nothing else
===> Hey Nick, send me the copy as soon as possible. And, I do NOT want it free. I can afford it if it costs less than 50 dollars. You can also send a rough copy, draft copy or whatever. Here is my address: Neel Kulkarni, 2410 Glengyle Drive, Vienna, VA 22181.
===> Now, coming to the anatomical points which you wrote, and at some times Tourist responded/added/etc/etc., this is my point. Please think about it.
===> I do NOT agree that a Yogi has to have a complete Understanding of Anatomy of the human Body. As you said this is NOT possible. Also, this trial has brought some if NOT all Yogis in dwelving into body matters so much that they have lost sight of the mind. And, this is one problem in the Western world, which is more focussed on body than mind, and some times focussed on mind in a body way. Some Yogis have even gone to the extent of proving that body focus is same as mind focus, and focusing on pose is same as meditation, etc. etc.
BUT, I fully agree that certain amount of anatomical knowledge is extremely valuable. And, also if one knows that anatomy is being sacrificed due to incidental, accidental or whatever way knowledge, they should correct their Asana Practice, and NOT cling to fanaticism.
Love and Peace
|
|
| |
Nose v. Mouth Breathing
