 |
  |
 |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
Site Areas  |
store | | | articles | | | forums | | | studios | | | vacations |
|
yoga | massage | fitness | wellness | meditation |
|
|
For future visits, link to "http://www.YogiSource.com/forums".
Make a new bookmark.
Tell your friends so they can find us and you!
Coming soon ... exciting new changes for our website, now at YogiSource.com.
 Engaging the quadricep by pulling up on kneeModerators: Moderators Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page] | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Yoga -> Ashtanga Yoga | Message format |
carolinejill |
| ||
Why is this a problem to do this--is this a problem? I noticed Nick mentioned in an old post that he "shudders" at this. Meanwhile, Gregor Maehle, who seems to be very well versed in anatomy and physiology, (not to say he can't be wrong) mentions this as a solution to passively hanging in forward bends, thus straining at the point of attachment, the ischial tuberosities. Now he is not saying to do this alone--he also recommends making a motion (without actually moving the foot) of pulling the hell back to engage the hamstrings as well. He often talks about agonist and antagonist, and using the action of one muscle group or more to release others. So what's the problem with this? What else is one to do in order not to sag into this pose and others involving forward bends in addition to doing such things as lifting out of the hips, etc. Those are by no means, his only directions--there are many--but does someone have some better idea about lifting kneecap?  | |||
| |||
| Nick |
| ||
    Location: London, England | http://tinyurl.com/d6asya Hi Caroline, Take a look at the web site above-an excerpt from 'Anatomy and Human Movement.' On the first paragraph of the second column ("In patients with paralysis of quadriceps femoris.."), a beautiful paragraph which largely sums it up for me. By constantly telling our students to lift their kneecaps, there is a danger of hyperextending the knee and stretching all the ligaments. Hyperextending the kneee also lengthens the hamstrings further, so that their muscular action is lost which is disasterous for knees-women are more at risk-their hamstrings tend not to activate in the same way as mens-which contributes to the higher incidence of ACL tears in women. I'll have to get this book, you've whetted my appetite  . Sounds like he may have solved the problem, by performing co-contraction of the hamstrings at the same time as engaging the quads, which stops the tibia mis-aligning underneath the femur. When I do this with my hams, then the quads also engage spontaneously-so I don't engage muscles, I engage movements and postures and feel the muscles engage-then my practice is like feeling a series of muscular contractions in reaction to my deciding to perform a certain action. An old motor adage; The mind engages in movement, not in muscular contraction-so why try to construct a thought process which actually hinders optimal posture and movement? Maybe I'll try to explain my reasoning a bit later, if I can, got to go to class, take care Nick | ||
| |||
| carolinejill |
| ||
| |||
| carolinejill |
| ||
| |||
| Nick |
| ||
Location: London, England | Hi Caroline, I'll try to reply, but I've not studied Feldenkrais to any degree, and supect that the language used to impart information might make it difficult to understand one another-but let's see. "why would contracting be like moving in an opposing thought process." The maxim I mentioned may have a more useful interpretation-"Teach movements, not contractions," in recognition of how living things construct posture and movment on a neurological basis. "I have studied Feldenkrais (noticed you mentioned it) among other things and the idea is that thought ALWAYS precedes movement. Point being, if the basis behind contraction is something useful and necessary like TENSEGRITY, then wouldn't one be moving mentally and physically (agonists/antagonists--thank god for my study of that or I would not have understood a word he was talking about) from a place of balance?" You just opened a can of worms . Another maxim I would like to use here is "appropiate level of neural activation at the appropiate moment of the appropiate muscle." Movement requires that these three factors are a continuum, and holding a posture basically means that we hold this continuum at a certain point. When sit down with both feet on the floor and come to standing, needles placed in the quadriceps and hamstrings will show high levels of activation in both muscles-this is called Lombard's paradox. This phenomenom shows that in closed kinetic chain, the principle of agonist/antagonist no longer apply-only in the open kinetic chain can you say, for example, that the bicep is an agonist of elbow flexion-partly because in the open kinetic chain, it is possible to limit movement to one joint, but in the closed kinetic chain, if the elbow bends, there is also movement in the shoulder and wrist-a linkage. The agonist principle is over-used by exercise coaches the world over-partly because a chiropractor, for example, will use an open kinetic chain exercise to isolate a muscle's function so that they can determine it's function. They couldn't do this with a closed kinetic chain exercise. Coaches and teachers have become a bit confused because they think that agonist/antagonist is the whole story. It is a bit part player in real life. Unfortunately. I was a bit upset when I realized this_ didn't know nearly as much as I thought I did. Always a bit upsetting for an egotist . I'm not sure if i answered your question there, so let's keep this ball rolling-it might be where a key for you. "Conracting by trying to raise kneecaps prior to my discovery of this always led to unpleasant sensations in the knee. Before having the satori moment of being able to activate from bandhas, and learn how to turn on opposing muscle groups, my only other option was to be limp in parts of my body while others desperately powered through it. Hence, I "decided" like I have heard otheers mention that Ashtanga was "too hard" and "made for boys." Pshaw. I'm 40 years old, do it with much more awareness now, and love it." You were, in a sense, lucky to getting those uncomfortable feeling so quickly, many people practice for years without pain and it is then nigh on impossible to prevent knee hyper-extension-this is another can of worms. notice also that using bandhas and bio-tensegrity, it is possible for contraction of bandha-appropiate muscle, appropiate force, appropiate moment-around 60 muscles attach to the lumbo-pelvic-hip complex to produce tension in the muscles that span the sole of the foot-and vice versa-then you have the concept of 'short foot,' which I have heard mentioned in Feldenkrais literature, I believe At the moment, I've crashed a bit with the book-I may end up producing it on a CD-rom, so that I can give it the form of a tensegrity model-that way, when people learn anatomical principles, they will immediately understand why they are learning these principles-I look at principles of good yoga practice like the compression struts of a tensegrity structure, and our practice, if intelligent, like the tension component-the practice then provides a span, or bridge, from one principle to another. Otherwise the study of anatomy will come to nothing, or at least, not provide enough answers. Take care Nick | ||
| |||
| Nick |
| ||
Location: London, England | Hi Caroline, I'm going to have to read the whole of Maelhe's book before I make any comment. Therein lies the problem-I hate getting useless anatomy books-I refuse to do it-so unless the book is in a bookshop somewhere so that I can brouse through it, I'm never likely to get it. The excerpts on-line cause me to believe it doesn't fit into what I would call good. I think this is partially because he doesn't challenge errors that are glaringly obvious in the practice of astanga, but instead sticks to the program-one tool for all people. But I feel bad for saying that, and I should read all of it. But remember-his qualifications for writing the book are, at best, minimal-according to his site, he is a German health care practicioner-have a look at this website to see what some people think of the german health care system with respect to this: http://www.chiro.org/Professional_Regulation/ So that really puts me off "One other thing on avoiding hyper-extending the knee. Maehle is big on NEVER bending in the back or he says this will cause disk bulges. Bending is only recommended in Bhujapidasana, Kurmasana. If one does this, then they may find they go a great distance less, but get deeper in the pose. This is what I did UNTIL I figured out how to activate my hamstrings, etc. and found I could move more deeply in the pose and bend less." I would say that illustrates my ealrier statement-I would say that even in bhujapidasana, the intelligent practioner will attempt to return the lumbar spine to a neutral position-but what he is saying is-in some postures, like bhujapidasana, it's ok to let the lumbar spine flex fully? That means that when the stakes are highest, in the most advanced postures which put more shear force on the lumbar spine and are also most likely to de-compress it, then you throw away the very thing that would protect you-bandha? Performed properly, bandha don't just hold you in good posture, they move you towards good posture. So even in bhujapidasana you are fighting to return to good posture of the lumbar spine. "What do you think about standing with legs a bit apart sometimes. This widens your base of balance (I'm not talking about spreading them wide, just not so toes are touching) and seems to help with not hyperextending the kness when dropping forward in sun-salutation and coming back up. What do you think? And how do you feel about bent backs? Are they "THE SALMON MOUSSE" of yoga? (LINE FROM MONTY PYTHON--DEATH POINTS HIS BONY FINGER AT ALL THE GUESTS WHO HAVE FOUND OUT THEY ARE DEAD DUE TO THE SALMON MOUSSE. FUNNY, IF YOU HAVE SEEN THIS.)" Two good points. I believe that most women benefit from having their feet slightly apart-the internal rotation of the knee and hip joints from having the feet too close together is to much for most students-but things like genetics, injuries, and skill are all going to impact on the most suitable position for the feet. The feet should never really be touching for anybody-it's anatomically idiotic. the exception to this might be the medial side of the foot, where the foot ends and the big toe starts (first metatarsophalangeal joint). Let's get back to the spine thing later, that's a book all by itself-but usually the answer is to compress the spine and move it towards neutral posture-using bandha. Nick Regards, Caroline | ||
| |||
| iandicker |
| ||
| |||
| Nick |
| ||
Location: London, England | iandicker - 2009-02-02 4:32 PM Nick, I'd be really interested to hear your opinion about Maele's book. i've been using it a lot over the last year and thought his anatomy descriptions were very helpful. Shame I don't live closer, otherwise I could have lent you my copy. Ian Hi Ian, Well, I had a look at the section on Arha Baddha Padmasana-he says to lift the knee to the chest to close the knee joint-this is compeltely false-flexing the knee opens the knee joint-extending the knee joint closes it, which then means we can stand without as much muscular effort than if the reverse were true. So I would say that if the author has any anatomical knowledge, he does not know how to apply it to yoga practice. He then goes on to say that only then can the two bones (femur and tibia) move in unity-again completely untrue-they only move in unity when the knee is extended, as outlined above. So what he tells us to do is to first de-stabilize the knee by flexing it and bringing it up to the level of the chest, and then laterally rotate the hip and extend it, to bring the leg into the asana. I would say, that along with his instruction to invert the foot, which would then tend to internally rotate the tibia, he is setting up a mechanism to destroy the meniscus and ligaments of the knee joint-external rotation of the hip and internal rotation of the knee is a recipe for disaster, obviously. This is quite a painful post for me-I keep on going back to the on-line book excerpt, and then passing on my criticism of each sentence. I don't understand how someone could go on an anatomy course of any standing...well you get my drift. last one I'm going to mention is he say's the knee is a hinge joint-having previously said the knee is capable of rotation-hinges to not allow rotation. the knee is actually a modified hinge-it is only a hinge when the knee is straight-as soon as it flexes, rotation is possible-as I mentioned above. I thought that the reason there was so much teaching of astanga yoga that is completely counterproductive to the use of astanag yoga as a tool for health was just down to how to it properly not being written down. But I see now that someone has written a book which basically uses the anatomy of some creature that does not exist, and never will exist. I wish you hadn't make me go back and look at that in more detail Ian. if we ever meet up it's just sun salutes for you for about 4 hours.  Sorry for my rant, but I have to say, anyone that uses that book as a guide is really increasing chances of injury-if someone here knows a physio or someone, show them just that section and watch the physio laugh or cry. Nick | ||
| |||
| Eteraz |
| ||
| |||
| tourist |
| ||
Expert Yogi Posts: 8442   | |||
| |||
| Nick |
| ||
Location: London, England | |||
| |||
| tourist |
| ||
Expert Yogi Posts: 8442 | |||
| |||
| tourist |
| ||
Expert Yogi Posts: 8442 | |||
| |||
| Nick |
| ||
Location: London, England | tourist - 2009-02-04 10:29 PM So doing this while seated - pretty much the same? Hi Glenda, Yes-in all positions, really. It seems to be a feature of yoga postures that faulty movement produces faulty postures. In lotus, typically, the femur is too internally rotated, resulting in twisting of the knee or strain. Lifting the knee to put the foot higher on the opposite thigh actually increases the chance of straining the knee! You need to get the hip externally rotated so that the knee is pulled back so that the foot is brought forward, phew , then it can be palced on the thigh without inverting the foot, or internally rotating the tibia, and without losing the ability to use bandha and postural skill to increase the benefits of lotus Nick | ||
| |||
| carolinejill |
| ||
| WOW!!!!!!! Truly amazing response. Once again, you've reminded me to think beyond the box. This makes sense to me about why the antagonist/agonist thing has seemed so confusing to me. After reading wht you wrote, I picture these actions described in the way higher authorities describe the way things "should" be in this optimal and perfect environment that doesn't or rarely exists. I'm getting the anatomy book you mentioned for sure. I have the maehle, and would not mind lending it to you. I live in CA, so it might take a while, but I think your intelligence and time is better spent on other things. I'm hoping later on that you talk more about "compressing the spine"--this was in reference to my question about "should you keep a straight back?" it's just like a frigging movie with great suspense--now I have to wait for the thrilling conclusion. CD ROM sounds like a great idea. Hope it will work with MACS! (my computer) (Below is how I feel after reading and actually being able to understand your explanation. Brilliant answer and so helpful. Thank YOU!!!! | |||
| |||
| Nick |
| ||
Location: London, England | Hi Caroline, Kindly spare my blushes. I've gone briefly in to bandha on the top forum here-let us know what questions you have. Nick | ||
| |||
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
| (Delete all cookies set by this site) | |