Mell Siff om squats

[ptpoul]

SQUATS AND MYTHS (1995)

Dr Mel C Siff

School of Mechanical Engineering

University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa

My comments on squatting technique have drawn a mixed bag of agreement and

upset, which is always the case with fundamental exercises which tend to be

surrounded by years of superstitious application.

GENERAL COMMENTS

Rest assured that this type of analysis is not meant to belittle. Heaven

knows how many times we are all challenged at lectures, conferences and

lifting platform about the appropriateness of our technique. I thank those

who have chosen not to be politically correct and kind to me over the years,

otherwise I would have been happily contented with the same old myths

forever.

Argumentation, analysis, refutation, rebuttal and counterproposal are all

time-tested ways of research and teaching. Regrettably we often feel that if

someone attacks ideas we believe in, then we are being personally attacked.

Most of the time we did not even create the offending idea, yet we have used

it so often that we become emotionally attached to it. In the case of

religion, politics and sex, criticism invariably leads to such passionate

encounters that even families become split up and nations go to war. Even

science is not immune to this belief fervor - just try to argue about

evolution and you will see what I mean.

In the world of fitness, a similar scene rules and it is inordinately easy to

tread on toes. The one merit of the Internet is that everyone can attend

(unlike some costly conferences and some forbidding lecturers) and become

involved and for that we thank fellow list member, Pansy. She prodded all of

us into a series of encounters from which we will all emerge enriched, if

personality clashes do not cloud the content. So, those of us such as myself

who have analyzed your comments in some depth still appreciate your

willingness to become involved.

SOME SPECIFICS

That having been said, it is still essential to comment on one of the worst

beliefs that one encounters at virtually every fitness convention and in

every popular publication, namely:

"This exercise is for the average person or beginner and is not meant for

athletes or experts"

While the sentiments are well founded, they often tend to insult the

'average' person - who on earth always wants to be just 'average'? None of my

clients wants to stay 'average' or 'novice' - that's why they are visiting a

professional - they want to move out of averages and progress to something

far greater.

Of course, we start with carefully graded sequences of exercises, beginning

with no added loading, and then progress cyclically to greater heights to

achieve mutually agreed-upon goals, but we must never lose sight of the fact

that any beginner HAS to be moving progressively onto significant resistance

(or duration, degree of difficulty, range of movement etc.) - and this is

where the problems begin.

Research has shown that skills developed with minimal loading do not

necessarily transfer effectively and safely to situations with greater

loading. Moreover, learning a skill using movements which are similar to, but

not the same as the actual exercise being taught, causes the same sort of

motor problem, because the controlling program being instilled into the

central nervous system is different for every different variant or pattern of

movement.

Thus learning of the half squat, power clean or machine bench press does not

properly prepare the beginner for safety and efficiency with heavier loads.

In fact, the well-meaning, but misguided advice to do certain 'safe'

movements can actually lead to the dangerous situation in which the client

may be MORE vulnerable to injury if he/she by chance is called upon to

execute the banned form of that exercise.

ADAPTATION AND OVERDESIGN

Just as one overdesigns roads and buildings with a greater "Safety Factor"

than 1 to withstand greater loads in earthquake zones such as San Francisco,

so we should overdesign the body just in case it is sometimes called upon to

do that dread activity that all the fitness authorities cautioned us against.

So we have to teach, modify or relearn the skill each time we are exposed to

some noticeable change in its characteristics, such as degree of resistance,

range, speed, duration and pattern. If one is likely to be exposed to fatigue

with an exercise, then we have to ensure that the client knows the different

skills of learning and coping under conditions of fatigue. It is highly

misleading to believe that there is only one specific skill for a given

exercise at a given time for every single person.

It is also misleading to lump all squats together. Even though they all

involve knee, hip and spinal actions, the powerlifting and weightlifting or

deep-knee bend squats differ very significantly in execution and distribution

of forces through range of movement.

There tends to be an irrational fear associated with deeper-than-parallel

squats, even though most of this is based on theoretical analysis and is

usually contradicted by clinical studies which show that even more knee

injuries occur in activities which do not flex the knee anywhere near

parallel (such as running and jumping). Others show that partial squats can

traumatize the knees even more than full squats!

Do the critics not appreciate that full squats executed under appropriate

control throughout the movement actually produce adaptation (that is what all

training is about, anyway!), enhanced strength, better stability and greater

resistance to unexpected loading? That is what the principle of Gradual

Progressive Overload is about, isn't it?

THE REAL DANGERS

The sooner folk realize that safety of execution does not depend primarily on

the exercise alone, but the technique with which it is executed. Thus, a full

squat executed slowly over full range may produce smaller patellar tendon

forces than a part-range squat done a bit more rapidly. As a matter of fact,

the patellar tendon force is frequently much greater during step aerobics,

running, jumping, kicking and swimming than during controlled full squats

with a load even exceeding twice bodymass.

The dangers of a squat (even a part-range one) lie more in inward rotation of

the knees, unequal thrusting with one leg, loss of stability with fatigue or

poor concentration, unskilled use of ballistic action or the use of some

object to raise the heels and increase the stress on the patella and its

tendon.

Does this mean that we should then advise against all these activities? Of

course not! If we presented a table of the stresses and strains acting on all

the tissues of the body during apparently innocuous daily activities

(including the pressure in smaller blood vessels subjected to the pumping

pressure of the heart), we would never get out of bed.

Sorry, these arguments of great forces and stresses and so forth have to be

looked at in context - the body grows, adapts and flourishes in response to

an optimal level of regularly imposed stress. It is also misleading to talk

about forces and tensions being large, because we should only do so in the

context of knowing something about how big, strong and dense the tissues are

upon which they are acting.

If the tendon has a large cross-sectional area and the connective tissue

comprising it is strong and extensible, then we have far less to worry about

than if the tendons were not like that. Remember that a knowledge of the

STRESS (force averaged over the cross-sectional area of the tissue) and

STRAIN (how much the tissues lengthen relative to their original length) is

far more relevant than the force itself. Forget about forces being quoted out

of context - we have to be far more specific than that before we can condemn

some poor exercise to death.

SOME DISCUSSION OF DISAGREEMENTS

GENERAL

< Like I said above, at no time did I suggest this was appropriate for actual

training but was trying to create an idea of overall form. When did I ever

say "significant weight" or bouncing or doing it fast? Remember my objective

was to help in form, in bodily placement, not in an actual weight training

program . >

***EVERYTHING is part of training and appropriate or inappropriate for

training. My comments about overall form are answered by my analysis of how

much the skills of execution vary all the time and that beginner methods may

not necessarily be enough to ensure that efficiency and safety continue to

reign. In terms of the two criteria applied to problem-solving situations,

those initial drills may be NECESSARY, but they are not SUFFICIENT for

learning squats which gradually increase in degree of difficulty (even if the

difficulty is because one is growing older and weaker!)

If the next response is that the client is never going to add a load and

remain at the same level and number of reps, I must say no more and go my way

in peace. But if progressive increase in fitness is the aim, well, all the

preceding commentary remains relevant.

<When did I ever say significant weight? Again, I was trying to get across

placement not an actual training routine. >

***Another little problem lurks in this comment. It is commonly believed that

adding an external load is the only way to produce really significant loads

on the joints and tissues. This myth has beset resistance training for

decades and many coaches and doctors still believe that non-load bearing

exercise has to be safer than load-bearing exercise.

If we wander back to Newton's 2nd Law (Force F = Mass x Acceleration), we

learn that the force may be increased either by adding load or by

accelerating the action. In fact, since it is easier to move faster or

accelerate more rapidly with a heavy load, many folk expose themselves to

greater force under unloaded conditions! If one accelerates rapidly, the

effective weight or load imposed on the body DOES become significant! This is

always something we have to watch out for with beginners or those who believe

in using light weights.

< With this present myth of 90 degree angle, are you then suggesting that it

is appropriate for a beginner to do a deep knee bend? >

*** Do the persons suffer from any pre-existing knee problems or weakness? Do

they ever squat in daily life to put on shoes or play with youngsters? Do

they ever run, jump or kick without experiencing knee pain or disability? Is

there any good medical reason which definitely indicates that slow,

controlled full squats without major bouncing are dangerous for them? Do

they always want to have a limited range of functional knee flexion for the

rest of her life? Do they believe that the body was created or evolved NOT to

be used in a controlled fashion (and sometimes for emergencies) over the full

range of its capabilities? If the answer to all those questions is yes,

then let them continue to treat themselves as if they are ready for the

grave!

Also entirely relevant to the 90 degree story is the fact that more research

is emerging which shows that this limited range squatting can actually place

GREATER stress on the various structures of the knee joint than full range

movement.

My old Bulgarian weightlifting coach used to try to convince me that I should

even used a controlled bounce at the bottom of all of my squats in the clean

and snatch to ensure that I did not damage my knees!! He and many of his

colleagues did this for years with loads of as much as 240kg and after

several decades of lifting they still had no obvious knee dysfunction.

I have not come across any research which supports his advice, but it would

appear that he was recommending that one must involve the elastic structures

of the joints to augment the 'pure' muscle contraction characteristic of slow

controlled squats. Why rely just on muscles, when you can use stored elastic

potential energy as well and spare the poor old muscle, seemed to be his

view? I await information from others in this regard.

POSITION OF THE TORSO

Other contributors stressed the importance of squatting with the trunk

vertical, which is another one of those horrible myths about squatting. To

analyze this advice, let us return to the training chair that started all

this discussion.

Sit erect with knees in front of you (or a bit to the side), shoulder width

or so apart, hands folded across the chest, according to the advice we have

just read. Without leaning forwards or shifting the feet further back and

flexing the knees more, try to stand up without leaning forwards or bouncing!

You will find that this is impossible. To stand up, you either have to spread

your legs very wide apart, like the Sumo squat position of the powerlifter,

or move the feet backwards and lean forward. For most 'average' folk and

serious lifters, the latter position quite naturally teaches you your

individual degree of forward trunk lean for squatting and deadlifting. You

HAVE to lean forward to squat or deadlift (now don't quote some of those

weird 19th century lifts with the load behind the ankles to prove this

wrong!); that is determined by the biomechanics of the movement!

And never forget to hold the breath, even without a load, for this is what

nature decreed should happen to stabilize the trunk and protect the lower

spine! Your blood pressure will rise in proportion to the size of the load

and the amount of effort that you are willing to put into the action. If you

have cardiocirculatory problems, and you insist on squatting with weights,

then keep your mouth open and gradually breathe out to prevent intrathoracic

and intra-abdominal pressure from increasing too much - and avoid using

maximal loads!

< Regarding to POSITION OF THE TORSO during squatting: I believe many people

get confused by the advice to keep one's back "straight." Dr. Siff is right,

in my experience -- you can't keep your torso perpendicular to the floor

without some sort of odd foot position. But you MUST keep an arch in your

back. The technique I've always used is to keep the arch in the lower back

and neck buy sort of "pushing out" the chest and abdomen and looking slightly

upwards.

The belief that the spine must be straight during squats and deadlifts is

another one of those confusing snippets of ill-explained training lore. >

STRAIGHT BACK?

The 'advisers' probably mean that the spine should not be flexed forwards or

extended backwards, in some sort of hypothetical straight line. When

challenged on this point, some of them state that this is their simplified

way of stating that the spine should be kept in its neutral position,

whatever that means in the context of a dynamic lift involving a line of

action which changes all the time relative to the direction of the

gravitational pull.

PATTERNS AND RHYTHMS

Some authors (e.g. Cailliett 'Low Back Pain & Disability') refer

simplistically to a lumbar-pelvic rhythm that must be followed to ensure safe

lifting (or squatting), but we have to look at the whole body as a linked

system to appreciate that the actions of squatting and lifting involve many

more actions than those of the pelvis and lumbar spine alone. However, these

authors are correct in identifying that there is a characteristic rhythm or

timed pattern of anatomical (kinesiological) action for the optimal and safe

execution of every exercise.

In the case of the squat, there is a definite rhythm of how the different

joints (ankle, knee, hip, spine) become involved in producing an efficient

and safe movement. This rhythm or timed pattern is really like an exquisitely

orchestrated symphony conducted under automatic and voluntary control of our

brain and nervous system. Every instructor or coach has to conduct a client's

orchestra to produce individualized nervous programs in the brain so that the

muscles will obey the commands to execute an exemplary squat.

POSTURE AND NEUTRALITY

One must maintain a definite lumbar curve during the squat, but this is where

some authorities differ. Some consider that this constitutes lumbar

hypertension and can damage the spine, so they talk about neutral posture,

even though neutrality is defined to apply under static standing upright.

As soon as you lie down or tilt the spine relative to gravity, then we can

attempt to maintain the three natural mobile curvatures of the spine

(cervical, thoracic and lumbar), but this necessitates increasing muscle

tension and changes in other joint angles to approach this standard of

'neutrality'. So, the appearance of neutrality is quite different under

different actions. Even though the spine looks like it is structurally in the

same relative shape, functionally the muscles, ligaments and other tissues

are in radically different states of tension and operation. In other words,

the concept of neutrality (like all the ideas about pelvic tilt) is not at

all as clear-cut as out medical and physiotherapeutic colleagues would have

us believe.

APPROPRIATE LUMBAR POSITIONING

To resolve the issue of lumbar 'hyperextension' during squatting or lifting,

we must analyze what stabilizes the spine under different conditions. The

muscles act as dynamic or static active stabilizers (since they can

contract), while the ligaments act as passive stabilizers (they cannot

contract). In maintaining the three natural spinal curvatures, it is pleasing

to know that both the muscles and the ligaments (and other tissues such as

the fascia, as well as the pressurised trunk) all cooperate to stabilize the

spine.

However, we cannot say that the loading is distributed equally between

muscles (e.g. erector spinae) and ligaments. This ratio is determined by

one's way of squatting. So, if one tightens the erector muscles as much as

possible, this may cause some of the ligaments to slacken, thereby placing a

greater load on the muscles. If one avoids tensing the erector muscles too

much or allows the lumbar spine to arch forwards, then the ligaments may bear

much greater stress and the muscles tend to decrease their strength output.

DYNAMIC STABILIZATION

It happens that there is an optimal balance between these two undesirable

extremes which allows the contribution by muscles and ligaments to

dynamically adjust to different phases of the squat from the starting to the

end position. The trainee or lifter learns this optimal dynamic balance by

tons of experience, some of which is by the bitter way of making painful or

damaging errors.

There is not one precise static position of the spine or hips, though there

is a typical ratio at each set of joint angle (knees, hips, spine, neck

etc.). The ratios change over the range of movement and one learns to develop

great proprioceptive skills to enable you to adjust rapidly and

automatically.

So, we can now appreciate how inadequate it is in the overall picture to

learn by squatting onto a seat or in a part range movement from which we are

told never to deviate, because one must use a specific single type of pelvic

tilt, lumbar angle of concavity, knee angle and so forth.

OBVIOUS ADVICE

We can, of course, make cautionary statements about avoiding actions which

have been seen to have caused serious injuries during squats and all

exercises, for that matter - such as rounding the lower back and twisting

simultaneously, bouncing vigorously in an uncontrolled fashion on totally

relaxed, using a weight which is too heavy to maintain appropriate technique,

bouncing the buttocks off a seat while using a significant load or

accelerating rapidly and squatting when one is fatigued, sore or injured.

Such advice is wise and advisable. But first and foremost are the rules that

perfection of technique and intuitive sensitivity to any changes will go a

long way to preventing injury and ensuring progress.

-------------------------------

Dr Mel C Siff

Denver, USA

Hvis der er nogen der er uenige i hans udtalelser, må de meget gerne kommentere!

Ellers nyd lidt af mesterens visdom