While cardio and strength training are great methods to combine with skill work to develop athletes, certain conditioning drills that work as hybrids between strength and skill may be key for separating winning teams from the rest. Out of all maneuvers in sports that involve running, the most physically demanding is generally when a change of direction occurs, especially when the change needs to occur quickly.

In the Journal study, researchers tested Gaelic hurling players on their ability to make a 75-degree turn. The athletes ran five meters, cut back at a sharp angle, and ran five more meters to finish.

Their times were calculated and then compared against a host of kinetic and kinematic variables that are too numerous to list, so I will briefly describe them.

• Kinetic Variables: The kinetic variables had to do with the athlete’s movement when also taking into account their energy and mass. Examples of kinetic variables studied were ground reaction forces and concentric hip power.

• Kinematic Variables: The kinematic variables were concerned with movement but not energy or mass. The range of motion of various joints is one example of a kinematic factor.

Peak ankle power had the greatest degree of correlation to success in the cutting maneuver, and by quite a lot. In fact, the researchers stated that ankle power all by itself explains 59% of the variation in cutting scores. Ankle power contributes not just to change of direction, but also to sprinting, which is why it’s so significant.

Because of the increased directional component, there were other factors involved that may not normally be represented by a straight sprint. Lateral pelvic tilt (meaning the tilt of the hip on the opposite side of the leg pushing against the ground) was one of the factors, and athletes with less lateral tilt performed better. Trunk rotation was the final factor, and the researchers found athletes who could turn their trunk in the proper direction before their lower body experienced faster times.

It would be interesting to see similar tests performed on complete reversal. A complete reversal is basically a change of direction back to where the participants came from. Complete reversals require the athlete to remain low, and are single leg dependent. I would guess that pelvis stabilization would be very important there as well, but the emphasis on power would move up the leg. Coaches could also use these results to create plays that suit their players’ strengths.

So when cutting, many of the same attributes that make an athlete good at acceleration will also benefit them in changing direction. However, due to the directional forces, greater stability is required. The researchers recommend working on plyometrics such as hurdles and depth jumps that involve as little countermovement as possible to develop improved ground contact and ankle power. For hip stability and pelvic control, use exercises like hip bridgs, side lunges, and pistol squats.

References:

1. Brendan Marshall, et. al., “Biomechanical factors associated with time to complete a change of direction cutting maneuver,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000463

Photo courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post The Biomechanics of Changing Direction appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

What you might not be aware of, however, is that the common methods of measuring this output might not give you the total picture. Sure it shows you where the power needs for each exercise are the highest, or lowest for that matter, and probably shows you the most common sticking points that we face, but perhaps we could get more out of these charts with more sophisticated methods. In a study published this month in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning, researchers looked to compare the various methods measuring power output.

One good reason to compare power measuring methods is to examine the differences between them. This might seem trivial at its surface, but knowing the difference can tell you which graph might be best for your purposes. In fact, the traditional methods for measuring power output are great for barbell lifts, but might not be as good for other types of athletic movements.

The traditional methods involve measuring the force an athlete puts into the ground, called ground reaction force (GRF), or the movement of the barbell or other implement. This sounds complicated, and the analysis of it can be very complex, but think along the lines of bouncing up and down on your bathroom scale. Notice that the needle goes up and down, sometimes less than your weight and sometimes more. This is essentially GRF.

One method that is not very common at all is to measure the forces at each joint. This method is less common because it is both expensive and time consuming to do right. However, I’m sure I don’t have to tell you why this information might be important.

In this newest study the researchers compared all of these methods for examining one of the Olympic lifts, the clean. Not only did they look at each method, they also used various loads that were at fixed percentages of each of the participant’s maximums.

The researchers discovered some interesting tidbits. The number of correlations between the traditional methods and joint methods increased as the weight got higher, topping out at 85% of the participants’ maximum. This means most likely that technique is best above 85% of the max, and the power generated by the joints is most effectively transferred to the bar. This also supports the use of the traditional power measurements for heavy barbell movements, as they line up nicely to the joint power. For exercises that do not demand maximal power, however, measuring joint power output is likely a better way to determine how best to prepare for a sport.

The other, more obvious information we get from examining the joints individually is that they do not share power evenly. For example, the hips and knees actually had the highest power outputs at 75% of 1RM, whereas the ankle had its highest at 85%. Less surprising is that the hips peak early in a clean, whereas the knees and hips peak just before the end.

This type of data can give us a more detailed picture of where our sticking points and weaknesses originate, and will also provide the most accurate information for more complex activities. I look forward to seeing more if this sort of data in the future.

References:

1. Kristof Kipp, et. al., “Correlations Between Internal and External Power Outputs During Weightlifting Exercise,” Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 27:4 (2013)

Chart courtesy of Jason Lake, from “Biomechanics and Newton’s Law: Force-Time Curves and Human Movement.”

The post Analysis of Power Outputs in the Clean Uncovers New Information appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

I brought this question to Katy Bowman, a biomechanics expert specializing on natural human movement and development. In addition to her textbook smarts, she also has two little ones under two who have hanging skills that would impress any monkey:

Katy encourages parents to get kids started with these movements that prime upper body strength from a young age (whether they go commando is up to you). “Babies have the reflexes to become strong very quickly. But it is up to us as the guiders of the wee ones, to cultivate what nature has presented – just like every other animal.” So what’s the big deal about this particular movement? What do hanging and swinging do for upper body strength, not to mention the rest of the body? According to Katy, they do a lot more than we might think:

Hanging and the much more challenging action of swinging from object to object, use upper body strength in a general sense. Swinging requires the full participation of every bit of tissue from the fingers to the lower body. The largest contributing muscle force-wise, is the latissimus, which connects the arm bone to the pelvis. When we work our lats as adults, we’re used to fixing the pelvis and pulling the arms toward the ground. This way of training creates an entirely different load (and motor program) than when you pull the pelvis toward the arm as you do during brachiation. The resulting tone of a muscle regularly used in this whole-body fashion can aid in shoulder and sacral stabilization, which in turn are essential for the mechanics of breathing and pelvic floor function. We don’t typically associate ‘monkeying around’ with lung inflation and bladder support, but mechanically speaking they are directly linked.

As a parent, this is fascinating stuff, but what’s even more amazing is that the strength required for swinging all starts way before kids find their way to the monkey bars. If you’ve ever held a newborn you’ve probably experienced that primordial response known as the grasping reflex. In addition to the stepping reflex (more on that here) reflexive gripping is one of the infant reflexes that drives human development. As Katy notes, “For the last hundred years, infant reflexes have been presented as vestigial; artifacts of our ancestral past. Many a scholar has written a paper on how these relics disappeared after a few months because they are unnecessary. Real development comes later, according to these papers, after the modern brain (implied as superior to our ancestral counterpart) was ready to be developed.” Which begs the question: Are infantile reflexes simply the leftover residue from our inferior ancestors, or are they something to be cultivated?

Katy says research shows strong evidence for the latter. “Early cultivation of these reflexes is essential to the health, strength and survival of children – even today. With skyrocketing bouts of children’s asthma and allergies, low muscular tone, abdominal herniations, diastasis recti, and just general malaise, a child’s development requires much greater attention than we are currently giving it.” In fact, when we look at the example of Katy’s kids (fourteen-month old Finn, in the video) it’s easy to call him a super baby, and move on. But what appears as super-strength is really quite average when you look at data collected from modern Hunter-Gathering populations. Did I mention Katy knows a lot about that too?

Data shows that modern H-G tribes like the !X un and Ju/‘hoan work specific exercises, multiple times a day, with their children in the first few months of their life. These children walk much more quickly (seven to nine months) and can hold their entire body early on. A deeper literature review reveals earlier research into the gripping reflex (1930s) and their conclusions that it was indeed a lack of practice early on that reduced the appearance of the reflex. They raised the question ‘What result would the practice of this function have on its retention?’ They found with cultivation, four-day old babies could hold their weight for a periods of time ranging from seconds to a full minute.

In my experience as a personal trainer, these are stats that put many adults to shame!

The next question is, “How safe is this?” Katy’s answer: it depends on the child’s mass and previous habits:. “A two- or three-year-old who’s never hung from his own arms doesn’t have the muscle to support his body weight,” says Bowman. “This load is then transferred this to the ligaments, which are not designed to withstand it, and can cause dislocation. This is where injuries like nursemaid’s elbow come from. When you progress appropriately – that is low and gentle tensile loads applied multiple times throughout a day for a few seconds each time – and you do it as they grow from eight to thirty pounds, watch out! Your kids will quickly become little circus performers.”

So if you’re a new parent sitting and staring at your infant in her swing, bummed that you missed your window to be able to ‘do’ something with her, there’s good news. There is a lot you can do with that baby to cultivate her reflexes and develop healthy movement habits, even now.

Start at the beginning, by loading your wee one the same way you would have if they were a newborn. Here is a video of a much younger baby Finn (wearing a diaper this time) cultivating his strength-to-weight ratio and pulling his own weight at just three months old. (No wonder he’s so good at those rings!):

These tips from Katy are a must-read before you get started:

1. Start cultivating the grasping reflex as early as you can. “Place a finger in their palms, letting them hold you. Then gently and slowly, begin pulling your hand away, giving them a chance to engage their muscles. Never yank, and, at a certain point, hold your position still and let them do some isometric work. They’ll stop when they are tired.”

2. Let baby pull up- don’t yank on your baby. “There’s a difference between you pulling on your kid and your kid pulling against something fixed. When you pull up on a child, you generate the load, which isn’t good because you have no idea of your force generation and how it relates to their current abilities.”

3. Pay attention to your baby’s signals. “You don’t know how fatigued they are – only they do. ‘Sessions’ with my kids (and in H-G tribes) are done just after a feeding and lasted maybe a few minutes tops. Teaching a few baby signs like ‘More’ and ‘All Done’ also help a ton with communication. You don’t want to be into it more than they are.”

4. Take it slow with latecomers: “For latecomers (kids who are already heavier than their muscles can adapt to quickly), start by ‘hanging,’ keeping the feet on the ground. Smaller progressions are more sound when it comes to injury prevention and optimizing your program. That goes for the adults too!”

Stay tuned for the final installment of this series: what Katy has to say about slings, cribs, car seats, and carrying your baby. If you missed it, make sure to read the first part of the series: Barefoot Babies.

As you can probably tell, Katy could write a book about this stuff- in fact, she is! Look for Katy’s book on natural human movement and how to find your reflex-driven body (or how to fix it if you missed out!), to be released in Spring 2014. Follow her Facebook at Alignedandwell for updates.

Photos courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post Katy Bowman and the Biomechanics of Human Growth: The Necessity of Monkey Business appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

Now, although very exciting, we didn’t really go into much detail, and detail can be important, especially when we’re talking about how we apply the forces that cause movement.

In my last article we covered a few of the relatively simple, but fundamental definitions that underpin sport and exercise biomechanics, relating them to the kettlebell swing.

Now, although very exciting, we didn’t really go into much detail, and detail can be important, especially when we’re talking about how we apply the forces that cause movement.

This article will focus on an important type of movement pattern: force-time curves, which illustrate how we apply force over time.

We’ll combine this with an explanation of Newton’s laws of motion and how they relate to the study of sport and exercise using countermovement vertical jump performance (in which the subject bends at the hips and knees before jumping). Understanding this creates a foundation for future review.

Recap: What is Force?

Recall that “… force is a pushing or pulling action that one object exerts on another.” So, if we want to move something, whether it’s barbell, kettlebell, or our own body, we have to push it or pull it – apply a force.

In the case of our jumper, force is applied to his center of mass, the point around which the masses of his segments (e.g. arms and legs) are distributed to help maintain balance.

Newton’s three laws of linear motion provide a framework of how we control movement with force, and the effect this can have on performance. Applying force to cause motion will only work if it is sufficient to overcome the inertia of the object – Newton’s first law: the law of inertia.

Inertia: It Won’t Move Itself!

Inertia is one of those words that is generally misused. In relation to Newton’s first law, inertia is the reluctance of an object to change its state, where state simply refers to whether it’s moving or not. It’s this state that is controlled by the application of force.

So, an object will remain stationary until it is pushed or pulled – force is applied. Or, once moving it will keep moving; until pushed or pulled, that is, by, you guessed it, applying a force.

But how do we control this state? The giveaway is the standard unit that inertia is reported in: the kilogram, the unit also used to report mass (well, in most of the world anyway).

This introduces perhaps the most basic type of force: weight, which is the product of mass and the acceleration of gravity. Therefore, to overcome inertia (move something) of an object we have to apply a force that exceeds its weight.

Force-Time Curves: A Basic Human Movement Pattern

From a practical perspective this is where it can get quite exciting. Human movement tends to be underpinned by the application of force to the ground through the feet (or hands, see Becca’s article on push up force).

Force platforms enable us to record these forces, and using Newton’s laws, we can manipulate them to obtain a better understanding of the mechanical demands of different types of movement (see previous article for example).

To get back on track though, Figure 1 shows the typical vertical force-time curve from vertical jump performance.

Figure 1. Typical vertical force-time curve from countermovement vertical jump performance, vertical force applied to the center of mass of our jumper.

One of the first things we tend to do to make sense of a force-time curve is determine the subject’s weight from the period of ‘quiet standing’ that can be seen in Figure 2.

In this case body weight is 787 newtons; dividing this by the acceleration of gravity (9.81) yields a body mass of just over 80 kg. We can then start thinking about applying Newton’s second law to get more information about how much force has been applied, and how much movement this will cause.

Figure 2. Annotated vertical force-time curve.

• The ‘y’ axis to point ‘a’ shows ‘quiet standing’, which is equal to the subjects’ body weight
• Point ‘a’ to ‘b’ shows ‘unweighting’ – the subject dips their knees, travelling in the same direction as the acceleration of gravity
• Point ‘b’ to ‘c’ shows the increase to peak force, where the subject slows downward movement to the lowest point of the dip
• Point ‘c’ to ‘d’ shows ‘active’ jumping (leg extension) force
• Point ‘d’ shows ‘takeoff’; points ‘d’ to ‘e’ ‘flight’ or ‘air’ time

Force, Mass, and Acceleration

Recall from the last article that force is the product of mass and acceleration (F = ma), and we can use this to decipher Figures 1 and 2.

If we know that F = ma, we can manipulate force data, like that presented in Figures 1 and 2, by dividing it by the mass of the subject, converting our force-time curve into an acceleration-time curve.

However, we need to remember Newton’s first law where we have to overcome the weight of our jumper: 787 newtons. We can simply subtract body weight from Figure 1 before dividing it by mass, which would render ‘quiet standing’ force zero.

Force would have to exceed zero to influence motion or accelerate the mass of our jumper. An example of our acceleration-time curve can be seen in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Annotated vertical acceleration-time curve – the acceleration of the center of mass our jumper during his jump.

This is great, but doesn’t tell us an awful lot. However, a little jiggery-pokery, in the form of some numerical integration, enables calculation of velocity – how fast our jumper moves.

Figure 4 shows velocity-time, and what are often referred to as peaks and troughs, which provide an indication of movement direction: troughs below zero indicate downward motion, peaks above zero upward motion.

We could take this a stage further and numerically integrate this velocity-time data to obtain displacement, or motion, but key measures like jump height can be quite easily obtained using equations of uniform motion.

To do this we need to determine the velocity of our jumper at takeoff, square it, then divide it by 2g (9.81 * 2), which in this case equals the following:

5.34 (2.31 [takeoff velocity²]) ÷19.62 (2g) = 27 (cm) (fairly mediocre)

Figure 4. Annotated vertical velocity-time curve – how quickly the center of mass of our jumper is moving during his jump.

We calculate mechanical power now by multiplying our force-time data by our shiny new velocity-time data, but let’s leave this to another article, where we can do the topic justice.

Before we finish however, we should consider the practical relevance of Newton’s third law.

Action: Reaction

This is perhaps Newton’s most famous law, and it states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Perhaps without realizing it, this law has been at work throughout our analysis in as much as if our jumper had pushed against the ground and not met an equal an opposite reaction, jump performance would have been quite tricky.

You see it’s this reaction – in combination with Newton’s second law (and friction) – that enables us to control how we move, and it seems so much easier to understand once we understand laws 1 and 2.

Figure 5. Forces during vertical jump landing.

The one downside to this is that it also yields a mechanical consequence. For while the reaction enables us to move, it can also act as that all-important stopping force, bringing motion to a crashing halt.

This is illustrated in Figure 5, which focuses on the change in vertical force as our jumper lands. Indeed, up to this point, our analysis has focused on the first aim of biomechanics:to improve performance, while the forces shown in Figure 5 enable us to consider the second aim of biomechanics: to minimize injury.

Identification of problem areas, like jump landing, enables us to implement technique changes to landing strategies with the aim of reducing landing force, and thus minimize injury.

Our jumper came to a halt with the help of a force equal to nearly 7.5 times his body weight. As a final thought, Figure 5 can also tell us how quickly landing force was applied to the body. In this case it was 56 milliseconds (0.056 seconds).

Dividing landing force by landing time yields something called loading rate, which in this case was just under 132 bodyweights per second – potentially problematic.

To conclude then, we can use Newton’s law of motion to manipulate force-time data to get an idea of the different phases of performance, like the vertical jump, its demands and consequences.

We’re going to use this foundation in future articles, the next of which will cover power.

The post Biomechanics and Newton’s Laws: Force-Time Curves and Human Movement appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

I love my job! I teach and study sport and exercise biomechanics. It feels more like a hobby than a job, and the fact that I get paid to do it is a bonus. My research focuses on the mechanical demands of resistance exercise, and my own training interests have influenced this. In this article I want to combine my teaching head and research head to go over some of the basic terminology used in sports biomechanics research using examples from my research into kettlebell exercise mechanics.

Swing Biomechanics

Recently a colleague, Dr. Mike Lauder, and I published two kettlebell related research papers. Indeed, our sports biomechanics laboratory at the University of Chichester, here in the United Kingdom, is one of only two that I’m aware of currently studying the biomechanics of kettlebell exercise. Breaking Muscle contributor, Andrew Read, recently presented an excellent review of our second study, which was a training study that quantified the effect of six weeks of bi-weekly swing training on maximum and explosive strength. I’d urge interested readers to take a look, although the study essentially showed this training program improved maximum strength by about 10% and explosive strength by about 20%. However, it’s our first kettlebell related study that I want to focus on in this article, and I want to use it to provide a foundation to clarify what we’ve studied, why we’ve studied it, and what our results mean.

‘Mechanical Demands’ – Come Again?

Our first study was titled: “Mechanical demands of two-handed kettlebell swing exercise.” Sounds very exciting, if you like that sort of thing, but what does it mean? This is a good question from which the other points I want to cover can be answered. Simplistically, mechanical demands refers to the biomechanics of the exercise. First things first though. Let’s make sure we don’t leave anybody behind and begin this next section with a couple basic definitions, the first of which should focus on just what biomechanics is.

Sure, we’ve all heard of biomechanics, possibly used it in training related conversation, but let’s make sure we know what it means. According to Bartlett (2007), sports biomechanics is: “…the study and analysis of human movement patterns in sport,” and we use mechanics – a branch of physics – to study these. To quantify the mechanical demands of the swing we decided to measure how far and how fast the kettlebell moved and what underpinned this. In this case all of these measures represent a human movement pattern, and plotted against time provide a record of that movement that can provide important information if you know what you’re looking at.

How Far, How Quickly?

Okay, now it’s time for definitions two and three. To describe the motion of an object in a given direction we use displacement, how fast it moves in a given direction, velocity. These are excellent examples of a human movement pattern, and the direction component is important because swing movement is relatively unique because of the way horizontal (forward and backward) and vertical (up and down) motion combines. I would go as far as saying it is a combination of this movement pattern and its movement velocity that led to significant improvements in both maximum and explosive strength seen in our training study.

The trajectory, or flight path, of the kettlebell can be obtained by plotting vertical displacement against horizontal displacement, and typical kettlebell trajectory is displayed in Figure 1 below. To give you an idea of what this means, the total kettlebell displacement was equal to about 71% of the subjects height, or about 128 cm, and the ‘bell produced an arc-like trajectory. I say ‘resultant’ because we were aiming for maximum impact, which tends to require getting to the point, so rather than report both horizontal (forward and backward) and vertical displacements individually we calculated and presented the resultant. This is calculated in much the same way one might calculate the hypotenuse of a right-sided triangle (the adjacent side would be the horizontal, the opposite the vertical displacement for the kettlebell swing). We studied 16, 24, and 32 kg swing performance, and load didn’t affect this displacement. Figures, when you think about it. Of course, there will come a point when load will effect displacement, but for our subjects 32 kg wasn’t it. However, their swing performance did slow (by about 12%) as load increased.

Figure 1. Typical kettlebell trajectory during two-handed swing performance. Sx = horizontal displacement; Sy = vertical displacement.

Not the Whole Picture

This may have important implications, from a training perspective, but this is the outcome. We need a little more insight to achieve a more rounded picture of the effect on movement mechanics, which will ultimately influence one’s training response. We can find this out by studying the force that’s required to cause this unique movement pattern.

Force

What causes this relatively unique movement pattern? To get to the bottom of this we’ll need to get a few more definitions out of the way. Let’s start with one we’ve all heard of: force. There’s lots of different ways to define force. However, force is essentially how hard one pushes or pulls another object. Remember Newton’s Law of Motion? According to his second law, force is the product of mass and acceleration, or: F = ma. Therefore, we apply force by simply standing still. However, it’s the force that causes motion that we tend to be most interested in and from a sport or exercise perspective study of force with respect to time is the way to go. One way of doing this is to study impulse.

Impulse

Impulse takes this a stage further, considering both how hard one pulls or pushes and the amount of time it’s applied. According to Newton’s Second Law of Motion, impulse (force * time) is equal to the change in momentum. Momentum seems to be one of those terms that are used to describe all sorts of things. In a mechanical context though, it describes the product of an objects mass and velocity. Because the mass of the kettlebell and lifter remain constant, impulse describes the change in their combined velocity. Motion is underpinned by impulse. No impulse = no motion. Its study provides far greater insight into the mechanical demands of a movement. Our results showed that combined horizontal and vertical impulse was maximized during swing performance with 32 kg, beating both back and jump squat equivalents.

The Wrap Up

So, we now know what biomechanics is. We also know how we use it to study one of our favorite bits of exercise equipment. If anybody feels a nosebleed coming on please get in touch, especially if you plan to follow future articles that will expand on the application of biomechanics to strength and conditioning.

References:

1. Bartlett, Roger. Introduction to Sports Biomechanics. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2007.

2. Lake, Jason., and Mike Lauder. “Mechanical demands of kettlebell swing exercise.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 26, no. 12 (2012): 3209-3216.

3. Lake, Jason., and Mike Lauder. “Kettlebell swing training improves maximal and explosive strength.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 26, no. 8 (2012): 2228-2233.

The post Biomechanics and ‘Bells: What Does It All Mean? appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

Katy holds a Masters Degree in biomechanics, but what makes her perspective unique is she first studied mathematics and physics before finding her passion in biomechanics. This mixed background allows Katy to come at human movement with the eye of an engineer, but a solid understanding of human biology.

When asked why there is such a prevalence of bad mechanics in our daily movement, Katy had this to say:

As a culture, we have lost all natural movement from our life. The way we are raised as infants, our use of footwear, the lack of squatting to use the bathroom, driving, copious amounts of sitting, and high levels of stress have great impact on the function of musculoskeletal tissue.

What Katy teaches, based on her study of micro-biomechanics, is that our lack of movement directly harms our circulation. When our muscles contract, they draw blood into them, flushing out waste, and keeping our system flowing. When we sit for long periods and do not use our muscles, circulation decreases, waste collects and causes swelling, and the rate of cell regeneration decreases. Subsequently, ailments such as osteoarthritis, low bone density, degenerated spines and tension in the neck, jaw, and eyes develop.

To compound the problem, just because you are moving, does not mean you are moving properly. You may be causing the very same ailments through bad mechanics. Said Katy:

Doing exercise, with its high loads and repetitions on a skeleton that isn’t in the correct position is the main reason why people who do exercise have all the same ailments as people who sit around all day long. Exercisers may look better, but they’re taking the same amount of pharmaceuticals, having joint surgery and replacements, and dying from heart disease at the same rates.

So what do you do if you are facing ailments whether you move or not? According to Katy, you learn to move properly and then do it frequently. She is attacking the problem on multiple levels through her two websites, www.restorativeexercise.com and www.nutritiousmovement.com. Said Katy:

I like to say changing your posture into alignment is simple, but not easy. It’s not “hard” to fix your alignment, but it can be challenging to change so many things about the way you move and stand about. Your posture is like the accent you speak with. It’s pretty hard to not go into your default way of speaking as soon as you stop thinking about it. And alignment – the way your body should be oriented in space for mechanical optimization – is pretty far from our culturally common postures.

You have over 600 muscles and each needs to be at a particular length to keep the joints at the optimal mobility and the planes of the body oriented to gravity in a particular way. There’s a lot of physics to learn. I can teach someone a pretty good guide to a lifetime of better longevity and cellular performance in about seven months. I don’t think that’s a very long time to learn about anatomy, physiology, and biomechanics, but everyone values their health differently.

There is no one specific fitness regimen Katy recommends, but she did have something to say about an essential and often overlooked movement. “I do recommend that everyone, even if you are running 50 miles a week, still take a walk a few miles a day,” said Katy. “There are biological things happening during natural walking that no other exercise provides.”

Katy’s Top Three Tips on Moving Better:

• Ditch the positive heeled shoes. If you can, ditch the shoes all together and opt for some “natural footwear” like Vibrams or the new company Sockwa. And I’m not just talking to the ladies. A lot of fitness shoes have 2-2.5” heels on the back, which create changes in the ankles, knees, and hips that research shows increase the risk for knee osteoarthritis.
• You know those body parts you love to work? You can probably reduce time spent working on those to one third. Make a list of your under-developed parts. Is it your legs? Your butt? Can you do a pull up? Once you have a list of long-forgotten muscles (or even areas that are stubborn to change) you need to stretch them everyday, and then follow up with some sort of natural movement that hits them. My favorite under-used muscle group is the intercostals – the muscles in between the ribs. Once these get buff you can really breathe!
• Create a standing workstation. Research shows, if you sit for a living, even exercising every day won’t undo the cardiovascular damage sitting creates. If you can reduce your sitting time by 10% every week, you will not only mitigate some of the damage, you’ll also be using more muscle during the day, keeping your bones loaded (let’s hear it for weight-bearing!), and be lengthening those stubborn hamstrings!

For more from Katy visit her websites www.restorativeexercise.com and www.nutritiousmovement.com

The post How to Move Better and Relieve Pain appeared first on Breaking Muscle.