OT: “The Posture Pandemic.”

[benb]

Originally Posted by krooj

But that's not the entire scope of this article; the author constantly alludes to posture and health, questioning whether there is any positive link. What I see here is a history professor that wants to push a book they wrote.

I'd bet there's a bibliography in this book showing that the science indeed never did justify a lot of what gets touted as important & true on the subject.

You're right it's to push a book, but the book could still be correct, and it does sound like an interesting book.

The reaction here is much akin to what you'd expect here if someone had come out with an expose book on the supplements industry and lack of evidence that supplements targeted at cyclists work.

[BdaGhisallo]

..

[bicycletricycle]

Originally Posted by vertr

I'm currently reading a book called "Back Mechanic" that makes a similar argument. Primarily that most back surgeries for pain are unnecessary and caused by MRI scans not being useful for diagnosis and the prevailing medical opinion is that they are. The book places a lot of emphasis on moving in a way that prevents injury, which is why I said the previous thing.

Well, besides acute injuries which are relatively easy to associate with particular problems, how do they know what prevents injuries?

Seems like we have people throwing darts at a wall. Perhaps it’s your emotions, maybe it’s posture, maybe it’s genetics, maybe it’s……. Etc etc etc

[OtayBW]

IMO, we have generationally lost a considerable amount of the natural lordosis in our lower spine from driving, prolonged disk sitting, slouching, and the like. This, to me, is the greatest cause of disk-related lower back pain, sciatica, etc. The good news is that cycling on a well fitted bike creates extension in the lower back which helps.

[makoti]

Originally Posted by bicycletricycle

I don’t think we really know anything about the human body

Of course we do. We don't know as much as we will or even have everything we know right, but to say we don't know anything about the body is silly

[vertr]

Originally Posted by bicycletricycle

Well, besides acute injuries which are relatively easy to associate with particular problems, how do they know what prevents injuries?

Experience? Try lifting heavy objects with your back for the rest of your life and let us know how it goes. The main thing is people use their spines as a lever (just moving or lifting) which causes injury. I don't think the 'do we really know anything?' argument applies well here.

[bicycletricycle]

Originally Posted by makoti

Of course we do. We don't know as much as we will or even have everything we know right, but to say we don't know anything about the body is silly

Oh ya, well, I think you are silly!!!!!

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

I understand the author’s argument. It’s the same one fat activists have made recently: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/21/w...ole-smith.html. Principle among their arguments is that fitness and all of its associated characteristics is largely predicated on income. Certainly, as it pertains to health, there’s a large degree of truth to that.

But if you are injured due to poor posture/tight muscles/extended sitting, then, by definition, you are not healthy. Ironically, this tends to impact office workers who skew more affluent.

Unfortunately your first link and the link above are both behind paywalls. But I think you are still missing the point. Here's a quote from review of the same book in the New Yorker magazine:

Linker makes no claim, she says, about the “realness of the epidemic or the degree to which poor posture is debilitating.” She’s not saying that Rafi and the Nekoze cat are wrong to harry me, or that your lower back doesn’t hurt. Rather, she sees the “past and present worries concerning posture as part of an enduring concern about so-called ‘diseases of civilization’ ”—grounded in a mythology of human ancestry that posits the hunter-gatherer as an ideal from which we have fallen.

In other words, the book isn't about whether there is an ongoing posture problem in the population, or even about whether interventions to correct posture are effective or just mis-guided; the book is about the beliefs and values society place around perceived "good posture", and the judgement it makes about people based on their postures.

The discussions in this thread about MRIs, and the effect of desk jobs on the back, and medical interventions are all interesting, but their connection to this book isn't how they affect the human back; the connection to the book is how it shows our fascination with posture.

[Kirk007]

I think it's hard to argue with the bio-physics. I have 3 cervical disks reminding each day about my posture and head position; whether I can ever again comfortably ride a road bike remains to be seen but 6 months of pt, traction and chiro designed to change my forward head position seems to be helping, and one need not be overly tuned into how one feels to differentiate the difference between a body bound up at the end of a day of sitting and one stretched and limber. Let's see what the author thinks when she's a few decades older.

The book may have a point, but I don't think it's about biology and health. Rather in today's world, seems to me, too many people looking for validation and excuses rather than taking on personal responsibility for their state.

The NYT article that Josh linked re the fat excuser left me slack jawed and truly sad for her kids, for whom it is a 24/7 all you can eat junk food buffet of highly processed chemicals - plastic bins full of Oreos .... damn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zap]

edited

Originally Posted by OtayBW

The good news is that cycling on a well fitted bike creates extension in the lower back which helps.

That is what I thought until last fall.

I started having back problems such that my typical Chiro adjustment no longer worked. Siting was mad painful and for the first time in my life, cycling was impossible. I had difficulties walking straight but when I could, I did. I could also run carefully....and I did up hills. But damn, putting on pants and socks was difficult, sleeping painful, etc.

My Chiro suspected that I may have injured a psoas muscle and suggested I try needling. I did (plus painful deep massage) and damn, it worked. That and strengthening the lower back muscles.

Today I'm fine. Better actually because I can now easily touch my toes and then some.

What I learned is that cycling creates problems much like sitting does. So what I did was cut one cycling day from my week and added a walk/run hills day.

[bicycletricycle]

Sorry to hear about the back

Strong agree on people looking for validation. It is sort of disgusting.

Originally Posted by Kirk007

I think it's hard to argue with the bio-physics. I have 3 cervical disks reminding each day about my posture and head position; whether I can ever again comfortably ride a road bike remains to be seen but 6 months of pt, traction and chiro designed to change my forward head position seems to be helping, and one need not be overly tuned into how one feels to differentiate the difference between a body bound up at the end of a day of sitting and one stretched and limber. Let's see what the author thinks when she's a few decades older.

The book may have a point, but I don't think it's about biology and health. Rather in today's world, seems to me, too many people looking for validation and excuses rather than taking on personal responsibility for their state.

The NYT article that Josh linked re the fat excuser left me slack jawed and truly sad for her kids, for whom it is a 24/7 all you can eat junk food buffet of highly processed chemicals - plastic bins full of Oreos .... damn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[benb]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

In other words, the book isn't about whether there is an ongoing posture problem in the population, or even about whether interventions to correct posture are effective or just mis-guided; the book is about the beliefs and values society place around perceived "good posture", and the judgement it makes about people based on their postures.

The discussions in this thread about MRIs, and the effect of desk jobs on the back, and medical interventions are all interesting, but their connection to this book isn't how they affect the human back; the connection to the book is how it shows our fascination with posture.

I think the issue is most people didn't actually read the article. It's paywalled, and it took a little bit of jumping through hoops to actually read the whole thing if you don't subscribe to NYT.

But yah, the whole thread was started on a misconception.

Somebody who works a tough job that impacts their posture is not "lazy" or a "bad person". And not everyone can go quit that job and hire a personal trainer to do everything "right".

It's not like jobs that have a physical aspect leave you in a much better place after 30-40 years either.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by benb

I think the issue is most people didn't actually read the article. It's paywalled, and it took a little bit of jumping through hoops to actually read the whole thing if you don't subscribe to NYT.

But yah, the whole thread was started on a misconception.

Somebody who works a tough job that impacts their posture is not "lazy" or a "bad person". And not everyone can go quit that job and hire a personal trainer to do everything "right".

It's not like jobs that have a physical aspect leave you in a much better place after 30-40 years either.

Au contraire, mon frere. I did read the whole article. Not that I necessarily had to. The crux of the author’s argument is contained in the first response to the interviewer:

“Nice to meet you.”

“Your posture looks pretty good. And it doesn’t matter — that’s the whole point of my book. It’s fake news.”

The question isn’t of blame, but whether or not good posture matters. And it definitely does. One article of many: https://www.wellnessforthebody.com/p...om-home-slouch

If your daily routine has you looking like the people in the pictures, you have to make some corrections.

[d_douglas]

That is what I look like - gawd.

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Au contraire, mon frere. I did read the whole article. Not that I necessarily had to. The crux of the author’s argument is contained in the first response to the interviewer:

“Nice to meet you.”

“Your posture looks pretty good. And it doesn’t matter — that’s the whole point of my book. It’s fake news.”

The question isn’t of blame, but whether or not good posture matters. And it definitely does. One article of many: https://www.wellnessforthebody.com/p...om-home-slouch

If your daily routine has you looking like the people in the pictures, you have to make some corrections.

[reuben]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

If your daily routine has you looking like the people in the pictures, you have to make some corrections.

If they ditched the tie and jacket they'd be fine.