In one on one settings, if we work with intent, our interventions should deviate from "the protocol" based on the individual we're working with.
The principles stay the same. But we SHOULD be going off on tangents.
Better = I forget about it at times
Better = I am able to do more
Better = I notice it less often
Better = When I do notice it, it's less intense/annoying/uncomfortable
Gone may be the end result of better. But better is still better.
Manual therapy is like a dance. A ballroom dance in particular.
It's a two way street. Even though one is leading the dance, he's only most effective when he's listening to and feeling his partner's moves.
An input port and and output port.
There is no recipe. But there are templates.
In relationships, in rehab, in coaching, in leading…
Fully functioning joints are the horse. Everything else is the cart.
Everything is just a narrative. Individually and collectively. A narrative.
It's not the equipment you use that's important.
It's how you load and prepare the body relative to the required demands that is.
A muscle in isolation is never the problem. It’s usually the interplay between muscles…and other structures.
Very rarely do tissues ever contract in isolation. They co-contract, in different types, at variable intensities…dependent upon the task at hand, the fixed points involved, and the 3 dimensional joint angle they’re in at instantaneous time points.
Hear me out.
In the realm of MSK, placebo addresses pain and NOT nociception. And pain is bioPSYCHOSOCIAL. Then with integrity, should interventions that individuals believe will help them be dismissed?
Thanks to Paj for stimulating the mentals on this one.
The problem with professionals in social media these days is that everyone is trying to sell.
Their "knowledge." Their image.
I can't be bothered so I keep scrolling, looking for dog videos.
Because personally, I prefer posts that ask more questions than provide answers.