READY, WILLING, AND ABLE PART F-Integrating the Continuum of Effort

IT ONLY CONTRADICTS SPONTANEITY UNTIL THE WILLING ARE AS READY AS ABLE

Training muscles to contract and torque optimally at the polarities of their joints’ excursions is the commendation of non-erosive joint function, and is tenable only in the presence of the aforementioned counterintuitive conditions that physics impose. Additionally, when they contract more forcefully at their extremities, the attachments become stronger throughout the entire range of joint mobility.

This enables them (1) to hold their bones in place during “isometric” challenges or when required to anchor systemic portions of the skeleton and (2) to retain a steady course that is congruent with the joints’ contact surfaces during the impulse of rotation, minimizing excessive assistance of ligaments and stress on cartilage. 

Congruency is crucial to joint health because it maintains the order of shear, distraction, and compression within the joints. The equity of these forces also reduces excessive stress on the passive joint tissues that otherwise gradually progresses erosive influences.

The first step of this unnatural process is to determine the distance of mobility where a person’s muscles can contract (concentrically) to tolerate the weight of the joints’ limb; the tolerance to be determined, not only by achieving and maintaining steady end ranges, but, by reaching them on a steady course. This is unusual because in any instance other than establishing this threshold, there are virtually no circumstances that require joints to approach this range with (or without) such control and deliberation (intent).

Once the threshold has been established, the next peculiar situation for the recipient in this context is to become consciously aware of this unaccustomed distance, and of how the control is ascertained i.e. to realize that it is established initially, by imposing a rate of acceleration toward the boundary that is not only unusually slow, but that remains consistent in both directions of impulse, which is also unnatural, because we are most accustomed to accelerate, impulsively (at just enough of a successively increased rate) to recruit the assistance of inertia through the naturally limited range of motion required by normal spontaneous tasks and challenges.

However, there is a strategic purpose for moving slow during the evaluation to gauge the mobility of a joint. It’s not arbitrary i.e. moving slowly for the sake of moving slow. The primary objective is to find the leverage of untainted muscle contractions to secure control of the (relevant) joint(s), especially at these most vulnerable extremities, where the least, if any, is available. 

The investigation needs to be conducted without the spontaneity of inertial assistance because the Service Provider needs enough time to process and analyze intrinsically located conditions and terminate the test if the verdict reveals danger. Permitting assistance corrupts the discovery like a careless detective who spoils the evidence of a crime scene, but the repercussions of neglect in these (most) Personal training situations, can be much worse.

At any moment of the search where assistance seeps in, the least harmful of unintended consequences can be an inaccurate appraisal of ability, which may lead to less effective training strategies and/or less efficiently acquired benefits, and also, with a greater risk of unnoticeable, chronic harm. However, in cases where existing pathological idiosyncrasies are concealed from the scrutiny, there is a distinct possibility that, even a transient lapse of intent may provoke unintended structural failure, causing injury, instantaneously! 

Therefore, the search for the torque at the extremities requires the same precaution as the outer space exploration of an astronaut in the sense that the Service Provider and the Recipient are surveying uncharted (inner) spaces, where it is not possible to anticipate what will happen. If the search is to be safe, there must be no subjective expectation, and if it is to be effective, it must be conducted and terminate with control. Control is the precaution that defines the boundaries, but inertial assistance corrupts the contractile force and leverage that facilitate it.

To that point, contraction, torque, and control are reciprocal and inseparable. One cannot exist without the others, and, their presence provides the “range of contractile length?” (Tom Purvis) where there is sufficient leverage to mobilize a particular joint. This “range of contractile length?” defines the threshold of the “training zone” for this person (at this moment) where this particular muscle can be challenged more than it is accustomed. 

The control and leverage of this thorough contraction represents the mental and physical ability where it is possible to impose more, or less, torque of resistance against the weight of limb, and how much effort is needed to achieve the threshold.

For example, a person that has flawless control of limb (or spine, or trunk) throughout the full range of mobility that can be produced, (with or without assistance of the Service Provider) is validating the need for some kind of additional resistance beyond the “weight of limb” to cause (strategically provoked) adaptation to those (tactfully imposed) demands. Contrarily, this most deliberately introspective search sometimes reveals contractile torque deficits that cause instability and possibly even pain somewhere within the excursion. 

In these instances, it is necessary for a skilled Service Provider to manually support the weight of limb to reduce the resistance torque until it matches the compromised torque of the Recipient’s effort. The “Personal Training” skill is, as in all instances, to know how to find, establish, and convey the control, and, at a moment where a deficit is detected, an amount of “off-loading of gravity” kind of support, equal to the Recipient’s control-ability, needs to be applied. 

That manual assistance skill, then, becomes the “tactfully imposed” demand that will provoke a change in the compromised condition, if the compromise is caused by a weakness (contractile deficit) or by insufficient transmission of sensory/motor-brain/body impulses (inhibition). It is necessary to make this point, because the purpose of exercise is to prepare those who are “willing and able”, to avoid the strains of “daily living” and/or to confront them during athletic kinds of performance, without the long term repercussions of joint wear. It is not about how to mediate disability.

The content herein consists of how well the Recipient is functioning, intrinsically. The operative consideration is, “well-functioning”. The intention is not to address how to treat those who are dysfunctional. In this context, inability is distinguishable from the less than optimal musculoskeletal function of compromised ability that is within the scope of an Exercise Service Provider’s skill set. 

This, of course, requires a skilled Service Provider to recognize the distinctions of varied abilities (vary-ability”) that are “trainable”, from orthopedic pathologies like bone spurs and chronic arthritis, that are not, and acquiesce to the more severe connective tissue barriers like severed nerves, paralysis, epilepsy, Parkinson’s, etc., that (most likely) require “treatment” long before training. 

That stated, once a limited “training zone” has been established, a skilled Service Provider will increase the support manually, reducing the torque requirement to tolerate (control) the weight of limb at the concentric end of the compromised threshold. Then, with an educated “end-range feel” for torque, the Service Provider can gradually reduce the support and “reload” a tenable magnitude of limb weight, provoking more torque, until it is evident that time induced fatigue is causing the challenge to become intolerable. 

Even though the “tenable magnitude” is not all of the limb’s weight, it needs to be enough to cause acute adaptation, which most often requires a series of successive exertions against it. Therefore, at the instant there is a lapse of control, the Service Provider will reinstate the manual assistance to negate the additional resistance and permit just enough recovery for the Recipient to repeat against a “reloading” of the limb weight etc. until ultimately, it is not possible to tolerate any further strain.  

A period of recovery between repeats is determined by a moment of intolerance, until it becomes chronic, where, the only way to continue is to provide an unreasonable period of time for recovery, or permit the Recipient to cheat. Since neither of those is a reasonable or productive option, chronic intolerance is the indication to terminate the challenge altogether.

Intolerance (in both cases) is confirmed by the inevitable, fatigue induced, lapse in control, which can be ascertained by the eventual inability to reach the threshold of the training zone, by shifts if body positions to seek for additional leverage, or the inability to remain on a congruent path, or by the onset of visible and/or palpable tremors and/or facial, verbal, audible expressions, and/or by voluntary submission. Eventually, with properly facilitated effort, the Recipient will gain enough strength to (at least), sustain the entire weight of the otherwise overbearing limb, independently.