READY, WILLING, AND ABLE

PART H – SYMBIOTIC RECIPROCITY

It is ironic that Fitness educators teach their prospective Trainers how to serve the public without regard for the anatomical and exercise physics that define the client and the challenge, and reward graduates with a “Personal” Training Certification. How does that incomplete edification make it “personal”, when the “person” is kept separate from the Fitness?

In reality, it is mandatory to seek and detect the personal information of the Recipient, but, even though the thoroughly educated visual, audible, and skillfully palpable explorations of a genuine Exercise Professional provide useful feedback, the investigation and summary also require intelligible input from the Recipient. 

Therefore, to succeed, it is necessary to teach the client how to explore and interpret personal sensations that can be translated into accurate verbal rejoinders of enquiry, and causes introspection which promotes subjective examination and interpretation a.k.a. as an internal dialogue i.e. self-conscious awareness. 

This is the aforementioned mental effort counterpart of physical effort. It serves the purposes of recognizing micro-control for coherent verbal feedback, as needed. It also imparts in the Recipient a sense of self-esteem, appreciation for the magnitude of commitment, a realistic expectation, the personal benefits of cooperation, and confidence in the service. 

The “internal dialogue” of this reciprocity is a means of communication with the Recipient’s Central Nervous System, but it will only permit the correspondence if it is not offended by our probes. Its primordial objective is to preserve and defend the order of its various systems, including its musculoskeletal mechanics, so it can orchestrate the physics (organize the compensation) of involuntary functions and performance. The shield of this defense is called Homeostasis. 

We acquiesce to the compensation of the Central Nervous System for inertial assistance to prevail in normal circumstances, but the pursuits of our objectives create neurological stress, because the inertial demand emits erratic, indiscriminate sensory signals. The subsequent complexity makes it harder to coordinate and redirect the information. More (motor) impulses must be relayed to more receptor sites in more variable directions, simultaneously, causing the CNS to be very sensitive to inertial assistance, and to function in that shielded state of defense (or alarm).

Therefore, if we want to communicate with it, without rejection, it is not a good idea to compound the process of the orchestration. That will only set off nervous alarms. It is better to proceed with the exploration of “inner space” precaution, so the incoming signals from the torque inducing contractions of exercise can be very direct, and conciliatory.

That’s where and why it is essential to adjust inertia to “mass-minus acceleration” to encounter the resistance. It is of primary importance because it enables us to contract more forcefully. When we do that, we can control the torque of our efforts, and control is the “precaution”. 

It is received (by the CNS) as a humble, deferential request for permission to use more forceful contractions for a net increase in torque, especially, to reach and secure those most unfamiliar end ranges. We are granted permission by proceeding subjectively, with control. 

The skilled Service Provider can guide the search for it, but, because it is subjective, the Recipient must be able to find it. The control not only enables more forceful contractions, but also provokes awareness of the ensuing sensations. The training is not only physical. It is also neurological. Furthermore, it is not only related to the body and brain. The mind shares an equal orientation of the experience as well.

The more clarity of sensation, the better we contract. The better we contract, the more direct the signals. The more direct the signals, the more the CNS will remain calm, receptive, and the more it will “listen”, making our efforts safer and more effective.

On the contrary, when we move without the conscious effort of contracting, it is easy to lose control and become imperceptibly unstable. The unstable condition transmits more complex, defense laden the signals that obscure the brain from our intention, so, it is simply unproductive to make the Nervous System, nervous. 

The only way for the Recipient to establish this subjective internal dialogue with the Central Nervous System is to embody the sense of control. That can only be accomplished with an awareness of the sensations that muscle contractions produce, but, none of this; not the control, the sensation of it, or the contraction itself (at the critical end ranges), are possible, without strategically altered inertia, and all of the other contributing factors of physics.  

Of course, the magnitude of torque from the resistance of the task will have an effect, because if it is insufficient, the tissues will not need to work that much harder than normal to create a benefit, but if too much, the overload will provoke the alarming instinct to accelerate to acquire inertial assistance, and/or:

If the torque from the resistance is extremely excessive, it will actually impede, rather than provoke, the acceleration that otherwise heightens rotational inertia, leaving the performer to deal exclusively with the strain of the resistance, received as a life threatening situation that provokes the defensive mode of the nervous system, causing alarm in a manner other than with acceleration.

Just think of a Power-lifter performing in a contest with a really heavy load. The rate of acceleration is so minimal that it is not possible to recruit inertial influences for assistance. When the performer is left to deal only with the inertia of the mass i.e. the resistance, the CNS searches for muscle torque from anywhere it can be found, to disperse the threat. Although, this is the same reactive orchestration that is induced by involuntary acceleration to fulfill a task, in this case, its purpose is to rescue its host (the body of the Recipient) from the assault. 

It has the same stressful effect on the nervous system as the proclivity of inertial assistance, but for a different reason. In this instance, it’s not the transmission of erratic sensory impulses (the mixed messages) that induces the panic, but a life threatening kind of sensory message that there may not be enough rotational inertia to survive the assault.

(Although this Power-lifting example and the aforementioned mass-minus acceleration strategy to heighten awareness and control of torque, both create an inertial resistance effect, intention is the difference maker. The intention of the former is to use anything and everything available to prevent a load from crashing down, perilously, and to shove it away from the body, asap. The latter is to welcome, rather than eschew the resistance, to elicit a better sensation of contraction. The Power-lifter is focusing on the external objective; the person who is exercising is focusing internally, on muscle contraction. That is why the Nervous System will treat one as a life threatening assault and the other as a stasis altering provision.)   

That stated, rather than saturating specific muscle tissue with contractile impulses, the Nervous System treats the threat in the same manner as it does in the presence of acceleration, that is, as a provision for assistance rather than assimilation, and impulsively scatters motor signals to a variety of other, available, but subsidiary, receptors. 

As soon as this “load sharing” is provoked, the orchestration becomes more complex, emitting more indirect impulses to muscle fibers of more remote joints, etc., and in many instances, the subsequent excitation of joint motion causes involuntary shifts in body positions (that occur with the survival instinct to gain leverage). Regardless of the cause; sensory or motor nerve overload, excessive acceleration or the lack thereof, the shields that impede the intention of neuro-musculoskeletal mechanics are raised to liberate the intensions of the achievement at the expense of orthopedic health.

Excessive magnitude is not the only neurologically distracting factor, either. The placement of the resistance from the task (relative to the joint of limb) can cause an otherwise reasonable magnitude to be excessive. If the moment arm of torque is too distant from the axis to tolerate, it will provoke the person to react impulsively i.e. to “cheat”, so to state, which immediately sets off the aforementioned subconscious alarms. Training on unstable surfaces does this, as well.

(Remember, Newton’s Second Law is not bad. Acceleration is an asset of life! It gives us the assistance we need, not only to survive and to complete ordinary tasks, but to enjoy life. That’s all good. It’s just costly, and most expensive when we are less prepared for the subsequent stress. Although it impedes the musculoskeletal torque we need to maintain orthopedic health, once we can torque better, acceleration is not only less costly, but more useful than ever. Ultimately, the more we can accelerate, the more we can accomplish.)

That stated, the direction can also create neurological havoc. If the path of a joints’ limb is not within the path created by the resistance torque, then the CNS is provoked to locate muscle torque from unintended muscle tissues and/or fibers. It is also a neurological distraction when the intention and the execution are not synonymous.

The CNS opts for short term survival at the expense of long term wear, because it is consumed in the moment of need. Its purpose is to secure the present state of its physiology, so it is not good at planning; only in reacting impulsively. Therefore, any and all of these factors will cause joint instability resulting in the deleterious repercussions i.e. arthritis.

RE-ENTRY INTO THE OUTER SPACE a.k.a. RETURNING TO NORMAL

The way to elicit contraction is to start so slow that it almost seems like there is no motion at all, and then, to allow the tension that is induced to take control of the movement. Once again, although antithetical to normal spontaneous function, we need to learn how to coordinate the tension of contraction with the torque it will yield. (Psycho-neuro-musculoskeleto-cerebral coordination, from the mind to the neuro-transmitter, to the muscle to the body to the brain.) 

This provides those aforementioned better, more direct impulses for the CNS to use involuntarily, because when we have achieved better contracting, tension producing, torque providing muscle fiber, (and muscle tissue), the brain eventually confiscates and transforms it into better, safer, involuntary function. The transformation is the adaptation. The better involuntary function is the transfer. The slow movement of the test for joint mobility is not only the means to identify and insure joint control (steadiness). It is also an introduction to the essential process of adaptation.

As mentioned, control validates accurate joint function because the purpose of the test is to identify the entire threshold of tolerance, where it is not only safe to travel, but also possible to challenge the contractile tissues that elicit the control. (Of course, that’s how they can become stronger.) However, the tolerance of the muscle tissues will vary according to their structure and leverage (Moment Arm and Length Tension variables), so it is necessary to adjust the torque from the resistance of the challenge accordingly. (More about this later. See Part I.)

Control is also pertinent to the intention of the torque. The resulting mobility must remain congruent with the shapes of the skeletal contact surfaces that comprise the joint and its bones must remain in a strategically imposed path of resistance’s torque, and, the tolerance of the search is not only about where the joint can go, but where it can remain. It’s not only a question of “getting there” with the torque of the muscle, but, it is also about determining if there is enough, at this weakest moment, to hold it there, and then, about the distribution of the (physical, mental, and psychological) efforts allocated.

In other words, the primary indicator of effort is in the ability to mobilize a joint on a steady, congruent path, to its end range, hold it there, and then, to allow the joint to return to its original position, on the same, clear, faultless path. This control is the key that keeps the shields of the CNS lowered. It is the sedative that keeps it tranquil and receptive to our attempts to alter its stasis.

There are some individuals who are so able that immediately, upon performing this analysis, they are prepared for a more demanding challenge. But there are also some who may perform flawlessly through and to the concentric end range, but will falter somewhere, eccentrically.

There are others who will find that the end ranges are terminal, due to an inability to remain there with control (stability). In those instances, it is often best to establish the threshold for work at the abbreviated longest and shortest range available, even though these are less than the terminal ends. Initially, the limitation becomes a temporary threshold to challenge the fibers, until eventually, they are “strong” enough to remain tense through greater lengths of impulse, thereby, eliciting control through more, and ultimately all, of the entire range of the joint’s mobility. 

Some people can achieve a maximal end range, but cannot produce a steady path, and some cannot even begin to move without instability, or pain. Still, others simply can’t move at all. The point is, these are indications of the ability or inability that must be ascertained to endow the client with a subjective sensation of muscle contraction that establishes the aforementioned dialogue of “Symbiotic Reciprocity”.

Although there are other effective tactics, the sense of tension is a most productive means to link conscious effort with the subconscious functions of a person’s brain, but, regardless of the strategy, the communication is a mandatory prerequisite to a productive use of the previously indicated need to adjust the resistance of the challenge to complement the torque of the goal specific muscular contractions. (Part G.)

Furthermore, the need to reciprocate the leverage precedes the need to gradually increase the frequency i.e. tetanus (not how often) of the muscle contraction that causes enhanced leverage to accelerate the joint until it is moving at the rate of ordinary tasks or specific extraordinary challenges, which in turn precedes the need to restore the leverage to the naturally incompatible state we encounter in all experiences other than exercise.  

In the end, we return to normal, performing impulsively, with all of the inertial assistance we can accumulate, to either avoid strain during ordinary tasks, or to confront it while performing extraordinary challenges. The only difference is, from our inner space travails, we have developed a better functioning body, intrinsically, with a greater ability to control the leverage of rotational inertia, and, with a greater orthopedic tolerance for the long term wear that threatens us when we explore the “outer space” of performance.