I own a Pilates Studio in Idaho and read Kelly Kanes article on hip disassociation/differention and would like more infor on what movements besides strengthening the core, any specific exercises or stretches. Excellant article!!!!!

Thank you for this article. The root of core instability for many clients stems from their inability to activate their pelivic floor. There are very few courses / instruction in our continuing education that gives such great tools to help us teach our clients about the pelvic floor. Thank you!

"Stability means absolutely no movement. Core stability assumes both the lumbar spine and pelvis remain immobile."

This model of stability may prove useful for objects that don't move, however for organisms such as the human body it counter-acts our functional integrity. This region being labeled as the "core" contains many joints and membranous structures designed for sliding, gliding and movement in relation to one another. When we 'lock' down the core in such a manner we inhibit a variety of adaptive capacities in this region, transferring and isolating strain into the mobile structures above and below this region. If movement is traveling from the foot, up through the ankle, through the knee and suddenly stopping at the hip, due to the immobility of the pelvis/lumbars, we're bound to see problems arise due to excessive forces colliding with this "stabile" /immovable environment. This model may work fine if you're loading weight onto a brick wall, but try moving the brick wall and see how unstable/dysfunctional things become.

'Stability' in the human body relies on its ability to MOVE, react, and respond to the subtle and gross changes in dynamic load during movement. Take away these qualities and you're left with a highly strained, unadaptive and rigid system. Rigidity is not a friend of the human body unless you're a power lifter or the like. Rigidity will quickly deteriorate joints and tissues at the junctions where mobility meets immobility. Forces accumulate in these places because they have no fluid path to travel through. You see this quite frequently in individuals with fused portions their spine. The segments at the transition of the fusion/non-fusion frequently are the first to develop signs of dysfunction such as disc/joint degeneration, arthritis, arthrosis, or collapsed/herniated/protruding/bulging discs, etc..

The concept that the 'core' lays in the middle of the body also seems rather odd. What enables this core to move an individual and "stabilize" them? Aren't we moving and supporting ourselves via our legs witch ultimately connect us to the ground? I believe the core begins in the feet (medial arch), running up the deep posterior crural compartment of the leg, up through the adductors and into the bottom of the pelvis, within the pelvic 'bowl' and up the front of the spine. Where's the mention of the important psoas in this "core" model that Kelly talks about.

"Challenging the core stabilizers by loading the head, arms and legs on a stabilized pelvis will make these muscles stronger."

What is the definition of 'strength' here? Strength isn't just static loading potential, but more importantly functional dynamic loading potential. In everyday life we don't move like robots or block people... . Just take a look at the most talented of athletes and you'll see fluidity of movement and strength at it's peak.

Regarding the TA - "It also aids in respiration... "

In normal respiration? How so? Yes, it aids in forced exhalation, but should we be walking around consciously forcing our breath out? The 'controlling' and overuse of the TA is concerning. Something we don't ever hear about in the Pilates model of core stability is the effect of excessive engagement of the TA as it relates to intra-abdominal pressure systems and diaphragmatic function... as well as rib mobility. When the TA is sinched down like a corset, it decreases intra-abdominal volume thus increasing pressure with this cavity below the diaphragm. Consequently, the diaphragm must work much harder to contract and move downward, thus putting more strain on it and making breathing more difficult and decreasing overall volume of breath. This results in having to utilize the secondary muscles of respiration in the neck and intercostals excessively, creating an inspiration fixed breathing pattern and straining the cervicals.

Is our goal to really make breathing more difficult and less efficient just to achieve greater 'static' abdominal and lumbar strength? Straining the diaphragm by increasing intra-abdominal pressure via contraction of the TA will lead to a variety of potential problems that nobody would want... and are often have very lasting impacts on both the musculoskeletal body as well as the viscera (organs). Increased pressure and less diaphragmatic excursion leads to abdominal visceral immobility and restriction... potentially effecting physiologic function as well. This increase in pressure also fatigues the muscles of the pelvic floor which are designed, in part, to counter-act the downward pressure exerted by the diaphragm on inhalation.

Furthermore, adequate movement of the lumbar vertebral segments is limited or null, which compromises disc health and physiology. Without proper movement and articulation the discs will chronically dehydrate and physiologic health will become negatively impacted(cellular function and maintenance is altered due to chronic immobility and sustained loading.).

As far as th hip movement goes... Why shouldn't our movment in the legs be allowed to travel naturally up through the hips and into the pelvic innominates? After all, the two halves of the pelvis naturally tilt posterior and anterior alternately when we walk... If they don't we've got problems. The pelvis was designed and is capable of moving healthfully via the SI joints(granted they only have a few degrees of rotational ability and a few millimeters of translation allowable). Nonetheless, healthy iliosacral/iliolumbar function allows for a figure 8 type of motion to occur here during gait. This is a complex region of biomechanics and form closure/force closure to provide proper stability and function in the moving form we call a human being. When we 'lock' this region down we're asking for trouble... and it will be anything but stable or functional.

Ever notice how some avid Pilates folks walk like soldiers? With there legs swinging under their pelvis like sticks and the pelvis/lumbars perfectly stationary... NO contralateral movement as was originally intended in our bodies. Very rigid in the "core", rather than dynamic fluidity and complex autonomic coordination.

Now I'm sure I've ticked off some folks here, but that's not my intention. I just feel that we've bought into a belief system that has lacked adequate and educated scrutiny. I think Joseph Pilates contributed some valuable insights, and I'm sure he helped many people. But remember that this was a person who was searching, in part, for a means to help his rickets... He himself needed something as 'controlling' as Pilates... Most people in our culture today don't need excessive rigidity or more control in their lives. Our culture could actually benefit from being a little freer in the pelvis... more expressive in their movements and less controlling of things that are beyond their moment to moment control. If we had to think about everything we did in out "core" every time we moved, we wouldn't go anywhere. Thank goodness our bodies can perform all of that for us. And when it has trouble doing so due to the many allienating influences in our cultures (driving in cars, sitting behind desks, sitting at our computers, sitting down to eat, etc.) we can turn to things like pilates to help re-connect with these inhibited and lost regions of our bodies. But we need to know when is enough and let the body take over its job. I also think its extremely important that we look objectively at all disciplines before accepting them as accurate 'truths'. Unfortunately, the training for pilates doesn't provide the level of anatomical, physiological or biomechanical understanding/knowledge that is needed to analyze and objectively view it in this manner. So too many folks are adopting a belief system that they aren't capable of questioning appropriately, and they're teaching it to others as if it were anatomically and biomechanically accurate , safe and functional when it really is not in some ways.

At the end of the day, no matter what discipline you practice, the body (its anatomy and physiology) is your only accurate teacher and source of information. If what you're being told or what you're teaching doesn't correspond to the reality of the human body and its natural unimpeded function, then we must be brave enough and secure enough to begin posing important questions. Our greatest weakness in this discipline of 'strength and stability' lays in our neglect to ask these important questions and challenge that 'stability' to see if it will really hold true in the end.

I would be happy to have a dialogue on this topic... That's really why I chose to post this message. I hope nobody is offended by my comments or such.

Are you a Feldenkrais person? I like your post. I also like Kelly Kane's article as well. I am an "out-of-the-box Pilates teacher and although Kelly's info may not be in line with your knowledge of the moving body she by far surpasses many Pilates peeps out there, especially those zealous Classical teachers.
I am looking to get certified in Gyrotonics and I am wondering your take on this modality. It definitely embraces more freedom than does Pilates and works more in spirals. However, I know some folks who are so hypermobile in their backs that they cannot do Gyro. Would love your feedback.

Hi rebelred,

Although I'm fan of Feldenkrais, that's not my chosen field of inquiry. I'm actually a structural integration practitioner with an emphasis on visceral/peripheral nerve and cranial osteopathic manipulation.

I honestly didn't mean to ruffle any feathers with that post, but I think it's always healthy to examine everything from an educated, objective and unbiased point of view (including my own chosen profession). And I do agree that Kelly Kane makes a concerted effort to provide an educated experience for people.

As for gyrotonics, ...love it! I wish it was more recognized and utilized by folks. It opitimizes organic, spiraling, integrative and fluid movement that is so akin to our everyday lives and nicely matches the inherent design and function of the human body. We could certainly use more gyrotonic/gyrokinesis teachers out there. Especially seeing as how we, as a culture, seem to have lost touch with the natural and unencumbered movement within the pelvis and upper body. I think it also integrates and connects our movements with the ground (through the feet) in a very effective manner.

I think it would be wonderful to see more fluidity rather than more rigidity and 'bracing'. 'Life is motion' ....

...Legs were designed to move with the pelvis, not separate from... .

Kind Regards,

Forgot to mention this... Gyrotonics may not be appropriate for everyone, but such is the case with any movement/manual discipline. I would say it's more about the right approach at the right time, as it relates to each individuals needs/condition ....Rather than any single approach being superior to the next.

This is a good discussion. I wish people wouldn't waste time slamming other groups, but whatever. I actually got hurt doing Pilates. Too much posterior tilt in my work. I proceeded to go through a postural specialist program which taught me a ligament workout to get me out of pain and into better alignment. Boy was I shocked when I saw my posture pictures, I thought, how can a Pilates teacher have such poor alignment? As a young teacher, I was basically afraid to question the "work" as then I would have to question myself.But being in pain changes all that. I still love Pilates, but my eyes are open. Now I have a much healthier view of Pilates and have also trained in Gyrotonic. I consider myself a teacher of movement and understand different modalities unlock different things for different people. In my opinion, finding the right combination is the best part of the journey.

Isn't really all about balance? balance in dynamic? balance in stability and mobitlity? I think you are both right. It does depend on what the body needs in the moment. Thanks!

Hi JW, interesting as usual and I agree with you about much of what you said.
However as to Joseph Pilates searcing for a means to help recover from rickets so was Moshe Feldenkrais searching for a way to release tension that was constricting his vocal chords, and in their explorations they both discovered and developed their systems. so why so dismissive of Joe? His work is just as valuable, and has helped many. In the wrong hands, with misinformation and weekend certificate training, individuals can get injured, whether it's personal training in a gym, Pilates, Gyrotonic, or deeper work like cranial/sacraland or SI these modalities can cause changes or disruptions that are actually more harmful than helpful.
I do think that the community of movement educators do need these dialogues and discussions as they are so helpful and enlightening no matter what the perspective.WE need to move forward into thsi century with as much knowledge as we can acquire, given the technology anow at our disposal. I do lean a bunch from you JW and so thanks again, even though I disagree with some things you say(not too many though) I know where you are coming from and do appreciate your input.

Hi LA,

Thanks for your congenial response. I mean no harm in pointing out Joseph Pilates initial inspirations/purposes, which were obviously many, in creating his work. I do feel it offers valuable and relevant insight into its purpose however. And that he definitely evolved it from there to accommodate more diverse populations than those with neuromuscular deficits.

I can't speak much to Feldenkrais outside of my own experience with it, as I'm not a Feldenkrais practitioner. But some of my teachers over the years were also students of Moshe himself and I do know that he developed the work primarily out of self-need as well for a knee injury he sustained and was given a 50% chance of walking again.

With that said, I think the application of his work was a bit more diverse and applicable to the general public from the start. One thing I find interesting is the contrast between Feldenkrais and Pilates in that Feld. used the brain/nervous system to release unnecessary holding patterns in the body and create movement that was of greatest ease and efficiency. Whereas Joseph focused on using the mind/brain to instill greater 'control' over the body. One was looking to 'let go' of the subconscious control and the other worked to promote control of our physical body. That's probably best left to another conversation altogether though... .

I am not judging the two, as you brought Feldenkrais into the conversation. I think you make a very valid point that any discipline can cause harm in the wrong hands or with an inadequate understanding. For me, the latter of those two is my personal concern. And my concern applies to all of those disciplines and more, even my profession of SI. I don't agree with all of my colleagues on everything and I think some lack the understanding necessary to do the work safely.

What I see commonly though is that SI practitioners are practicing SI, cranial practice cranial, Feldenkrais practice feldenkrais, etc... but quite often I see Pilates teachers practicing something other than pilates as it was intended. They may be doing structural assessments and pt type stuff with people without the adequate understanding. Pilates trainings don't teach people to work with musculoskeletal pathologies/conditions. As a teacher grows they certainly could apply their understanding and continued education to that task, but many don't wait for their skills and knowledge to develop.

So to write articles such as the one this comment is under shows an inadequate assessment and understanding of what the work is actually doing to the body and the mechanisms Kelly describes. I think Kelly Kane has offered a lot to the Pilates community but I also think that she has a superficial understanding of some of the things she presented.... Hold on now, I don't mean that as insult, but more to say that she appears to have developed theories and such around the Pilates method rather than critically analyzing the method first and then developing a theory of movement and stability based on those findings. So while Pilates has many benefits, have we really objectively listened to what we're saying is 'good' about it? Is it really good to limit movement of the pelvis/lumbars during movement of the legs? Is it really beneficial to consciously engage the transverse abdominus (and inevitably the other abdominals) with such frequency and tenacity that we challenge and stress the diapragm, intercostals and scalenes?

I'm just of the opinion that more questions need to be asked and examined before becoming a supposed 'authority' on the matter. I know Kelly has a good reputation because she has done a lot of anatomical studies. But based on the article she wrote above, it doesn't sound as though she's considered an alternate view on the actual way the body naturally functions when we don't impose such control over it. It sounds to me at least that she is using her anatomical knowledge to support the theory proposed by Joseph Pilates and in his work.

In my own profession and practice all that I intend to do is help people find a way within their body that is harmonious, balanced, easful, aware and which allows for the truest expression of their inner selves without hindrance or obstacles to those possibilities. We are mostly born with that ability and often accumulate unecessary or undesirable holdings/patterns/inhibitions along the way that don't serve us well. The question I often ask is 'What is in the way?' Rather than 'What do I need to add?' All we need seems already present, just obscured or repressed or forgotten. I personally feel every discipline has something to offer in this regard, including pilates.

"There is this medicine and that medicine, and this method and that method, and then there is the way the body really is." - Kerry Weinstein

Information is always “good,” if it leads to healthy conversation. Questioning that information, which is just a window into the perspective of the author, (especially in a 7-thousand-word article and perhaps, then, not worth the effort of judgment) is even better.

That said, I would question anytime someone makes a “should” statement. To my mind, there are lots of possibilities and “protocols,” just as there are many ways of sitting down or walking. Also, in my view, we need to take another look at “In the Pilates venue we call this hip dissociation/differentiation.” Was the way “disASsociation” was written at the end a misprint? Is that, and the fact the concept was written as two words with a slash, further indication that we need consensus on yet another issue in our community? How important is it?

I’d ask new teachers the question: What specific populations/conditions might not benefit from repeated practice of the sitting position shown above with the focus on the femur in the acetabulum and the sit bones jutting back? When might it be better to focus on the action of the talus on the tibia with the head over the hips?
In pilates there are a variety of exercises in different planes of motion that challenge the movement of the hip joint in varying degrees, angles, and loads. These movements require a variety of sequencing and range of muscular dynamics from head to toe. Which exercises might you use for those other types of bodies?
Hint: Use the arms as well….

Other commenters have asked “good” ones, too. Jw’s question of conscious engagement begs: When is it appropriate to tell the abs what to do and when can you just observe as you ask the abs to “do their thing”?

I ask: What is the client noticing? What can he feel; what can the body do? Is she able to visualize the bones? Can the body do it without visualizing? If he can visualize, does he appreciate being able to do so? Or is he too disturbed about what happened in Ireland over the weekend? And on and on....

Once we study the anatomy, once balance is achieved, then what?
Where does the mind go after that?
The observer expands…
and suddenly…
we find reason in all of this….

And tomorrow, we might see/sense it all differently anyway….have a good Monday :).

correction: tibia on the talus

Dear LA?
How do we know he had rickets?
and,
Dear JW?
What is your profession?

Siri Dharma Galliano

Rickets is a softening of the bones that comes from a lack of Vitamin D, no sunlight.
He grew up outdoors playing, and his posture shows no bowleggedness or knockknees or scoliosis, all the result of "Rickets."
sdg

Siri,

Actually,rickets does not cause skeletal 'deformities' in everyone who has it. Those are only 'potential' effects of the disorder. It can cause a host of other issues/problems, including but not limited to motor control development and muscular atrophy and weakness. People don't present with ALL of the possible symptoms of a condition.

[MODERATOR NOTE: This post has been edited.]

Sorry to everyone else who chose to read those pathetic posts, including my own. I couldn't resist a response... sorry.

Aside from my comments to james, my point here is not to dismiss pilates, but to discuss its methodology, purpose and affect in a different way than usual. My comments on this thread were only meant to objectively look at things from more than one perspective. Unfortunately it now sounds as though I'm anti-pilates, when in fact I'm just anti-james/ignorance.

Sorry folks for the disaster... I'm sure James' comments and my follow up will prompt another deletion from the pilates-pro administration as it did in another thread not too long ago.

So mr james, if you care to comment on your dislike or disagreement towards/with me then try to do so in the future in a way that shows some degree of counter-intelligence. At least tell me why you disagree and support it with something other than insults. I'm happy to disagree with people and respect that, but I don't respect you're cascade of inappropriate personal insults towards me.

Well since my posts have been deleted perhaps I need to be more tactfull. I have not seen your follow up response JW so I cannot comment. I disagree with you because alot of your points fail to take things into consideration. Particlarly that it is a corrective method. Not a 100% natural one. We do not do things in Pilates 24/7. One of MANY examples of your saying this is in this thread.

but should we be walking around consciously forcing our breath out.

I and others I know certainly do not do that outside of a Pilates session. You have made many comments like that including one along the lines of 'What are we doing to people making them squeeze their glutes and pull in their stomachs all the time'?. Again we do not do this all the time outside a Pilates session. This shows an real ignorance of Pilates for someone who has claimed to have been practcing it for 6 or 7 years.

I do not feel despite your wording that you are really here for an objective debate about the methodology. The tone and what you say indicates otherwise. Judging by the errors you have continually made I do not feel you have credibility in a Pilates discussion. Most of your posts I have read has a distinctly anti-pilates tone and that would ok if you have not made the mistakes that you had made. Now it's just easy to dismiss you because of your ignorance of what the method is.

Also at the time of writing you have not told Siri what your profession is.

Another quote from your comment in this thread,

Is our goal to really make breathing more difficult and less efficient just to achieve greater 'static' abdominal and lumbar strength?

Once I have finished a Pilates session I can breath more easier and deeper then I ever could before Pilates. Like I said before so many fo your posts miss the point. If we did Pilates 24/7 yes it would be bad for our bodies. Too much of most things is bad for us. Thats why it's only effective to do Pilates for short periods. I feel for someone who wishes to discuss things like this you need to have a better understanding of what it the method really is and it is not something we do all day everyday.

If you wish to see the long term effects of original Pilates I suggest you take a workshop with Jay Grimes who has been practising Pilates for 40+ years. You can observe up close what the method does to the body long term. You might be suprised at how he compares to others of a similar age.

Siri, I have read in several different histories that Joseph Pilates suffered from rickets as a child and developed his exercises to help counteract postural abnormalities that he suffered as a result.I did not know him personally, so I am only using those facts as my reference. I appologize if I am incorrect and do not want to perpetuate a myth.

"remember this was a person who was searching in part for a means to help his rickets"

Siri, I was responding to a comment made by JW as to Joe Pilates having Rickets, so let's ask JW how he came to think that.

Siri,

"Joseph Pilates was born on December 8, 1880 in the German town of Monchengladbach, not far from Dusseldorf. One of four children, he was plagued as a child by rickets, asthma and rheumatic fever. Pilates was determined to overcome these childhood ailments during his youth,...."

The PMA Pilates Certification Exam Study Guide 2005 p.15

Do you have a source or sources who suggest otherwise?
Please let us know.
Thanks,
Carole

Mr.James,

To avoid another unhealthy and inappropriate situation here let me just say this to you.

Are you able to consider any perspective, regardless of individual disciplines or methods, beyond that of pilates? Not for the purpose of dismissing pilates, but for the purpose of ACTUALLY understanding the movements themselves and the effect they have on the body, not the proposed theory, but the actual movements as they relate to functional human movement. And can you go beyond saying, 'Look at so-snd-so, they're quite healthy'? Because that's not objective in my opinion. How about hte client that comes to me and says; I had been doing pilates with a well-known teacher for years and I recently stopped for a month for life reasons. When I stopped the chronic sacroiliac joint pain I had been having for months now went away as well. When I returned to pilates it came back immediately. Iwas surprised to think it could be caused by my pilates practice and my teacher said we need to develop more strength around the joint. It still hurts and is getting worse. Can you help me?'

You or I can't ignore scenarios like that and try to argue that the pilates work may not be the solution to the problem at hand. Matbe that person needed to resolve another underlaying issue before continuing to work her body in such a way.... Is that something we can agree on, maybe????

And that is a somewhat common scenario I see. Yet not all who do pilates are in this situation and it IS helping some people, or at least not damaging.

I hear your point that pilates is "corrective". By the very definition of 'corrective' you are saying that the movements taught and performed are reflective of the way we 'should' be moving... thus 'correcting' unhealthy patterns.

My other point to you under all of the banter is this. Regardless of whether you feel that the "corrective" movements being performed should or shouldn't be carried with us outside the studio, IT DOES STICK over time. That is precisely how we develop movement patterns.... perform repetitive tasks on a regular basis and you establish new patterns of neuromuscular programming/patterning.

Instead of trashing me with personal insults out of nowhere, please try and speak to these points. Because all you keep doing is ignoring them for consideration, when they're completely valid realms for thought. As I said earlier, I'm not trying to dismiss pilates as a whole, but clearly it has not been thoughtfully reviewed/considered from a perspective outside of its loyal followers. Can you see my point of view here? This is not an 'SI' point of view, it's just an attempt at a thoughtfully educated one. Have you been able to offer a perspective or analysis of the movements that isn't just a reiteration of what you've been taught?

Help move this discussion forward rather than halting things with pointless insulting statements towards me.

By the way, I don't know of the "errors" you speak of, but I have no shame or "embarrassment" around any comments I've put forth, other than those that became unnecessarily personal in tone and direction.

mr, james, (for Siri's interest)

By the way, my profession, in part, is in structural integration and movement re-education.

"Contrology is not a fatiguing system of dull, boring, abhorred exercises repeated daily "ad-nauseam." Return to Life Through Contrology Joe Pilates. Unlike some of the discussions in this blog.

That might depend on who you're asking Deborah... .

In all seriousness, it might be more stimulating and exciting if we didn't have comments like the one you just contributed. It's not helping matters.

james,

Pilates, Alexander, Feldenkrais, SI, etc all have value and potential to help people. They also have their short-comings and discrepancies in accuracy from their original conception. Moshe, Ida Rolf, Joe Pilates all contributed valuable tools and perspectives and they all put forth some ideas or notions that are arguable. It's not about one being superior. We should be able to take the foundations of what they put forth and use that to build and modify where needed based on our current and evolved perspective on the human form, experience and movement alike. If we can't do that objectively without biased for each discipline, then we have failed in fulfilling the spirit of each of those pioneers. None of them would have let their work remain static in its conception and development or exempt from further scrutiny and analysis.

So to bring the intention I had in originally posting on this thread regarding Kelly Kane's article on core stability, I would hope that we wouldn't just accept something as gospel because it reiterates or reinforces Joe's beliefs. If we do our work based on any given model it should be because it makes sense and can be supported following objective scrutiny/analysis and varied perspectives. Otherwise we're just drawing a curtain over our eyes to that which we choose not to see/acknowledge.