Doctors,
I’ve been binging on your articles, forum comments, podcasts, and (a bit) on the research you’ve cited, as far as cause of injury is concerned.
Very simply put; poor load management is correlated with injury (plenty of evidence). What “bad” form is, seems impossible to define (where do we draw the line between “good” and “bad” form with respect to, for instance, spinal flexion? Does that line move depending on the individual in question? Etc), and therefore how it (“bad” form) correlates with injury, seems equally impossible to determine. Anecdotal evidence, however, of what is colloquially considered “bad” form, suggests that there’s no correlation, as a lot of people who lift with “bad” form are totally fine, while others who obsess over “perfect” form are hurting/“injured” constantly.
I’m completely on board. But I’m wondering about this:
Surely, form is A factor in how much load gets applied to a particular region of the body, just like the exercise in question, and the weight, and so on, are factors in that? I mean, moving one way loads body region X more/less than moving another way does.
I understand that blaming “bad” form is missing the underlying stuff – no type of movement (obviously ignoring the super extreme stuff) is bad IN ITSELF. A certain variation of a deadlift (let’s say rounded back) isn’t bad IN ITSELF. That deadlift with a certain weight, for a specific individual, may just mean too great a load on some part of their body, such that they sustain an injury.
So the root cause is still (or seems to be) load, and not form, since that individual might’ve been fine doing it with a wooden stick.
… But, that individual might’ve been fine deadlifting the same weight that injured them, with a different (in this case, I guess “better”) form, right? Since the load on the injured region would’ve been different.
So, isn’t form still a matter of >0 relevance as it pertains to injury risk reduction (NOT prevention)? I know that You do attempt to hammer in proper technique with clients; is it ONLY about efficiency, or do you also do it in order to reduce the risk of injury?
It just seems as if, since load is a factor in injury risk, that form is still a relevant part of the topic (of injury).
Of course there’s no one-size-fits-all form (Pavlova)… again, I get what you are trying to communicate with respect to this subject. But still, for instance, if a client perceives a lot of internal load in body region X from deadlifting with a particular form, isn’t asking them to “try keep your back like this” a logical next step to see if the subjective internal load decreases IE “form check for injury risk reduction”?
Maybe you’re adamant about the proper angle of approach being “load” instead of “form” because it’s just a much more precise view of reality, or maybe I’m missing something that makes my question nonsensical?