Is Your Ab Workout Hurting Your Back?

[observor 69]

June 17, 2009, 11:00 am
Is Your Ab Workout Hurting Your Back?
By Gretchen Reynolds

The genesis of much of the ab work we do these days probably lies in the work done in an Australian physiotherapy lab during the mid-1990s. Researchers there, hoping to elucidate the underlying cause of back pain, attached electrodes to people’s midsections and directed them to rapidly raise and lower their arms, like the alarmist robot in “Lost in Space.”

Rest of article at Link.

Link

Must watch excellent video.

Your welcome. 

 

[Fiver]

Here's a paper on the US army sit-up tests. The conclusion (page 4) is the same; crunches are better, sit-ups are bad for the back.

 

[VIChris]

This theory has been around for ages. I was surprised when I saw the standard for sit-ups involved full sit ups with the feet being held. Not only is this hard on the back, but also engages upper leg and hip muscles, reducing the effectiveness of the sit up on your abs.

 

[gcclarke]

This theory has been around for ages. I was surprised when I saw the standard for sit-ups involved full sit ups with the feet being held. Not only is this hard on the back, but also engages upper leg and hip muscles, reducing the effectiveness of the sit up on your abs.

I don't really think many people are advocating using the full sit up as a training exercise, much like you typically don't carry people around to train for the Battle Fitness Assessment.

Full sit ups may be somewhat hard on your back, but let's face it, if you can't do 19 once a year without damaging your back, then you have bigger issues than the sit ups. They're an assessment tool, not a training tool.

 

[VIChris]

That's a fair counter point, though I wonder how many people will look at the standards, and practice doing their situps in that fashion for months on end leading up to their first fitness assessment?

 

[The_Falcon]

It is my belief that  ALOT of the issue (WRT to people injuring their lower backs doing full sit-ups) is people focus WAY to much on their front, when doing core work, and completely neglect to do an equal amount of work for their back (for fear of injuring it).  Also there are far more effective methods of strengthening your abs (and indeed your entire core) than crunches/situps, such as front squats, (overhead) presses, GHD situps.

 

[gcclarke]

That's a fair counter point, though I wonder how many people will look at the standards, and practice doing their situps in that fashion for months on end leading up to their first fitness assessment?

Hopefully those people would be listening to the PSP staff with regards to a proper training regimen for your core. Or listening to, honestly, almost anyone who seems to know what they're talking about. The internet is full of information telling people that doing full sit ups are probably a bad idea.

It is my belief that  ALOT of the issue (WRT to people injuring their lower backs doing full sit-ups) is people focus WAY to much on their front, when doing core work, and completely neglect to do an equal amount of work for their back (for fear of injuring it).  Also there are far more effective methods of strengthening your abs (and indeed your entire core) than crunches/situps, such as front squats, (overhead) presses, GHD situps.

And yes, I have no argument with the idea that people should be focusing more on full-body movements rather than workouts that focus only on a single muscle group. Single muscle focuses are fine in situations when you know that a particular muscle is underdeveloped, especially when compared to its contralateral counterpart. Otherwise, it's better to have workouts actually reflect motions which you might have reason to perform. Lifting weights in the gym is useless if all it allows you to do is lift weights in the gym.