Do you train your brain as often or as intensely as training your body?
Traditionally, training focuses on any number of workouts to develop the physical mechanisms of performance. They focus on the perceived physical limiters to success.
But what if the primary limiter to success isn’t physical? What if it is mental?
Many may think that mental training is only necessary for an elite athlete, that it is just the difference between winning a gold medal or a silver medal at the Olympics. Most people don’t even think about training their brain, but will spend countless hours training their body. How am I supposed to "train my brain" ... and why bother? My brain works just fine as it is – or does it?
The primary limiter to success – in sport training, in injury recovery, and in life, is the brain. So why not focus our efforts on this organ?
This episode of the Ruminations was originally intended to be the first video episode. Yes, I have decided to forge ahead into the world of video blogging in the hopes that perhaps my sharp sense of humor will unfold even more brilliantly in front of the camera – or not. As you might expect, I say this with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Unfortunately, life can at times get in the way of video production, so perhaps Episode 21 will be the first. I am sure that unbridled excitement will prevail across the blogosphere in anticipation of this epic event.
In the meantime, the Ruminations must go on: drugs and debt and a little war thrown in on the side.
1. In years past, if someone had pulled a superhuman effort in the Tour de France, the accusations would fly. These efforts are usually chalked up to drug use and are now “guilty until proven innocent”. That is the sad state of affairs that is public opinion these days, especially when it comes to cycling.
This year, French cyclist Thomas Voeckler rode like a man possessed. He held the yellow jersey far longer than most had expected. But strangely enough, nobody ever seemed to mention the potential for drug use. Perhaps the court of public opinion has shifted, but perhaps it is even more elemental than that.
In my last post, I outlined the current need for a health revolution. Cost, lack of evidence-based practices, and perhaps greatest of all, cultural change, are the issues preventing a system of health from being sustainable and effective.
We are in need of a change in our approach to health. Over time, we’ve seen the attempts at incremental change. We’ve witnessed this in our recent health care reform debates. But at this point in time, if you continue to do what you’ve done, you will get what you’ve got thus far. And that is a “system” that is broken in many places.
A system of health needs to be seamless along the continuum of health – from disease to the absence of disease. It needs to focus on the mechanisms of health and on optimizing human performance within all contexts of health. It needs to be truly client-focused. It needs to be built on a foundation of learning and transformation at the level of the individual, in order to then foster cultural change socially and politically.
We are in need of a Revolution – and it starts today with the unveiling of the Smart Life Project.
Over the past 40 years, there has been a progressive, silent attack waged on the health of the American population.
The problem starts with a dysfunctional health care system that is more about "illness" than "health". Chronic medical conditions in our aging population have forced the cost of health care to skyrocket. But if you think the problem is with the Baby Boomers, think again.The same effect is noted with our youth, who are growing up inactive, overweight and having low self respect. The current system is unsustainable when it consumes 17% of the gross domestic product – and it is only going to magnify over time given the current population dynamics. It is a simple equation:
Generation X + Generation Z = an impending health disaster.
The phrase "patient-centered care" has also become a misnomer. The current system isn't "patient-centered" in any way whatsoever. Why?
It has been quite some time since I did a Playlist Pondering, so I thought it was time to resurrect the idea. Today’s pondering is on one of the greatest rock bands to grace the planet – Rush.
Growing up in Canada, Rush entered into my consciousness at an early age. Back in the day, it seemed like they played virtually every high school in Canada – except mine. Rush was always on the radio, at least on the rock stations like CHEZ 106 in Ottawa or Q107 in Toronto.
The stellar musicianship and incredible jams initially caught my attention. How could it not, with Geddy Lee, Alex Lifeson, and Neal Peart playing their hearts out? All you had to do was watch “Exit … Stage Left” and you would be hooked. Awesome sauce, indeed.
But it was far more than that. My high school years, like many other people I am sure, found me struggling to find meaning. I was struggling to find out who I was and where I fit in, and the timing was right: there were Neal Peart’s lyrics right in front of me.
First of all, I find it ludicrous that a physical therapist, in this day and age, requires a gatekeeper to decide when physical therapy is and is not necessary and appropriate. I’ve written about it extensively, and frankly it just evades the power of logic. I don’t tell an orthopedic surgeon when surgery is appropriate, nor do I tell them how to perform it. I don’t tell a gastroenterologist when surgery is appropriate, nor do I tell them how to perform it. And I sure don’t expect anyone other than a physical therapist to know when physical therapy is appropriate, or how to perform it. A pretty simple issue of professional autonomy, I’d say.
Of course, don’t tell that to a physician or osteopath or chiropractor. I might start sounding like some kind of uppity therapist that just wants to … do … his … job … in the context of his professional training and licensure. Sound familiar?
What makes it even worse is that if you are going to take on the role of gatekeeper, then darn well know your responsibilities in order to perform the task properly. If you are going to own the keys to the car, then learn how to drive that car responsibly. Sadly, this doesn’t appear to be the case in the vast majority of scenarios.
Training methods have a long history of being based on anecdote. The anecdote typically comes from a coach or athlete who have applied their “theories” to the training realm and succeeded. Of course, this success could be due to any number of factors, most of which may have nothing to do with the actual physiology underlying the training itself.
But then these training approaches are applied to various populations, and invariably athletes end up with varied results. They get injured. They get burnt-out. They start to think that if it worked for Athlete A, why doesn’t it work for me? And then they start to wonder if they just don’t have “the right genetics”.
One of the best excuses for the inability to perform, or to train, or to compete, or to attain lofty goals, is genetics. It has become the perfect self-limiting, self-fulfilling prophecy. You don’t have the right alignment. You aren’t talented enough. You aren’t smart enough. You just don’t have the genetics to do this sport. Go ahead, give up now. Don’t waste your time.
Up to 60% of runners will sustain an injury within any given year. Poor running mechanics, in conjunction with poor, ineffective and outdated training methods, can pose a significant injury risk. "RunSmart" was written to address these issues in the running community.
"Running Injuries: Etiology And Recovery- Based Treatment" (co-author Bridget Clark, PT) appears in the third edition and fourth editions of "Clinical Orthopaedic Rehabilitation: A Team Approach" by Charles Giangarra, MD and Robert C. Manske, PT.
Allan Besselink, PT, DPT, Ph.D., Dip.MDT has a unique voice in the world of sports, education, and health care. Read more about Allan here.
Top 5 finalist in three categories: "Best Overall Blog", "Best PT Blog" and "Best Advocacy Blog".
PO Box 26161
Austin, TX 78755
512-222-6263
