Dr. James Fisher
James Fisher PhD (james.fisher @ solent.ac.uk) is a Course Leader and Senior Lecturer for the School of Sport, Health, and Social Sciences at Southampton Solent University in the UK. He specializes across both exercise physiology, biomechanics, and resistance training. James is an active researcher publishing numerous peer-reviewed articles relating to health and fitness.
In this episode, we discuss lumbar biomechanics, ideal range of motion, best ways to utilize the MedX Lumbar Extension, workout tips, training volume during fatherhood, and much more.
Stop feeling frustrated with your strength training studio and start growing your client base
Download How to Attract Great Personal Trainers PDF
- Listen to it on Apple Podcasts
- Stream by clicking here
- Download as an MP3 by right-clicking here and choosing “save as”
Show Notes
- 0:55 – Lumbar biomechanics and thoughts on loading spine in flexion
- 24:16 – How to figure out a client’s ideal range of motion
- 31:18 – Rep durations during a lumbar workout
- 41:20 – Views on 9 sets per muscle per week for hypertrophy
- 56:10 – Workout tips and training volume during fatherhood
Selected Links from the Episode
- 313 – Bill DeSimone on Joint-Friendly Fitness, the MedX Lumbar Extension, and his Favourite Workout Routines
- Joint-Friendly Fitness: Your Guide to the Optimal Exercise Program by Bill DeSimone
- The Joint Friendly Fitness Project
- MedX Machines
- HIT Business Membership
- MedX Lumbar Extension
- Nautilus Inc.
- Exercise Programming Series with Dr. James Fisher and Luke Carlson
- DEXA Scan
- The Colorado Experiment
- 315 – Mike Petrella and Michael Perilli – Does STG’s Colorado Experiment Create New Opportunities to Drive Client Results?
- Resistance Exercise Conference (REC)
- Good to Go: What the Athlete in All of Us Can Learn from the Strange Science of Recovery by Christie Aschwanden
- Four Sigmatic Mushroom Coffee
- Flexed lumbar spine postures are associated with greater strength and efficiency than lordotic postures during a maximal lift in pain-free individuals by Ralph Carpinelli
- American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)
- National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA)
413 – Cardiac Rehab & Cabin Gyms: An Intimate Look at Jon Allen’s Personal Training Business
412 – Dr. James Fisher Unveils Trainee Perceptions on Supervised Resistance Training
411 – Maximizing Profits: Secrets to Boosting High-Intensity Training Prices Without Losing Clients with Luke Carlson (Timeless Throwback)
Well. I’d say we agree to disagree, but my position isn’t fairly represented here.
James said at the beginning he hadn’t read JFF. In the section called The Spine, pp 209-216, I explain the phrase “Don’t Load the Spine In Flexion” (quotes included) pp 211-212. I didn’t suggest accepting it as conventional wisdom, I explained it specifically as to anatomy and biomechanics.
Lawrence read a few out of context lines from Update #85, https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/billdesimone/the-joint-friendly-fitness-project/posts/3137296. In the update, I described it again, gave examples, and scans of the bibliography sources I used.
Let’s skip the differences and get to a point. If you bought a Medx Lumbar Extension (or any other brand or station) for your own use or your studio use, use it however you’re comfortable. Anything good or bad coming from it is on YOU. Maybe Medx, maybe your insurance carrier. But not my place to tell you what to do. I was aware of it, and I didn’t buy one for my studio.
If, on the other hand, you are an individual training yourself, you should at least consider what conventional back safety guidelines suggest about exercising safely. Because if you lift in a way that contradicts conventional back safety guidelines, say by slouching your spine with a barbell in your hands or on your shoulders, i.e. loading the spine in flexion, whatever happens is literally on you. And I’m not wishing bad on anyone, but should the injury occur, my guess is the orthopedic surgeon will be a bit influenced by conventional medical guidelines.
Ultimately, you as the reader has to decide what’s useful. Good luck with your training.
Thank you Bill. Sorry if I misrepresented your views. Not my intention. Appreciate your comment.
I think Bill is presenting the conventional view when it comes to loaded flexing of the spine. However, I gather that the conventional view is perhaps not as solid as I had thought. It seems that, even when attempting to lift with a neutral spine, considerable movement of the spine will occur. Also, the connection between repeated flexing and frequency of disk herniation may not be quite a clear cut as I had thought. For further details consider the following:
https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog/normal-movements-of-the-low-back-during-squats-and-deadlifts/
http://www.greglehman.ca/blog/2016/01/31/revisiting-the-spinal-flexion-debate-prepare-for-doubt
I added the option of doing a feedback static (1:30 TUL) to my MedX Lumber (SuperSlow version) through load cell and a digital indicator display. I can do it it the neutral position. Who needs weights LOL
To me finding out the numbers of sets per workout/week/etc. is something that one has to find out by experience/time. So many factors that vary per individual. Fact as i understand is that tension for duration stimulates protein synthesis and from there we expect growth. My mindset for a workout is always to keep meaningfull tension for as long as possible per set and thus must every rep make sure the tension is there. Where is the upper limit of such stimulating sets (in fact thus reps)? I can only guess but do experience the reduction of force producing capacity and also drive to continue the workout. I do several sets to failure with a last set including 2 or 3 rest pause sets of about 3 reps. so still HIT but not HIT as one set per exercise. The other factor is indeed recovery that set the limit of what is possible through a certain time although more growth could be possible otherwise, but this is ok since, well, I can’t just do more (and it might be small differences anyway). This has ofcourse to do with stresses of life in general but also with mindset. Since a longer time I now workout 4 times a week and don’t feel ready everytime but, if not ,I force myself (and some coffee) to just fucking do it. Low and behold, I always manage a good workout. So, it has for me more to do with the mind……… General conclusions from science are ok but more important is it to respect the individual in every aspect. And this is difficult to coach and also takes a lot of time and the willing individual. But is also the fun of BodyBuilding ( ok, exericse) in the right context. And for that I’m my own best coach.
Let’s say I steel man lumbar extension. We have a muscle structure that can be strengthened. Strength is better than weakness.
The issues with the exercise are HIT issues. Progression and muscular failure fetishes ramp up the potential dangers of the medical lumbar ext. Very few people have certification on a machine that can ruin a life with one mistake.
HIT studios treat lumbar extension like it is a “treatment”.
Fixing back pain. Fake Chiropractors selling fake snake oil. The clients would likely experience the same reduction in back pain if you told them simple HIT weight training would lower their pain and skip the lumbar extension.
Submitting customers to static testing is dangerous snake oil. Static testing is not a valuable indicator of real life capacity. It’s a category specific test. A skill. And it’s dangerous. Studio owners are using it as client retention marketing and that should be rethought. If you believe that lumbar extension strengthens a back, you shouldn’t need a test to tell you it’s happening.
As much as I love HIT training and have spent probably too much time thinking about it, the MEDX lumbar extension machine is in the wrong hands. The priorities of HIT practitioners turn one of the most robust and intricately designed weight training machines into a potential crippler.
I like your comment here Bill.