This may be why we're seeing things differently. You said "3 main symptoms" but according to what I read, there are 4 or 5 main symptoms and postural balance is actually considered one of the most serious issues/symptoms of the disease, and one of the biggest factors of life expectancy due to falls in later stages (which you mentioned). This would suggest to me at least that the same benefits from the prior Harvard geriatric study apply even more to older people with diseases like this, but also young people who may suffer from them. Early onset Parkinson's starts before age 50, about 4% of the population...I could easily fall into that demographic myself soon. So, if I start getting posture and balance issues at my age out of nowhere, I'd definitely want to see a doctor about the potential for Parkinson's, based on what I read below. And TC would be a low risk, high benefit, high compliance exercise to help symptoms. Whether or not that's considered a "treatment", we can agree to disagree. "Four motor symptoms are considered as cardinal signs in PD: tremor, slowness of movement (bradykinesia), rigidity, and postural instability" "Postural instability is typical in the later stages of the disease, leading to impaired balance and frequent falls" Parkinson's disease - Wikipedia
Old people don't fall on the flat ground. Old people fall when they walk downstairs. When you walk downstairs and lose balance, you need to have the ability to recover your balance by your other foot. Again, the training can be as simple as to - Move your gravity center in front of your leading foot. - Your body will fall forward. - You step in your back foot to regain balance back. It's a such simple training. If you add this into your daily training, everything will be perfect, and there will be nothing left to argue. If my post can prevent just one old person from falling, my typing effort will be worthwhile.
Not an expert in Parkinson's, but as you posted "Postural instability is typical in the later stages of the disease, leading to impaired balance and frequent falls"" It wouldnt be the first symptom of Parkinson's you would of had, so if you only had one of the later symptoms of advanced parkinson's, it's unlikely to be Parkinson's. "Whether or not that's considered a "treatment", we can agree to disagree." It's not, and that's why your misreading studies and trying to claim all sorts of benefits which don't have the evidence. You need a little more medical understanding the you currently have. It's good to like stuff, I like BJJ, but do you know what, it's not that great for your joints, pulling guard is not optimal for SD, getting collar choked a lot increased the risk of stroke, at least 50% of the blackbelts are functionally idiots, and the majority of the schools are involved have some shady buisness practices. It's good enough to like something for what it really is, not for what you wish it is.
Sure.This type (form of) exercise.Which is why I said you could make an exercise sequence which wouldn't be TC but would produce the same results. Yeah,like some of us haven't been reading these types of studies since the 1970s. Why don't you write DR. Wayne and ask him if I'm mistaken when I say - Tell ya what,go back and read all the studies/papers just written in the US since the 70s and let me know if there's anything profoundly new in Dr. Wayne's work. Then you can ask Mr. W. to translate all the studies done in China during the same period. I think you'll find mucho repetition of the same sorts of conclusions. And what exactly does any of this have to do with 1) definition of "internal" as applied to combat systems or as applied to internal alchemy? Answer-nothing. Yea,esp. as this thread was "What is Internal?", not how slo-mo relaxed exercise can help,esp older individuals, improve balance. Really? I think my teaching kicking for a couple weeks will have markedly improved balance and recovery of same over those simply learning rope skipping. People sticking with one method over another has nothing to do with validity/benefits of said methods. Yes, the similarity is that most TC people are simply doing a relaxed slo-mo exercise,and most ch'i gungs are simply gentle breathing w/simple movement exercise. Most TC is taught/learned at a superficial level,and most ch'i gung is taught/learned without much content/method. P'raps MDs and yourself should familiarize yourself with the history of the pop ch'i gung movement promoted/packaged by the PRC in the post revolution period and how the monster grew such that now we have ch'i gungs for breast health and for stem cells.Why do I think there was no stem cell ch'i gung in the Ch'ing dynasty? Maybe 'cause there really wasn't much in the way of ch'i gungs then,either. Nei/hey gungs,yeah. Most of the ch'i gungs practiced now are equivalent to the "gymnastic" exercises practiced in the gentlemens' athletic clubs of Euro cultures in the late 18800s early 1900s.To wit-simple breathing or deep breathing exercises. Nothing special or profound. Just as there is nothing special or profound about a particular relaxed slow exercise sequence taught at kindergarten level. Well,after that I guess I'll be called up in front of The Board again for revealing too many secrets.Especially the dirty truths. Enough people have fallen on the flat as well as the inclined so I have to disagree. Also some people fall because their hip breaks and THEN they fall but that's a different matter. Couple years ago my mom's (95 year old) knee swelled up from arthritis she didn't know she had.After it subsided she needed some PT.(She got around fine previously). The FIRST exercise the therapist had her perform was alternating extending her legs to the side (10 times)-the second was extending legs behind for same reps. Why? For balance enhancement. He and I spoke quite a bit on things but he didn't tell me I should teach her Disinclined to Take Hold of the Robe instead. So I think this validates our position on leg extension (kicking position) over TC for balance enhancement,at least in initial stages of learning,and esp if learning/practice isn't an in depth study. He later tied a belt around her waist and pulled her forward so she would have to step forward INTO the fall with one of her feet thereby regaining her stability. She recovered fine and tho' like most people she didn't want to use it and generally doesn't need it us boys decided she should use a cane,at least outside the house.So she does.
As the thread subject "What is Internal?" is in the "IMA" section I'm wondering why no one has addressed my previous post (#35 in thread) regarding Sun's definition of "IMA" or my following comments.
"slo-mo relaxed exercise can help,esp older individuals, improve balance." is that all you got from all the scientific literature I posted? Did you bother reading anything I posted, Master Medico? Would it have been better had it been Oxford? Or whoever you trust for your medical science? Oxford University Sport Tai Chi Chuan So you're also better than Harvard Medical School, Oxford, and jumping rope. Going on record against the titans, eh? I can dig that. But I now doubt you can jump rope.
That's the website of Oxfords sports centre, for university students. Its not their medical school, and also doesn't make any medical claims.
I'm not a medical expert, but I have had dozens, if not hundreds of hours of conversation about neuro rehab with an expert in the field over the past 20 years. My mum was a highly skilled neuro rehab physiotherapist specialising in Parkinson's, strokes and multiple sclerosis, and because of me teaching martial arts and sharing a fascination with the neuromuscular system and teaching people movement that is probably the majority of what we talk about. It doesn't make me an expert, but I'm not coming at this topic cold and blindly quoting studies. As I said previously, the quote above mentions adherence to exercise, which is a big factor. If Tai Chi is more engaging for patients, then that is a big plus, but it doesn't point to anything exceptional in the movements of Tai Chi itself. A big question mark is raised for me in comparing learning sequences of movement with resistance and stretching, as a big part of treating Parkinsons is neuroplasticity and recruiting new areas of the brain to take over the jobs of damaged areas. Comparing Tai Chi to simple strengthening and stretching exercises seems to me to be loading the dice in terms of results somewhat. It's not apples to apples. Hey, you didn't even acknowledge the review of studies I posted. So come on kettle, lead by example for us pots! I've got a more recent review for you here, and will quote the conclusion: Tai Chi for the Prevention of Falls Among Older Adults: A Critical Analysis of the Evidence in: Journal of Aging and Physical Activity Volume 29 Issue 2 (2020) These Harvard Health Publications puff pieces you keep posting are not enough to base the efficacy of medical interventions on. It is the consumer health and wellbeing arm of Harvard Medical School publishing, not actual scholarly publishing. Until there are large scale, high quality studies of the actual effects and mechanisms of Tai Chi, distinct from other exercise, there is not much to say about it other than it shows some promise for certain cohorts.
Yeah they do. All the time. Sure steps, stairs, kerbs, ice, uneven ground, vertigo, going beyond their capabilities (trying to act young again!), neuropathy, etc play their part but sometimes they just mix up their footing leaving the kitchen and hit the deck. Hell....pretty sure I've done that in my time and I'm only 48.
That for me is the important bit. I have been lucky enough to go to China and go to the park in the morning to see people doing Tai chi. And there were certainly many people doing it. But there were also people just stretching generally, walking, chatting, playing badminton, playing instruments, ballroom dancing and hacky sack. There doesn't seem anything intrinsically "different" about the moves of Tai chi from say doing a tango or foxtrot as far as I can see. Of course from a martial perspective they are different (if you're into that stuff) but really a solo form is really just a dance. Where it may differ I think is in the slowness (easy to cover up bad movement, lack of strength and balance by by being fast) and the control needed for that and the cognitive benefits of learning a new skill. Which I think is pretty well documented at this point as helping stave off age related deterioration?
Pffft... Tango is an external dancing art, it couldn't possibly have the same health benefits as the foxtrot!
Pardon me,allow me to amend that- ===Yea,esp. as this thread was "What is Internal?", not how slo-mo relaxed exercise can help,esp older individuals, improve balance,as well as provide a variety of other benefits.=== Happy now? I was involved in the balance enhancement discussion. I wasn't getting into Parkinson's therapy etc. Tell me if there is anything significantly new in the balance studies I haven't read before. I doubt it. It's quite possible I may have read some of these particular studies before they were published in the book. Oooh,sarcasm.From the individual who felt Swayze was doing a great TC demo. Altho' at my age I guess you're almost obligated to call me that-especially with all the couldnotpunchtheirwayoutofawetpaperbag masters we have around. In case that crack was because of the capitalization "DR. Wayne" that was a typo and no disrespect was intended. Dollars to doughnuts I've read far more things from the HMS than you. Not just TC related things. I imagine I've read many more studies on TC than yourself. So,were any of the Harvard studies in that book-since you say he wrote the book on TC medical benefits-on long time serious practitioners and their specific TC-(or related,like Pile Stance training)- health practices? Oxygen intake levels? White/red corpuscle counts?Bone density?Joint health?I've read such studies, with blood sampling,x-rays,etc. They're far more interesting than studies on kindergarten level TC. Some of them I read years ago may even have come from HMS. Because otherwise these studies are only on the benefits of a relaxed slo-mo exercise at its VERY basic performance levels. Here's a sample of a TC health practice beyond that,and beyond the ability level of of most people "doing" TC . (Sorry,can't get links to be active for some reason) That link is to a class of Docherty's TC. So? Do you even read the things you post? Sarcasm intended. Of course I'm better than the HMS.The HMS is an institution.It doesn't practice TC any more than Cornell Ag School does. I'm also better than jumping rope,fly fishing,or stamp collecting. Hmmmm....I'm certainly on record as going against some of the "titans" of TC in respect to their proliferation of fictional TC history. That includes headmasters of my own lines. Ain't I a wittle cuss,tho'? But where was I "against" any of the studies you mentioned? Did they do a comparative study on balance development in a 2 week period between TC,rope skipping,and executing/holding kicks/leg extensions? Tell me when they do. Maybe you can also enlighten me as to why my mother's P. therapist while quite impressed with the things I would tell her to aid in her performance of leg extensions didn't tell me I should just teach her TC instead and forget the extensions. Maybe he knows extensions are a quicker way to develop balance? Let me know if Dr. Wayne disagrees with what I stated about any similarly conducted exercise being able to provide the same benefits as TC at the basic level. And why.Make sure to quote me verbatim. OK,then.....after your previous trainings and then practicing TC for a year your touting Swayze's hideous performance could lead one to doubt your analytical abilities in the field of athletic performance and especially even at a 1 year beginner level as regards TC. Of course you could answer Aardia's questions she posted in that thread. You haven't. This all started simply because Wayne said it was "one of the best" , Mr. W disagreed, said practicing kicking developed balance and recovery of same sooner than TC form and I agreed. I can't speak for John but that's been my observation over years of seeing different MA schools/students train.Like TKD people.No one said TC didn't develop balance. You come off like it's the greatest balance development exercise ever-barring jump rope- just because someone published yet another study on seniors and balance. It may be one of the best in the long term for people not practicing balance beam or tightrope or other more difficult practices so maybe Mr. W's statement was too absolute and needed clarifying. but- When Mr. W said- you said- Where's your data to refute Mr. W.'s position? Did the world's top medical school proclaim TC as the best method in the world? If not then you're defending nothing."One of the best." And he and I agreed on a quicker method,evidence is admittedly anecdotal on my part as I haven't conducted any studies,just observed things for years. Guess physical therapists should all be teaching TC instead of the common leg extensions.Why don't they? Does it not seem there may be some validity when an individual whose main focus has always been TC agrees on a different and simpler method as producing results regarding balance quicker? Or am I back in that bar exercising my low self esteem and this time hating on TC and/or Harvard? But ah reckon wi'out thet thar Phd nuthin' ah think I knows abouts is true.Ya knows how iganerant us country hicks am!
"Harvard puff piece", now I'm wondering if all of these comments are from some sort of anti-American bias. I have to remember that this is mostly a Euro audience. It's one thing to attack my inexperience with TC. But you're attacking mainstream medical research into something specific, with really odd bias against of all places, Harvard. Yeah, I figured you were posturing again. Not a fair discussion if you're going to say things like this to act superior. El Medico, you really don't seem interested in having a civil, fair discussion so I'm not going to bother responding to your long winded walls of texts, in this thread or the other. I really don't have the time or energy to deal with internet know-it-alls especially martial arts ones. So please understand that every time you pull this trick, I'm not going to bother spending a lot of time refuting what you say, not because I can't, but because it's not worth the effort. Ok, So younajd others have been doing TC a long time and so what you say should outweigh what I'm reading from Harvard? No thanks, if I want a lecture I'll get it from the medical pros, not you. I posted legitimate medical research in the interest of the thread topic. Once again, for some odd reason, certain people on the board just want to beat a dead horse rather than simply acknowledge the research... The research speaks for itself. So does your attitude. Maybe it explains the silence around here, so much inter-community sniping of others interests. Oh well, it happens all over social media. Hope it feels great to be so superior to others and let them know it.
Seriously I'm done discussing Tai Chi on MAP. Not going to post anything, or comment again on the subject. Too many know it alls just ruins my interest. Can't have nice things because everyone needs to one up everyone else, rather that just chat and share notes like it should be. Can't just chat about research, need to dismantle the research and attack the messenger. This must be why "internal"and TC are so controversial a topic. It's all politics.
Well you are wondering wrong. There's none of that at all. What there is on MAP, and to some degrees has always been here, is anti-nonsense bias and a desire to analyse what people say and actually appraise martial arts for what they are rather for what people hope they are. It's nothing to do with politics or being anti-American. Ask David if the grilling him and his martial art got was due to us all being anti-American! Personally I seek out "know it alls" about a particular subject if they are clued up on it. That's kind of the point of knowledge and experience.
What's political is only wanting to hear the opinions of a man financially invested in the, not unsubstantial, Chinese alternative medicine industry, and disregard less biased reviews of swathes of research. You can talk about training Tai Chi all you want (I haven't seen anyone crashing the party in Aaradia's or Nachi's training logs), but if you're wanting an uncritical reception to rose-tinted interpretations of limited studies then I'm sure there are forums where that will happen.
Guess that YT link did work. Posturing? That was a reply to your smart remark on would I have trusted Oxford instead.If your gonna be a wiseguy don't start pouting when someone responds.Not acting superior. You're making a big deal about one research publication. One. Pot is callin' kettle something here as regards long winded. I fail to see my avoidance of a fair discussion.Civil? Don't call me sarcastic crap like "Master". In this instance these studies don't refute anything Mr. W and I stated. But that's an easy out,"not because I can't, but because it's not worth the effort".On a discussion board. What trick? You read some research and you seem to be the know-it-all.(And thanks for that insult). I'm always ready to revise my opinions and have many times over the years.You get entrenched in defending things whether it's some minor celebrity or a study that wasn't even under attack,just an alternative method presented. Presenting an alternate exercise method for a specific purpose doesn't outweigh anything,esp as TC was not declared the best method,just one of. So where was I denying the research? What attitude? Seems telling me I can't skip rope just because I disagree with you on efficiency of balance training exercises is attitude.Or calling me "Master".Outside of some sarcasm-in response to yours-what? Not sniping at your interests.Never have. I've always tried to be helpful since you joined.Haven't I? It's a discussion board,people disagree on things at times.We talk about them. Remember your "going on record against the Titans" remark? Mr. W and I disagree strongly on some things. He's a recognized master,far far far better at his main practice than I ever was at mine. But I'll still disagree with that Titan at times.That's what we're all here for,to talk,hash things out,learn things,maybe have our minds changed about something. All the years I've been on here never been accused of that,even by those I exposed as being full o' the Blarney.(Anyone remember RoadToad?). Only thing in this context I'm superior to you in is just knowledge/experience.(And having read more studies)Doesn't make me a better person than you,smarter than you, or anything. C'mon,Grond. I'm glad you joined MAP.Really.
Even if you fall on the flat land, you won't injury yourself that much. The downstairs falling that you fall from the top of the stair to the bottom of the stair that can hurt you seriously. The flat land falling can be protected by break fall. The downstairs falling may not be protected by break fall (because the edges).
How on earth did you arrive to that conclusion? As mostly an observer here, Grond you can't expect people to take calling them names. From what I got no one really disputes Taiji is bad. I guess it is a nice activity, it would improve balance and especially if it would be enjoyable for people so they would keep practicing regularly and longterm. Did anyone dispute that? If someone wanted a specific routine to treat problems with balance, sure, there would be more specific exercises that might have better effect. Did that study dispute that? Just stick to it if you enjoy it and it should bring some heatlh benefits. There's no need to stop talking about Taiji. There seem to be a lot of people who practiced Taiji here, who can offer advice from years of experience. And I don't think anyone said anything against the art. Just that it isn't a universal cure for everything (nothing is). It just seems to me you're quite uncritical towards your points of interest, be it Swayze or a study proving benefits of Taiji. Someone saying one or the other isn't the best out there isn't out of enmity. It is just a discussion pointing out weak points of said things. No need to defend them that much. It is still just a discussion, right? Why not start a training log? You can discuss your experience with Taiji, jumping rope, etc. freely. There aren't many active logs now!
