this is actually not the most current research, ACL prevention is not about strengthening supporting muscles but rather training the neural networks
New Girls DA Clubs Announced
- Thread starter Desert Hound
- Start date
Playmaker38
BRONZE
I can see how that would be true. What I would see as strengthening the muscles around the ligaments (the jumping and landing I see in pregame and warm ups) could definitely also be part of training the neural networks. One and the same I imagine.
Definitely no expert on ACL prevention. Just not a fan of the rhetoric being spewed by EOL
No, it has nothing to do with strengthening the muscle around the ligaments. That's what I used to think but that is not the current research. It is the neural pathways between the muscle movements and the brain. May not like EOL but he does have some accurate knowledge.
Can you explain that? I understand the need to retrain neural pathways after an injury. But what does neural pathways have to do with injury prevention if you have never had neural pathway damage? I’m certainly no expert, but everything I’ve read about neural pathways has to do with preventing a second ACL injury after the first injury. Thanks for the help.
Here is one article that talks about this and how neuroplastic changes in the brain rather than strength training are an important part of ACL prevention.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2938326/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2938326/
Here is the Summary paragraph --
In young female athletes, ACL tears are a common and debilitating injury. Given the detrimental effect of ACL injury, considerable effort has been directed toward the development of injury-prevention strategies. Although ACL injury-prevention training is being advocated in various sport settings, programs are being implemented without a thorough understanding of why they work and how they are best delivered. Ongoing research suggests that the protective effect afforded by injury-prevention training may be the result of skill acquisition associated with central adaptations (ie, motor learning). Future research efforts should be directed at identifying optimal training methods that elicit long-term changes in behavior that are considered ACL protective.
I don't see how that supports the "neural networks" argument.
Soccerfan2
GOLD
This pilot study was performed on 4 females...
You might also want to read more about how settled the science is regarding the pill and ACL prevention before giving EOL any credit for accurate knowledge.
I’m glad there is ongoing research and over time as it continues I’m sure we’ll get a better understanding, but for now these are just ideas to be studied further. My kid will definitely not be skipping the weight room.
You might also want to read more about how settled the science is regarding the pill and ACL prevention before giving EOL any credit for accurate knowledge.
I’m glad there is ongoing research and over time as it continues I’m sure we’ll get a better understanding, but for now these are just ideas to be studied further. My kid will definitely not be skipping the weight room.
I hesitated to even get into this with this crowd because no one looks into the research but rather focuses on tearing down the individual posts to to debate statements made This was only one article that I posted that I thought would be a simple one to shift through. There is more research about this not just this one study. This research direction is about making a link to reinforcing cognitive links between the musculature and the nerve excitability which comes from the brain. These are neural networks. You can do your own research on neur0muscular training (or also called INT) and ACL injury prevention. You can also talk to the doctors at the CHLA youth sports medicine program.
My comment about EOL was not in regards to the pill. I don't really have a comment about this but rather some of the other posts. I get there is a lot of hating on EOL but EOL does make some valid points. It is helpful to do the research to see what is out there, not just debate a lowly poster on a public forum.
My comment about EOL was not in regards to the pill. I don't really have a comment about this but rather some of the other posts. I get there is a lot of hating on EOL but EOL does make some valid points. It is helpful to do the research to see what is out there, not just debate a lowly poster on a public forum.
Soccerfan2
GOLD
I have read all the research that is out there on this topic. Your conclusion that developing supporting muscles to prevent ACL injuries is not important is inaccurate. That is not to say there are not other contributing factors although I don’t think that science is settled yet.
I do agree with CHLA’s advice on their website about how to help prevent ACL injuries. They have not abandoned strength training:
I do agree with CHLA’s advice on their website about how to help prevent ACL injuries. They have not abandoned strength training:
- Don’t forget your “core:” The core muscles that include your abdominal, back, buttock and hip muscles help to stabilize your body so that you are putting less stress on your knees and ankles. Multiple training programs that target the core as well as incorporating plyometrics and movement training exercises have been shown to decrease the risk of an ACL tear.
Wow, that is very impressive that you have read ALL the research that is out there. Not sure that is possible but maybe you are an orthopedic surgeon or similar to have looked at ALL the research on this topic. This is why I don’t start discussions on these types of topics because the energy is about trying to discredit a poster rather than having a real discussion about the research. The original comment was on strengthening the muscles around the knee joint and how THAT is not effective. No one said anything about building core strength. Of course that is necessary and helpful. Like I said, everyone can look at the research and I am not going to go back and forth about this. Thought I would put something helpful out there but don’t have a need to debate the information.
And by the way, your quote above reinforces what I am talking about...incorporating plyometrics and movement training exercises, not strength training around the knee joint
And by the way, your quote above reinforces what I am talking about...incorporating plyometrics and movement training exercises, not strength training around the knee joint
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
Neural pathways and ACL injury prevention...that just sounds like training the brain to tell your body to jump out of the way before a bone crushing tackle.
End of the Line
SILVER ELITE
This is great stuff. In a discussion about knee injury avoidance, the best you can do is claim that the pill makes women violent and fat and then change the subject to heading soccer balls? You must have learned how to debate in anti-vaxer school.
The actual content of the article you referenced includes this point (which I consider to be the essential element of it) --
We (Pollard et al) demonstrated that increased use of the hip musculature appears to underlie the protective effect afforded by injury-prevention training. More specifically, girls, adolescent girls, and women who underwent a 10-week ACL injury-prevention training program decreased their knee-extensor moments and increased their hip-extensor moments during landing. Furthermore, greater energy was absorbed at the hip (relative to the knee) posttraining. As a result of these findings, we have proposed that injury-prevention training may decrease mechanical loading at the knee through increased use of the hip musculature.
I read that, in the context of the article, to be saying that the incidence of knee injuries in female athletes can be reduced by teaching them a different way to jump and land. Kind of like ballet vs. breakdance.
Soccerfan2
GOLD
Strengthening all muscles is important. It is precisely because other muscles are strong that the load does not land entirely on the knee ligaments. Neuromuscular adaptation is generated by resistance training AND explicitly taught movement patterns. I have no query with the idea that explicitly teaching movement patterns might be beneficial. However, there are no muscles around the knee (quad, glutes - which are considered core but are involved in knee action, hamstring) that should not be strengthened. Also, the purpose of plyometrics is to build strength (it uses multiple muscle groups in tandem). I don’t want to discredit any poster, only ideas. I would guess we actually agree on a lot here. My debate is only with the idea that strengthening muscles is no longer important.
Many years ago I took Cramer Chemical Company's correspondence course on athletic training. There were many things in that course that I had never heard of before. One that has stuck with me over the years is that isolated development of muscle strength not related to the sport in which an athlete is going to participate can be destructive, and knees were used as an example - it is possible, for instance, to build up enough strength in the big muscles through weight or resistance training so that the muscle can tear up joints to which they are attached (or whose movement they effect) when a situation occurs during the sporting activity that is outside of the stresses encountered during the muscle development training. The rule of thumb was that big muscles can tear up small muscles, so those small muscles (the ones that align and/or stabilize joints during the operation of the joint in question) need to be developed as well.
Playmaker38
BRONZE
Again, this is you taking statements and using them to suit your argument. I said the side effects of some pills can cause violent mood swings and also can cause weight gain, therefore arbitrarily using the pill to prevent ACL tears doesn’t seem like the best solution.
The statement about heading was based on the fact that you seem to think the research that you have found is a catch all for why the DA is horrible and causes ACL tears. I wanted to see if using research to support actions only applies to tearing down the DA or if you as a person are as vigorous in using widely available research to other areas of importance in soccer.
You have since avoided having an opinion on the matter, which is fine. You could just say you don’t have an opinion.
For instance, my opinion, heading isn’t necessarily a good thing but it is a necessary part of soccer
Soccerfan2
GOLD
Espola, yes for sure, and I’m not advocating aiming for huge muscle gains. What I’m talking about is running sport participants (like soccer players) who overdevelop quads and underdevelop hamstrings and glutes. Some simple resistance training and plyo to balance things out is likely the most beneficial thing most girls and women can do to effectively counteract ACL injury risk.
End of the Line
SILVER ELITE
You should know by now that the typical attempts at evasion don't work with me. However, since you're so intent on discussing head injury avoidance, fine, because it further illustrates the main point that GDA is such a crappy product.
In 2015-16, USSF made an exception to its stupid no re-entry and limited sub rules for head injuries to provide more time for staff to evaluate players and conduct concussion protocol. Prior to making the exception, evaluation of head injuries were often rushed and inaccurate due to the pressures placed on coaches to make quick decisions while unnecessarily having to play down a player. USSF made the change after carefully evaluating 5 years of DA data and proactively researching the issue extensively with experts, right? Wrong. It was essentially forced to do so after getting sued in a class action lawsuit by people who actually cared about the safety of the kids affected by USSF's stupid rules (and often lack of them). Let it soak in for a second. It took a freakin' lawsuit for USSF to protect kids from the possibility of, well, dying unnecessarily.
If it took a major highly publicized lawsuit for USSF to protect children from a risk of death, what makes you think it cares about your kid's knees, or their health at all? Do you know what other change USSF made after the class action was filed BTW? Adding mandatory arbitration to its waiver to prevent future class actions that might seek to further protect the safety of children. Yes, USSF certainly learned its lesson.
And if exceptions to the GDA's no re-entry and limited substitution rules are needed to properly evaluate head injuries without putting undue pressure on coaches and trainers to hurriedly diagnose the injury, why only head injuries? Why should coaches and trainers continue to be rushed to evaluate any potential medical emergency, including heat stroke, asthma, knee or ankle injuries, or anything? Is it because most other injuries realistically only present a risk of major surgery or allow USSF to point the finger at someone else for things like asthma (the parents knew she had it) and heat stroke (the club should have given her more water or a heat break)? Is it because USSF just hasn't gotten sued yet for other stuff? With respect to asthma BTW, you should look out at the CO showcase since it can easily be confused with altitude sickness. The good news though is it will be a non-issue for those who follow a certain someone's advice to miss a couple extra school days to get acclimated. Hopefully it will snow, also making heat stroke a non-issue.
Seriously, why are you defending rules that have no legitimate basis to exist? Why are people defending CO as the ideal location to play soccer in April, when it's more likely to snow there than MN? Why are people arguing that the week before finals is a great time to fly across the country and miss 3 days of school? Why are people defending the HS ban when it was inevitable to result in virtually all the best clubs in the country to fleeing GDA?
But, in answer to your question, its great that USSF took some action on headers and head injuries, even if it only did so because it got sued. But the exact same reasoning for making an exception to the no re-entry and limited substitution rules to evaluate potential head injuries applies equally for all types of injuries, and it shouldn't take another lawsuit to make that happen. The GDA no re-entry and limited substitution rules just shouldn't exist.
Chris Knight
SILVER
Decent stuff End o' Line with the exception of this peculiar outlier ...
"Why are people defending CO as the ideal location to play soccer in April, when it's more likely to snow there than MN?"
The obvious answer being that it's also more likely to be a sunny and dry 75F.