Sorry. So why does, why does the narrow ISA have less space than the wide? I would think it's the other way around.

No.

What's heavier? Always remember that you're measuring in reference to the table. The arm really doesn't weigh as much as the leg does. If you had a big, gigantic arm on one side and a normal sized arm on the other side, chances are when you try to internally rotate it with a big, giant arm, it wouldn't have turned the spine nearly as much. You would have a measurement that would be more representative of a limitation. When you bring the leg up over the hip and it pushes the hip into the table, you'll get a true representation of the limitation of internal rotation. The arm being lighter, everything just kind of turns with it. You have to discern these things. Whenever you're measuring a limb, you're measuring the entire body moving. If the question is how much does the hip move, how much does one side of the pelvis move, how much does the spine move as you're performing these measures, that's how we figure this out.

All right. So you're asking a question about a multifactorial process. All of those things matter, and then to whatever varying degree, right? Some can compensate for other elements.

Yes, sir. Do I need to? Sorry. That's not the thing. No problem. into consideration when loading. Is it going to be the same thing? Is it going to be creating a situation that I don't want if I do that on both sides? Did I have one side that's like an EQI, like an asymmetric, almost an EQI? Would that be a better fit for one side or the other? I'm just trying to figure out best way to load.

I mean, that's sort of the right side too though, right?

Yes.

Well, how do you create posterior expansion of discs? Well, you have to have compression on the opposite side.

Yeah.

That's what I was saying. You're picking up your left foot. Okay, somebody needs to mute. So you pick up your left foot, center of gravity is going to fall to the left, right? It's going to move to the left, down. It's going to move down into the left. Am I correct?

Like a stepping foot. And in that situation, you would probably want to see the pelvis also kind of roll back and forth.

In your video on rolling, you said that you're going to have a yielding strategy on the right side. Correct. Which is confusing to me because the right side is moving forward, the left side is staying back.

All right, so I've been thinking about this over the last couple of weeks. And finally had an epiphany the other night, which kept me up until around 3 a.m. as I was working through it. So, feel free to let me know if I'm totally off base here, but I'm hoping I'm on the right track. So it has to do with basically direction of force. So there are three pictures that I've been working with that have, we have a force plate mound and they're very jumpy, meaning they kind of lose connection with the mound. Does that make sense?

Yeah. So it's sneaky. But if you understand what the possibilities are, then it helps you get out your chest boards, right? Okay. Yeah. As I say, all measurements are dirty, which means that the whole body is represented in each of your measures. So let me give you another instance. When you look at the shoulder internal rotation measure on the left side, right? You got a pretty decent measure there compared to what your left hip was representing. The left hip IR is only about five, and you get 60 IR on the shoulder, and you go, what's going on there? Well, if you're laying on the table and you're twisted this way, guess what? Your neck is turning this way, right? Your lower cervical spine is going this way. That's going to magnify your internal rotation measurement of your shoulder because you're not measuring just shoulder motion. You're measuring internal rotation. And so if that spine is turning away, that magnifies your internal rotation. So that's how you identify these things.

Yeah, that does. I appreciate it.

Excellent. You're very welcome, sir. Is there anything else I can answer for you? You have one minute and 15 seconds.

Would I get some sort of benefit out of that from a yielding capability?

The other thing I was considering was the rate of connective tissue loading as he's moving. It's one thing to have him breathe in a static position, all these things, but as soon as he's moving quickly, it obviously increases stiffness, like you've mentioned multiple times.

And then so some of this can be, if he modifies his seat height a little bit, he's actually going to make it a little bit easier for him to get his hands into position. So he might be actually sitting low. Have him elevate the seat just a little bit and see if that prolongs his ability to tolerate the position. But ultimately, I think that what you're going to end up doing is you're going to have to get AP expansion, but start driving like true internal rotation from proximal to distal. Because like I said, chances are he's already pronated down into his hand if he's getting hand symptoms.

So a sprinter, if you didn't have the stiffness of the skeleton, they would not be able to bounce across the ground the way they do.

We're good. Keep going.

All right. Appreciate it. Have a great day. You too. Bye.

If I increase relative motions, that would decrease force production capabilities, and vice versa. Yes, I'm having a hard time understanding why that would be.

Okay. So let's start with the foot representation first. So we're very clear on what we mean by a heels elevated representation. So what I want to have is I want to have the foot on the platform. All right. So it's one platform because if I just have the heel elevated and I have the toes extended, I put myself in a late representation, which means that I won't get the yielding action that I want in the bottom of the squat.

Right. Yeah. Cause the whole thing did it.

Right. Yeah, so it's like with the chain, you're not going to get the unloading of the guts when you're using chains.

Yeah, I think that the confusion lies in what the intention really is because most people think that if I'm applying resistance to something, then force production is my goal. When that's not really the case, what we're doing is we're manipulating forces to allow us to accomplish a specific outcome. And so again, if I'm trying to capture motion, I can definitely use the elastic resistance to my advantage. But what are the secondary consequences? We always have to consider secondary consequences. Right? Is there something that am I creating interference for? So again, high resistance—a high resistance band chop—creates interference for relative motion in the actual skeleton but it also may buy me the extremity position that I wanted in the first place. Now now I'm fulfilling my goal. It's like, so we have to define, we have to be better at defining what our intention is, and now we just follow the principle. So again, elastic resistance follows a very specific principle: the greater the elongation or compression of an elastic element, the more force is going to be applied. That's the rule. That's Hooke's law, right? It's Hooke's law. So as long as we understand how to apply Hooke's law and then how does our system behave under those circumstances, now we can make better choices.

Yeah.

I don't have the potential to restore the eccentric orientation that is required. So orientations first, ER somewhere, right? ER field somewhere, sorry. ER somewhere, usually in the sequence in which it was laid down, and then IR superimposed on top of that. So again, if we're looking at a wide ISA with anti-orientation, restore the capacity to move the pelvis forward and backward through space. So basically I'm anti-leuranted. I'm gonna teach them how to posterior orient. I'm gonna expand the ER field, usually from the bottom up. That's how the lungs fill. I'm gonna restore it from the bottom up. So now I'm thinking like posterior lower thorax, I gotta get expansion there. And then I can go after something like pump handle and get the IR. Does that make sense?

Yeah, absolutely.