Here are the findings from a recent detailed 8 month study on a pivotal machine (Gallileo 2000).
- The study found significantly positive results for Bone Mass Density increase in post menopausal women using pivotal as compared to lineal machines. (4% increase at the hip;other 8 month studies with lineal machines with variety of protocols had given no significant increment in Bone Mass Density findings of Torvinen et al, 2003).
- It also found that this Whole Body Vibration (WBV) protocol was superior than 55 minutes of walking + 5 minutes stretching 3 times a week for developing Bone Mass Density.
- It found this WBV protocol superior to walking for developing a better balance in the subjects (29% for the WBV group and Nil for the walking group).
The amplitude used was 3mm, frequency 12.6 Hz, with static standing with knee flexion at a 60 degree angle, with a graduated increase in training sets starting with 3 sets x 1 minute reaching 6 sets x 1minute, with 1 minute rest in between. Training was 3 times a week.
Points For Discussion
(1) Do the findings and referenced research literature of this study confirm experiential findings that lineal machines do not improve balance in the static standing only position? If so, are there any positions that can be used with a lineal machine to improve balance for example standing with one leg on the machine and the other on a non-moving stable same height platform?
(2) Similarly, in the standing position only exercise, is there confirmation that in lineal machines the Bone Mass Density does not really increase (what about golgi bodies stimulating bone mineralization as per other studies?)
(3) Researchers here are citing studies that higher frequencies of 35-40 Hz using a pivotal machine 3 times a week with 4-6 sets would be beneficial for the elderly for balance improvement. How does this co-relate with guidelines on this site that recommend pivotal vibrations do not exceed 30 Hz?
Article submitted by Green.
There is peer-reviewed research showing bone-mass beneficial effects from the use of vertical WBV devices. For instance JOURNAL OF BONE AND MINERAL RESEARCH; Volume 19, Number 3, 2004; Prevention of Postmenopausal Bone Loss by a Low-Magnitude, High-Frequency Mechanical Stimuli: A Clinical Trial Assessing Compliance, Efficacy, and Safety; by Rubin et al.
I have several other articles in my bibliography. After reading several of these articles, one realizes tha bone mass gain is induced by g acceleration. This can be obtained with both tilting platforms and vertical platforms.
The advantage of vertical platforms over titling platforms emerges in muscle toning. So if you only care about bone mass, use either a tilting or a vertical platform. If you are concerned with bone mass and muscle toning, definitely use a vertical platform.
Thanks for the info about g force helping with the bone density. That is my wife’s biggest concern.
What about the frequency for maximizing the BMD? Is the maximum benefit for that in 10 range? Will the same benefit happen at a higher fq over a longer period of time?
Thanks to all of you experts for your help.
I suspect the regular resistance training prescribed may not have included exercises (i.e., squats, leg press) at a sufficient enough intensity to stress the bone enough. Just a guess.
Interesting comment on the study not stating whether the supplements were used or not.