Vibration Training: Glossary of Terms
There are a number of terms used in discussion of whole body vibration that need to be clearly defined.
If you have any terms to add, please enter a comment below.
3-D (3 Dimensional)
This means the plate moves in 3 directions during the vibration. Up and down, side to side, and front to back.
Amplitude
How high the platform moves during it is vibrating.
Commercial Unit
A commercial unit is designed as a projected income for a high end-use studio or gym. Should be serviceable for a period of 10 years+. Should have no feasible weight restrictions.
Contraindications
A list of reasons why you cannot use a particular unit. Note: One list may not apply to all machines. Some are safer.
Domestic Unit
Home unit designed for personal use. Depending on quality may or may not be used for weight loss.
Dynamic
This is moving (eg. jumping, moving push-up etc… ) while the machine is running.
Frequency (Fq)
How fast the platform moves while it is vibrating. Measured in Hertz (Hz).
G-Force
This is dictated by the speed of the platform during its upward movement in the vibration. For example; when someone is put in a rocket and fired towards space - gravity is still trying to pull you back. But because you are moving in the opposite direction to gravity you become temporarily “heavy”. In Vibration Training terms this would be one indication of how hard your muscles need to work to stay in a given position.
ISO 2631
This is an industry term used to relate safe exposure to vibrations in humans. These ongoing studies mainly revolve around occupational and workplace exposure (e.g. truck drivers, road works, construction workers etc.). However the research will and should be taken into account for voluntary exposure such as Vibration Training.
kN (Kilonewton)
This is a measurement of force in the vibration. Dictated to by the mass X speed of the platform.
Lineal
A solid platform that moves straight up and down, all across the surface at the same time.
Pivotal
A platform that tilts from side to side - so one foot goes up while the other goes down.
Professional (Pro) Unit
Unit designed for professional practices like Physiotherapists or small gyms. May also be used in studios but will have a limited lifespan and because of cost may have weight restrictions.
Static
This is holding a pose in a position without moving while the machine is running.
Vibration Therapy (Purpose Built Machine)
Using Kinetic Vibration to cause movement and circulation in tissue, with the aim to assist in stretching, breaking down of scar tissue , or a healing process.
Vibration Training (Purpose Built Machine)
Using Kinetic Vibration as a form of maintaining a base fitness level, weight loss or performance enhancement.
60 Comments
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 12th, 2007Di,
Your explanations where close. Here are some clarifications:
WBV is actually a more broad term used to describe vibration that is distributed to most of the body. This can be via a vibration platform, but also through your car, a dump truck, factory floor, etc. This term was developed in the industrial vibration field and has been used in research for a long time. The research being performed at this time in regard to WBV as a training or therapy tool also uses this acronym. This is the most appropriate term for the vibration applications being discussed on this site.
On the same line as this, vibration therapy is also a broad term used in other fields besides those discussed on this site. In fact, it is believed that the vibrations from a harp can have a therapeutic effect on patients. Care must be taken to use full terminology when talking about vibration platform therapy. My preference is WBV Therapy since there is also a term called direct vibration (vibration on a single body part, which is how much of vibration began historically). Also, I would prefer WBV Training as to just Vibration Training, since direct vibration also has show training effects.
Lastly, I would not suggest using the myotatic reflex as the explanation for the results seen with WBV. There is research (Jackson & Turner, 2003) that shows that there are possible central (e.g. brain, polysynaptic) effects of vibration. The mechanisms of WBV are not fully understood. Stretch (myotatic) reflex is a very basic explanation for how vibration influences the muscles, very possibly too simple. Almost all (if not all) of the manufactures’ information comes from a few of the original manufactures explanations; however, these have not really been investigated.
There is a reason I use the term Vibration Training as opposed to WBV Training. The internet and other published material on ISO regulations all start with “WBV” . And people would have to wade through a ton of stuff about ” white finger etc..” and other problems machinery operators get , before they found the right site.
Remember when I started writing material in 2003 there was nothing on the net for the consumer.
And yes the Myotatic reflex only plays a small part in the reactions caused by a Training model. This small reflex was used in the past though to help the public understand the basic principle.
“Your movement can sometimes be involuntary” .
Another thing to note:
You can lose the public very easily by over explaining things in the beginning , academics are usually the worst at relaying a message to the public. They simply cant resist the urge to “show off” their intelect by using terms and explainations that only their peers would understand .
If you look at the explainations from PowerPlate Galileo etc.. pre-2004 about how Vibrations effect the body you will see what I mean.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 13th, 2007To make my point that “Vibration Training” is a less specific word, I did a little comparison in Google (with and without Boolean, since not everyone uses it). The exact search terms and results listed are as follows:
vibration - 38,800,000
WBV OR whole body vibration - 2,000,000
WBV OR “whole body vibration” - 1,200,000vibration training - 2,250,000
“vibration training” - 68,500
WBV Training OR whole body vibration training - 19,300
“WBV Training” OR “whole body vibration training” - 699vibration therapy - 1,780,000
“vibration therapy” - 40,600
WBV Therapy OR whole body vibration therapy - 804
“WBV Therapy” OR “whole body vibration therapy - 572As you can see, using WBV reduces the number of results. Given that this does not say anything about the content of the hits, I looked at the first results page and found more content about industrial vibration with using “vibration training” than using “WBV training”. I know that you began using this term in an era when there wasn’t much information; however, I think it is time to change this terminology to help the consumer better sort through all of the information.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 13th, 2007The comment on academics and their need to “show off” is one that has no merit and is an insult to me and all of academia. Articles written in peer reviewed journals are written with the audience being peers. What manufacturers, marketing depts, and the media do with these articles is not a result of the academics.
And some of the explanations given on this site by “experts” have been incorrect (or only theoretical presented as truth), only adding to the disservice to consumers.
- KG
July 13th, 2007Oh Boy….
This is gonna get good!
- Di Heap
July 13th, 2007I did realise that wbv has a wider meaning but it is used in the wbv training/wbv therapy industry as an acronym for “the experience of being on the vibrating machine”. I have also used Google long ago, with and without Boolean. Interestingly wbv on it’s own brings up sites related to wbv training/therapy first and industrial articles later. If I google specific brandnames I get a higher result but as these are trademarked names they can’t be used to describe the experience.
WBV Training/Therapy Studio users need to be able to use an explanatory term in everyday speech
I just use the term “training” which doesn’t explain at all but my family know what I mean. “Vibration Training” and “Vibration Therapy” seem to me to be the best available terms to date and they’re free to use (not trademarked). “Vibe” is a little too close to another industry and “acceleration training” coined by power-plate recently is already a sports industry term plus in use in other industries. So until a new term is provided that gives meaning to the experience, I’ll go with “Vibration Training” when the use is general fitness, health improvement - as an aid to weightloss, and sports specific use and “Vibration Therapy” when a specifically used for therapy, rehabilitation after injury, osteoporosis etc. I think I’ll be understood.
My experience and investigations this year have shown me so many differing machines it’s impossible to make one term fit all. The points I try to make clear when I tell people about this industry are: 1. make sure you know that the machine you are using does what it’s advertising says it does and isn’t relying on studies done on other machines to promote itself. 2.Understand the difference between lineal and pivotal machines and their respective uses. 3. Understand the difference between therapy and training and be sure you use a machine that gives the results you want.
If my explanations or observations are not strictly correct they are given as a Consumer and Interested Sports Performance Student, not as a Professional or Manager within the industry.
David, yes I can see that there could be polysynaptic response maybe as an inverse stretch reflex or if using dynamic or contraction poses.
I’ve take friends and family to Vibration Training and used the simple terms (stretch reflex etc) to explain to them what they experience. I agree with David M. Bazett-Jones, that some explanations have been incorrect. I have even seen new peer-reviewed articles in authoritative publications like the Journal of Strength and Conditioning research, with incorrect conclusions. The latest appeared in the JSCR, May 2007 issue: a study by Spanish researchers stated that as we move up on the body, different body parts would vibrate at different frequencies. This is incorrect and shows how little even researchers understand of the basics of vibration. I don’t mean to bash on researchers but only to the fact that this is still a fledgling field, and that we only see the tip of the iceberg.
I also would like to point out that 3-D vibration is a misnomer. Power Plate uses this term in their marketing material, and many others do too (I heard it this morning again at a PowerPlate presentation at the NSCA Symposium).
Manufacturers in the industry try to build platforms that vibrate vertically, and the platforms happen to shake a little bit horizontally, caused by engineering limitations, but it is a minimal effect. However, they are unwanted effects. Actually if you shake a platform in three directions at the same time, the resulting movement is either circular, or elliptical or diagonal, depending on how the three movements along the X, Y and Z axis combine with each other.
I didn’t mean to show off, but only to correct some information, which if we keep feeding to the public will do the industry a disservice.
This is interesting about terms etc. We need the scientists to do research and clear things up - especially as it relates to actual implementation/protocols. In the US, there are at least two vibration companies I know of that have “hired” well-known performance specialists (who aren’t scientists) to “develop protocols.” We need interaction between scientists and practitioners. This is much the same as the athletic strength and conditioning programs at universities in the US having little or no interaction with the academic departments at the same universities. I have continually contacted scientists in the US about doing vibration research - and I mean research that will add to the understanding of how to best implement - especially for athletes as this is my main area of interest. I actually met a former Soviet scientist (lives in Belarus) in LA in 04 and have his dissertation. While he was far from the first in the USSR to study vibration (he really began looking at it in 80’s) I think the credit for the modern use of vibration should go to the Soviets. Additionally, his dissertation is 423 pgs long and all the experiments were done on athletes.
Settle down KG , yes this is going to get good….
My points will be simple and hard to dispute but I am sure David in the spirit of this forum will try. I will leave the theory of “how” Vibration Training works till later.(1) Why was a repeat of the vertical jump height test done ? I have read dozens of these . Are you aware the core of our industry is trying to cure obesity and help the elderly move better. Not make them jump higher.
Remember ,you tested young already healthy athletes ?
(2) Please name in which exact area has the technology improved due to a universities research. I have yet to see a single report that helped me build a better unit or design a safer program.
(3) You mention the ethical responsability of the manufacturor but you voluntarily work with PowerPlate ? Knowing full well your work will probably be picked apart and used for marketing if any positive results are found, whilst burying any negative reports. This fact about PowerPlate was well known by 2005. It was all over the net.
Note: I have seen the documents PowerPlate make researchers sign before they can start tests. Researcher like Dr. Marco Cardinal have refused to sign such documents in the past because of these concerns.
What are you going to do when this happens to you ?.
(4) In the “process” of testing the Plate for inconsistency. This only takes half an hour max and should have been done before any tests were carried out. Note: the test you did was “unloaded” but you are trying to test what happens when you put someone on it ?
Are you aware…
A change of only 3hz can effect an outcome dramatically.
eg…. “Slippage” is how much actual speed is lost between the motors and the Fq inverter ( 2-5%). Some of this is inherent in motors but made much worse by a load and can vary in speed according to the design. Most units will lose about 2hz just in slippage alone.
And again this is only one variable that has to be accounted for.
I am sorry David but I have to say this. Even if your tests show an outcome at a certain speed at a certain amplitude etc… because you had no idea what the Plate was actually doing in Physics terms your results will be impossable to duplicate so will be invalid.
Just like the reports released to date , they will be used very effectively to baffle the public with bullshit by marketers .
Now to make things clear. I am not having a go at you David, in fact the point of this is to help you understand what you are up against as a researcher ( unethical manufacturors , unethical marketers , public perception etc.. ) so if we ever do meet , which I am sure is a fate accompli by now , we are heading in the same direction.
When we do meet I pledge to give you “everything” you need to do your job effectively.
I would dare say that when any research originating from the PowerPlate or other uncalibrated models is peer reviewed they will not pass.
As when word gets around that the tests had no true base theoretical line they HAVE to be made invalid. And will not be published.
I feel sorry for any researchers out there that have just wasted a couple of years. But you all know who to blame.
David….
For your study, you may want to note we recorded a 23% error rating ( unloaded , no-one on it ) on the advertised specs on the very model you used.
Please inform us how you are going to account for that high a figure .
Come on David…
I was expecting a response from you about your predicament. Or are you going to just ignore the problem and publish your results anyway.
That would be very unfortunate for our industry.
Di,
You sound like someone that has been exposed to the vibration language for a bit now, but imagine if you had only briefly heard of it on the news or an infomercial. Would you want to look up “vibration therapy” in which you get hits about someone using a harp to help with cancer or about using the DMS (deep muscle stimulator, a handheld vibration device), when in reality, you are looking for whole body vibration? For experienced users, shortening it to vibration therapy or training is perfectly acceptable. My concern is that individuals will think that the DMS (which has not scientific backing) is the same or similar to WBV. That is why I prefer WBV Training or Therapy. The experience that you have is of the whole body, and WBV Training would be more specific.
As far as the trademarked comment, please note that trademarking WBV or WBV Training/Therapy is like trying to trademark strength training. It would be virtually impossible since these terms have been around for quite some time.
The experience that you have is of the whole body (unless you only place a single limb on the platform), and WBV Training would be more specific. Also, this term is not going to differ between machines. Contrary to what has been said on this site, listing a machine as training or therapy really has little reasoning behind it. If a machine is of low quality, then why should we use it to treat the sick? This makes no sense to me. Now if we are going to talk using a machine for training or for therapy, then we should not say that this machine is good for one but not for the other. It needs to be talked about in terms of vibration characteristics (frequency, amplitude). Individuals who are interested in training should use machines that have higher frequency and amplitude settings, given that this has an effect on the intensity. In the same context, it seems that individuals who are looking for therapy use, should seek machines with lower frequency and amplitude settings (more so lower amplitude settings in my view). Additionally, it may be suggested that individuals with lower extremity injuries should be use devices that have any horizontal movement (3-D or tilting vibration) since we know that sheering is how ACLs are torn. All of this is only my own theory, having researched WBV for a few years. None of this is proven by anyone, nor has anyone attempted to prove it as of yet. I want it to be clear the that there is little known for sure about WBV. (Please do not respond to this comment/paragraph here, I will also post this section under http://www.vibrationtraining.net/2006/10/the-difference-between-therapy-and-training-machines).
As far as the stretch reflex, you can use any terminology to describe it you want to. You just need to know that this is not the simplest term, given that we don’t know the mechanism of WBV and still are working to understand the stretch reflex. I personally just say that it causes involuntary muscle contractions in order to keep it as simple as possible.
Just remember that while some “Shawisms” are correct (or close); they are not all accurate or agreed upon in the WBV community. (Not a knock on Lloyd or you for following in his thinking since we need more passionate individuals like him in this industry, except those that are passionate about making a buck.)
- John Weatherly
July 17th, 2007I agree that the elderly population and health concerns are the most important areas vibration may be able to influence. This just points out again the need for research. Scientists - at least in US - should be able to get grant money from NIH given the studies that have been done (mainly in other countries)showing benefits like improved movement/balance in the elderly etc. They could also “piggyback” some athletic research in with this one would think. One scientist who I have shared with about vibration since 03 recently took a position as Dept Chair at a major university in US. At his prior position, he seeemed frustrated often commenting that he needed grant money and to do some of the things I was interested in (like performance stuff for athletes, vibration etc.) he would have to tie it in with health and ride it “piggyback” which is actually what he called it - “piggyback” - not a scientific term but slang for the fact he needed grant money. Meanwhile, we have the marketers etc. like I previously mentioned about the vibration companies “hiring” well-known performance specialitst in US to “create vibration protocols” etc. Where is/are the science and the scientists in this?
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 17th, 2007Giovanni,
Just to clarify, the different parts of the body do vibration at differing frequencies. And it may be that as the vibrations move up the body and are absorbed, their frequencies may change. However, this is not known; nor is it known how the amplitude changes. This is a very hard thing to measure. However, we can hypothesize that vibration in bone is going to be transmitted and absorbed differently than in muscle. This is the same argument that a steel vibration plate is going to transmit vibrations differently than a plastic one. All that being said, none of this has been proven by scientific research (which may take years, unfortunately).
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 17th, 2007John,
This is a very astute observation. I think this is very difficult in the fitness industry since there are many individuals who do not understand research and therefore, become confused or misunderstand research articles. Reading research is very difficult and takes years to even be able to do it well. I know that bridging the gap between science and practice is a goal of the NSCA and their Strength and Conditioning Journal does a good job of this. However, there is much about WBV that is unknown. I think there are many people who are developing good protocols, like the ones used by Lloyd and others. They are pretty much flying blind because there is little evidence of what a good program looks like. Until we understand the mechanisms, it is very difficult to say what works.
This is the dilemma faced by researchers as addressed by your second comment. Research needs funding since this is our income and job stability. And, believe me, there isn’t much funding is athletic related research! As far as “piggy-backing,” I know exactly what you are talking about. That is why, as a researcher, I must have more diverse interests than just in athletics (which I am very interested in). I personally am in the process of performing pilot studies on various platforms in populations such as wheel chair bound, multiple sclerosis, and osteoporosis. My hope is to get enough initial data to gain NIH funding (which is VERY hard to get). Until then, I must spend hours upon hours searching for funding opportunities, not to mention writing the grant applications (so my apologies if I don’t respond sooner than most).
I am biased because I think it works, even though I will not claim that I know yet how it works. I must acknowledge that bias, just as everyone that has some sort of bias should, and be careful that my research does not reflect this bias. All that being said, it is my personal belief that there is much more work needed in this field and it will take much work to find out whether these “well-known performance specialists” are correct or not in the programs they create. Time will tell.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 17th, 2007Ok Lloyd,
Now to address your comments:
I feel that it is ironic that you are calling me out for not answering right away and questioning my ethics in regards to my research (“ignore and publish anyway”). So, here you go:
In regard to the first comment that was posted, I will not address this here since this has been double posted (for reasons only Lloyd knows). I will address it in the correct “track” or whatever it is called. (http://www.vibrationtraining.net/2007/07/soloflex-weight-loss-claims-untrue)
The ironic part is that you have not answered my comment in regard to vibration terminology (which is what this track is about). Please do so.
And now on to ethics:
1) You sell your self as purely ethical; however, I think many forget that you are invested in this industry as much as every other manufacturer (like your hated Power Plate). You have a financially vested interest in this. There is nothing unethical about wanting to make a living provided that you lay out your conflicts of interest so that everyone knows you are biased towards your machines and programs. Lay out your conflicts as you expect everyone to do since you seem to be one of the worst at marketing on this site (however well disguised and well-intentioned it is). You and every other person that comments should lay out their conflicts of interest so that consumers can make well-informed decisions.
2) On your web site, you present research that shows that WBV works to improve bone density. However, most of the research on this has been done by Clinton Rubin, a man that has worked for years at distancing himself from the WBV industry (he calls it dynamic motion therapy). And he has every right to since the WBV his platforms use are very different than those you use. I would go so far to say that the only vibration unit that has shown (in research terms, that means many studies) to improve bone density. If you are truly interested in ethical marketing, you would remove those, especially since many of them have been done in animals! Even Power-Plate (gasp!) has restrained themselves from quoting his research.
3) In addition, I think it is obvious you haven’t read half of the research that you post on your site (you, just like others, think quantity is better than quality). For example (this is not all inclusive), you have an industrial article that says that WBV suppresses the movement of food through the digestive track (in the flexibility/mobility/balance section), you have two incontinence articles (one is not a research article, in the flexibility/mobility/balance section), and you have an article (Humphries and Warman) that is unrelated to WBV (uses local vibration) in the performance section. While I applaud your disclaimer (posted to obviously cover your butt on the ethics), I would say you, and the other manufacturers need to present these in a much more clear fashion.
Will you be the leader in this and back up your stance that you are truly interested in helping the consumer make good decisions? I hope so.
Lloyd, I hope your pride doesn’t get in the way of taking these comments constructively, since I also want a better world (so to speak) when it comes to WBV.
- Di Heap
July 17th, 2007David,
1. I have been exposed to the “Vibration language” since January, 2007 when I went to one of Lloyd’s studios as I was curious about advertised (not by Lloyd specifically) benefits of this type of “exercise”. I’d read articles and advertising for a year previously. I do some race-walking and running with my partner who is a skilled endurance runner but who was losing time and placing in events simply because of increasing age (the nemeses of us all!). I place mid-field but sometimes place well in gender/age results. My partner is more focused and has the drive to excel. He has the body shape for athletics. I’m overweight. So, what could WBV training do for us?
Lloyd invited us in,talked with us and showed us his machines. We returned later and did a free session. I was intrigued yet skeptical and as I was considering doing a Sports Performance Course (studies not physical training) I started researching WBV Training to use as a topic of research in my course and I began doing regular sessions of WBV. I had long-term injuries that PT, Osteopath therapy, and specific exercise had not resolved and these 90% resolved within three months of starting WBV sessions. I remained skeptical and questioning for at least four months and I visited three different brand studios to be able to compare machines and programs. Only at one other brand studio, recently, did I find machines and a program that I was comfortable with in terms of my own safety (my biggest concern is what is the machine doing to me that could hurt me?) and my ability to get into the required positions (I’m not agile enough for overly twisted sideways positions with only parts of body on machine).
I praise Lloyd for patience with me because even though he’s known to be “loud” in pushing the benefits of his machines he met a difficult customer in me; one who continually questioned everything and wanted to know exactly how, what, where, and he gave me hours of time with no gain for himself as I’m free to say whatever I wish. I’ve also used the internet and read articles and studies and have been encouraged by my tutor who took part in a NZ study on the effects of WBV on athletic performance and believed it to be really helpful. I do use some “Shawisms” as that’s the descriptive terms I’ve learnt but I don’t automatically follow Lloyd’s thinking and I have to prove truth in what he says (as much as I can). We definitely don’t always agree!
2. As a customer/user of a WBV training program in New Zealand I’ve chosen to use Lloyd’s studios/machines so yes, I have a bias. I haven’t had the opportunity to try some brands that I’d like to try as they are either unavailable or not easily available in my city. The studio sports level machines I use work for me so I have no reason to look elsewhere except for my insatiable curiosity so I try other models when I can.
3. The terms therapy and training when related to the machines I use explain what can be expected as a benefit/result of use. For me, these terms have nothing to do with the mechanical construction or “cheap” price or quality of the machine but refer to the overall “force” of the vibration and the purpose built machine. I know others use these terms differently. There are 5 different machines available to me but which I use is determined by my health and injury status and not even chosen by me but by the Instructor. This week I’m using a lower “force” machine as I injured my knee in an event on Sunday and what I am doing currently is (wbv)therapy not (wbv)training but how I’m using these terms is rather specific to the machines/brand I use. I try to use these terms in correct use for the brand of machine being discussed.
4. There’s not a lot I can add to the debates on this site as I am not a professional or employed in the industry but as I have 7 months experience of using wbv machines and learning about them I can add to the discussions, especially when newcomers ask simple questions. I am thinking to work in the Industry or as one who writes Exercise Prescriptions for regular (non athlete) people so this site is one where I can learn.
I did see the “harp” and the “DMS” pages when I used Google months ago and I smiled and looked further but perhaps another person might be confused.
5. My partner found the effects of using a very high-level sports model Whole Body Vibration Machine detrimental to the muscle requirements for his chosen sport. This has been very interesting as it means that the machine worked!!! He built up quad muscle girth and strength suitable for a sprinter but not useful to an endurance athlete. He’s had a break from wbv training and will return less often, to help/correct body core balance and upper body strength, using intensive training only as a build up pre-event. I’m very interested in his experience and the effect that it had on him. Overall he’s improved run times and placing by using (Lloyds studios) wbv training plus a psychological skills training program that I forced apon him (part of my course). Many runners prefer to just run and avoid cross-training so wbv training can be used as a fast (10mins 2-3x week), fairly easy way to increase performance.
I hope to get to read the published results of your studies early next year.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 18th, 2007Di,
I am glad that you have kept an open mind about WBV when first being exposed to it. I hope you continue to keep an open mind because I am willing to bet that some of the ideas we have today about it will change within the next 5-10 years (this is natural progression).
I am also glad that you have seen good results and enjoy the workouts. I truly think many people could benefit from WBV, as many already have. Thanks for your personal experience as I bet the individuals new to this blog enjoy your take. Keep up the good work!
David
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 18th, 2007Posted as a reply to a post on another page (http://www.vibrationtraining.net/2007/07/soloflex-weight-loss-claims-untrue#comment-1788).
Lloyd,
(2) You accuse me of marketing , I do not sell machines to the public and have never tried to on this site. I am sure I will be backed up on this by all long term bloggers.
Even I will back you up on the fact that you do not sell machines to the public or on this site. That is not what I was saying though. You have a service to sell, do you not? By pushing your ideas on this site, you have become known as an expert, an expert who owns Vibra-Train. While you do not say, “Come to my place, it is the best in NZ!”, your comments indirectly market your business. I just want everyone, including you to say that you have a conflict of interest, even if your goal is to “effect positive changes and create discussion in our industry.” Would it be unethical for me to leave out an acknowledgment that my research was funded by a vibration company (hypothetically) when I publish this research? Sure it would. So why shouldn’t you indicate your conflict when you publish articles on this site?
(3) “It could be argued you have a greater vested interest in this or any other industry than myself , you make your living from testing other peoples work.
I on the other hand I have a very solid profession in my mortuary work. I still do it every night and will continue for as long as I want. My reason for my effort in the field of Vibration Training is simple , I am using the knowledge I have in my head to help people while they are still alive.”
Sure, this could be argued. And I could argue back that I have many more options than you. You have 2 while I have a virtually infinite amount. I could go and research the mechanisms of knee, ankle or hip injury. My other interests include rehabilitation, sports biomechanics, and muscle biomechanics. These three options alone provide me with thousands of areas to research. I research WBV because I like it and think it has some great training and therapy applications. Guess what, I too use the knowledge in my head to help people while they are alive. I want to improve their quality of life just as you do! See, we are not all that different.
PS - Actually, I am trying to figure out how the lightbulb works when it light touches a human since the inventors don’t know how to do that.
4) Speaking of ethics, you have not responded to my other two comments. And these articles remain on your site so should I assume you disagree?
Or, was this how you addressed it, “Past research has only in my opinion been of use to me to show the public this technology , in its many forms , has and is been tested.”
You do the public no service by listing research on a site. Do you really think that they know the difference between the research Clinton Rubin is doing and the research being done by others on totally different machines? How many people on this blog know the difference between measures of bone physiology and basic bone density scans? Few I would think. Nothing wrong with that but it seems to me that it is better to provide consumers with accurate information, not a list of articles (of which, about a third or half are not even true articles). This is not isolated to your site and all manufacturers do this so I do not blame you for following the marketing schemes of other companies. This is the way things work. But will you be one of the first to stand up against it as you do Power Plate?
- John Weatherly
July 18th, 2007David,
I agree “time will tell” but why does all of this have to take so long? In the meantime, we have all the marketers and people out there doing things that may be “duping the public” while lining their pockets in the process. Science needs to point the way and give some direction. Power Plate is an example with Dr. Cardinale like Lloyd has mentioned here (and other places) using Cardinale’s name and he didn’t know about it. They had him listed on their “Scientific Advisory Board.” People can get “trampled” too - good people - by unethical people when there is no direction or guiding way given by science!
Yes, the NSCA has a slogan of “briding the gap” but as I mentioned many (probably most) academic and athletic depts at universities in US have “no” or very little interaction. How is this “bridging the gap?” Many strength coaches at universities still aren’t trained in the exercise and sport sciences and even directly violate the NSCA’s Professional Standards & Guidelines document. Many of these universities are where NSCA “fellows” reside - the same universities. What ever happened to being an example and practicing what you preach? And I know several scientists who are NSCA “fellows.” Some I consider friends and some are former mentors. Why can’t our universites in the US set an example?
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 18th, 2007John,
I must echo your frustration. As a researcher, I would love to get information out quicker. But this is not possible and it is very difficult to move this along. Much of this is just the process and we just have to deal with it. In the US, the pharmaceutical industry only sees something like 10% of its development actual converted to drugs that can be marketed, and that is after years and years of research. The big problem with this market is that WBV devices are considered low risk and are basically unregulated (at least in the US). This makes the public more vulnerable to shady marketing practices. Honestly, there isn’t much that can be done except each individual can work hard to get their research written and published. My very first study was performed 3 years before it was published and I would say that this is an average amount of time.
As far as bridging the gap, it is difficult because many practitioners are not trusting of researchers (as is evident on this site) for reasons I don’t totally understand. It is also very hard to work with athletes since there coaches are not very willing to try new things, especially when some players have the possibility to not receive as good as training/treatment (which is usually necessary in research; e.g placebo). All of this combined makes it very difficult and researchers are not blame free. They have a hard time working with practitioners for those very same reasons, except they are frustrated from the other end. I try to keep my foot a bit in clinical/practical application (as I am also technically a clinician, but mores so a researcher), which allows me to have better relationships with non-researchers. Anyway, it is not easy and we need to work together for the betterment of all.
- Di Heap
July 18th, 2007David
I’m not sure what keeping an “open mind” about WBV means to me except that, as you said, some of our ideas might change. I’m not expecting any negative outcomes from WBV so the changes will, I think, be small in terms of machine type/composition (force, program etc) but huge in terms of possible usage as I can imagine immense possible medical uses for this technology as soon as “academics” put out positive, verifiable study results.
So back to the problem: Designers/Manufacturers and Academics/Researchers have to find ways to work together along with “subjects” of the studies. I’ve learnt enough to understand why some manufacturers wont just abandon their machines to a University for testing. At each Brand of WBV Studio I’ve visited the program of positions and times on the machine has differed so it seems to me that the Program is specific to the Machine Brand and there would have to be agreement over the positions/times used in the studies. At some Brand Studios more emphasis was placed on “correct position” than at others and different fq and amplitudes are used and I think this would affect results of tests if done on multiple brands or without manufacturers advice.(along with the questions of does the machine perform to specs).
I’ve read/learnt of a local study where athletes (runners) were recruited to deliberately injure themselves (by running 20+ mins on a downhill slope treadmill) and then the study was to measure possible fast healing time by use of WBV. The study didn’t take place with the reason being obvious. Another study I know of, I am waiting results of (trying to find if the study was completed?) many of the athletes (sprinters I think) abandoned the study for personal and injury (non WBV related) reasons.
Can I suggest studies performed on regular (non athletes) people and people with health conditions (other than osteoporosis) like obesity and the risk of worse health problems. Also studies on regular non exercising people (office workers maybe)to see if their overall well-being (physical and mental) is affected by WBV over a period of time. I guess these type studies aren’t as interesting or funded as is repeating jump height studies.
I think you’ve said in one of your posts that jump height is valid for older people as it shows that they have good balance/ less likely to fall but I’m older(50+)and I walk, run but I do not jump at all. I don’t like to jump but I do have good core balance after 7 months of WBV. Did you use older people in your study or young people? I’ve read previous, inconclusive result, studies on jump height and while it is measurable it doesn’t show what WBV can do for regular people who aren’t interested in jumping higher.
Just a small point that definitely will show my bias. I said I don’t always agree with Lloyd but I didn’t clarify that. I haven’t found anything that he’s told me about WBV machines and programs to be wrong or disputable even though I’ve tried. Disagreements have been about lack of marketing/advertising and general life. I meant that I have not simply “believed” because Lloyd told me but I have independently researched.
I’ve never heard Lloyd say “Come to my place, it is the best in NZ!” Rather he encourages customers to try out other places and decide for themselves and he doesn’t actively advertise locally. I’m happy to say it though; for me it is the best! I wish that personal experience was admissible in studies. The experience my partner had of building quad muscle, yet he didn’t want that… proves that the sports high level machines do what they were designed to do… and maybe faster than expected in that individual. My experience of vastly improved core balance and complete stopping of low grade continual pain and this week after two sessions specific to therapy as I have mildly injured knee are subjective but extremely valid results.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
July 24th, 2007Di,
I agree that there are “immense possible medical uses for this technology”. This is an area that I am passionate about and my research will be going very soon. I am just working on finding more options for vibration platforms to use (as I agree with Lloyd that they need testing and we should use the best ones). I too want to help people and will be aiming my research at that type of population.
I also agree that we all must work together. But that is hard when you are being attached by others that you are trying to have an open and quality debate with. It is also hard to use manufacturer suggestions since all of their recommendations are so different. And, as most of this blog believes, some manufacturers may not be up-front about their specs. It is a slow process and we can only do as much as we can do.
As far as inducing injury, this is different than you think. The “injury” being induced Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness (DOMS) is the soreness that you feel a day or two after a workout. Running downhill is a common and acceptable practice for this reason. As for the rest of the study, I can’t comment on those things I do not know.
Also, I actually have a study coming out in the fall hopefully looking at office workers at a university and their physical and mental health as a result of WBV. I am not going to release the results or other aspects of the study but it will add to the knowledge of WBV. And these types of studies receive more funding then a jumping study; however, as I have commented before, those jumping studies are necessary (we will be doing many more of those) to help us understand WBV better.
Jump height in older people has been used as a measure of their ability to catch themselves during a fall. I did not use this type of population or measure for my study since this isn’t what we were looking at. If WBV increases your muscle activity and strength, then it should make you jump higher even if you aren’t interested in jumping. This is a generalization but I hope you get the point.
As far as Lloyd doing advertising, I don’t doubt he is ethical. In fact, I am guessing that he is very good at what he does and there are many others like you who have had positive results. If I could afford it, I would love to fly down there and experience a Vibra-Train studio myself. I hope his model comes to the US because I agree with Lloyd that individuals should be supervised and the machines shouldn’t be sold to individuals. However, my comment was to show that the ethics of individuals can always be questioned. No one is wholly good or wholly bad and that everyone has some bias. While Lloyd does not directly market on this site, there are very subtle mentions of his devices and programs (which are only at his studios), and I normally would assume that these are not intentional marketing plugs. However, after he attacked me and my ethics, I wanted to show others that we all have bias.
I hope you continue to have success with WBV and I am sure you will.
In good health,
David David…
Its all a matter of trust and not just ethics. The reason I have told Universities and researchers to take a hike to date is their very apparent lack of respect for me , I offer safety advice and they disregard it immediatly by proposing tests I do not want done on my units ( my smallest is 180Kg , not a toy ) .
True they are my theories I am basing my concerns on , but they are trying to use units built on my theories so why disregard my advice. I dont care what forms they are willing to sign , if someone gets hurt it will be my responsability.
I find the arrogance scary. So I have decided what to do.
Researchers will have access to my units on the local studio floor. The logistics of this can be sorted out when I am approched.
- John Weatherly
July 26th, 2007David,
I admire you doing research and trying to get funded by NIH. As far as your comments about marketing and Lloyd probably being very ethical but also putting subtle hints in about his equipment, don’t organizations like NSCA do the same thing? You made one comment about NSCA’s practical journal helping bridge the gap etc in a response to me. How long have you belonged to NSCA? I joined originally a long, long time ago. In fact, I was originally CSCS before the “founder” of the NSCA. Also, if you’d go back and look at the 96 issues of Strength and Conditioning (the NSCA’s practical journal) you’d notice articles I wrote. One of them was “Concepts for Baseball Conditoning.” That article had a section titled “Directions for Research.” The article was published in 1996. Here it is 2007 and very little has been done as far as research to help baseball players etc. What good does this do? I am hoping vibration won’t be in the same boat. Hopefully, you and others will help avoid this. Additonally, I have asked several people (including NSCA “fellows”) over many years if they could write a training program for starters, mid relievers, and closers for off, pre, and in-season including throwing programs and none of them can apparently do this. So, it appears to me that the “fellows” can’t write a training program for baseball pitchers. These are leaders of the NSCA. They are people I admire - don’t misinterpret - but they seem incapable of designing a comprehensive training program including throwing programs for pitchers and baseball is probably more entrenched in Americana than any other sport. American Football and baseball are the largest sports (at least from spectator interest) in the US. Have you ever read the NSCA’s mission statement? It says: “As the worldwide authority on strength and conditioning we support and disseminate research-based informantion and its practical application to improve ATHLETIC PERFORMANCE and fitness.” So, the NSCA says it is the “worldwide authority.” The NSCA says it supports and disseminates research-based information to improve ATHLETIC PERFORMANCE and fitness. Like I mentioned in a prior post, the Soviets were studying vibration as far back as the 70’s. Also, the Soviets were using periodization protocols, plyometrics (and vibration) etc. long before people in the US or the scientists in the US started studying it. The point being is the NSCA is a good “marketing organization” too. I think NSCA is/has been very valuable - don’t get me wrong. I’m just saying you “scientists” belong to good “marketing organizations” too.
David,
I think you are the most educated of the people perusing and writing in this forum. I enjoy reading your comments and respect them for your intelligent and measured remarks. You have brought back some respectability to the discussions going on in this and Sal Marinello’s forums. You have managed with your polished writing to tone down to a civil level disagreement that used to be very inflammatory personal attacks.
However, I disagree about the issue of frequency change in other parts of the body. The frequency doesn’t change as we move to different parts of the body. Clinton Rubin implicitly shows to know that in his studies. There is a formal proof for it. However, this is not the right forum for an academic discussion, and I will follow up with the proof in the forum you started at http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Whole_Body_Vibration/
Also biomechanicists who specialize in the field of gait and equilibrium can model fairly accurately a person on a vibrating platform and calculate the amplitude changes.
David…
This is now on Vibra-Trains research page…
Research
The research into the effects of Vibration Training and other forms of Vibration exposure continues, with well over 200 academic papers released to date (29/7/07), all pointing in the direction of its positive benifits to some degree or another .
Type into Google … Vibration Training Research … for results.
The reason we have removed the existing research is this; our units are built to a standard we believe has not been seen in the industry to date, instead most research has been done on machines we have not been given the full engineering tests for so we believe it unethical to repeat the test results until such time as these standards have been meet.
It is simple …
you come to Vibra-Train because you trust the owner of Vibra-Train, who is also the original author of the material on this site, is the designer of the actual machines you will use and the matching programs you will do, knows his stuff .We do not comprimise at Vibra-Train on any other issue and we see no reason to start now.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
August 2nd, 2007John,
While I am a member of the NSCA, I do not produce or develop any of the marketing of the NSCA. My reference to the S&C Journal was only because it was the most specific to the comment you had made. The ACSM is also a very good organization that has similar materials. I have no financial conflicts since I do not receive money from this organization (I pay to be a part of it). This is the big difference between my “marketing” and Lloyd’s.
Now that being said, your comments only reiterate the point I was trying to make. We all have biases and conflicts at some level. The most obvious is financial. I am biased toward the NSCA because of my involvement with them. My research is biased (although I try not to let it be as much as possible) because I think vibration works. Those that do not indicate their bias are the ones to watch out for. However, the average user here doesn’t think to ask this question. We must protect these consumers from 100% believing what an individual says without knowing his/her bias. That was the main point that I was trying to make, showing that EVERYONE can be questioned in regard to their “ethics”.
As far as the NSCA and the baseball training program, I really am not able to comment except to further indicate how much more research is necessary even today in the strength and condition field, even in the basics of resistance training.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
August 2nd, 2007Giovanni,
Regarding the issue of frequency; I think it is a common thought that frequency may change upon “entering” the body. This may be due to the review article by Issurin that stated that frequencies from 30-50Hz are absorbed the most by the muscle and that as frequency increases, muscle tension generally increases in a linear fashion. However, those to issues very easily could be separate from what we are discussing. Your points are good ones and, after reviewing the Rubin article you cited, have come to agree that you may be right. While I will still be hesitant until I do my own experiments, this is very interesting. We will have to discuss this more on the WBV Yahoo forum.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
August 2nd, 2007Lloyd,
When I use Google and Vibration Training Research, I get 1,870,000 hits and when I use “Vibration Training Research” I get 70. So, I am curious as to where you got 200 and how this is supposed to “show the public this technology, in its many forms, has and is been tested.” And to clarify, not all of the articles on WBV “point in the direction of positive benefits to some degree or another.” While this statement is pretty vague, it is absolutely false. There are many studies that should no positive benefits. I don’t see how this helps consumers at all. In fact, I would say it compromises something: consumer knowledge.
As far as your statement regarding the standard of your machines, my first comment would be: prove it! The problem is you can’t. As a consumer, I would want to see some kind of proof that the product works. Theories and equations are not proof. The reality though is that the average consumer only pays attention to marketing, especially in the fitness industry. That is why unethical marketing (or you could call it normal marketing) runs a muck. You are telling your customers to trust you because you market yourself as a WBV expert. But that is no different in my book than what other marketers do.
To me, this was a cop-out. You pretty much could have written, “My machines are the best and I am the best so trust me and don’t bother to make yourself educated on the matter.” Now I am not trying to be callous but I think this was an enormous disservice. I challenged you to be ethical by removing articles that were off the topic and those by Clinton Rubin (since his is very different). Instead you took the easy way out and did this. Very disappointing. The challenge is still there to be a leader in the industry and not a follower.
- jenny p
August 2nd, 2007Hi,
i recently bought a wbv machine. i am wondering how i should start out. i have fairly severe arthritis and have much wasted muscles as a result.
Thank You!
Jenny Jenny………..
we need to know what type of machine you have.David…
Considering the low amount of hits that page recieves I wanted the statement to be broad. Not to be specific about each test done. The fact is “most” tests that have been done with some thought behind them have been positive. In my opinion , the ones that have been ambiguous/static are the result of bad protocols or a complete lack of understanding of what should have been expected from the test.Classic example…. the CO2 test to see if Vibration Training burns calories was a complete waste of everybody time.
I will not apologize for my candid remarks about sub-standard units. I have worked very hard to make sure my machines have been built properly and hold a straight theoretical. I have independent engineering tests to prove it.
- David M. Bazett-Jones
August 2nd, 2007Now there is a logical thought process; If it supports my position (WBV works), then it is a good study. If it doesn’t, it was a bad protocol. Thank God you aren’t doing any science! Not to mention that you’re obviously not qualified to discuss science in any manor; I have already rebutted your anti-energy expenditure argument once. Stick to the stuff you know; bashing bad units and telling people what are good ones. It seems that you are the antithesis of Sal M, but both of you are way too one-sided on your own side and way to stubborn and prideful to admit when you are wrong or there is something you don’t know. It is kind of ironic, don’t you think?
David…
Your attitude is the perfect example to show the public why I do not waste any time convincing the academics my theories are valid.
According to you I should spend the next ten years of my life educating you all as too what I am doing , so you can all sit around and agree to let me carry on ?
I dont no if you have noticed but I do not need your approval to be successful and have managed to create a reputation based on my own work and I see no reason to change course now and start asking you for advice .
Note: The fact you guys “forgot” to test the machine before you started 2 years worth of study testifies to the deep rooted problems you are having just getting to grips with the basic fundamentals of this science . This is a mistake I wouldn’t and didn’t make , I had them all tested.
Which makes your comment to me….
“Not to mention that you’re obviously not qualified to discuss science in any manor”
just funny as if you are qualified and I am not , so what’s your excuse for stuffing up ?
Sorry but the Vibra-Train has left the station and you are not on it , good luck catching up.
- Di Heap
August 2nd, 2007Some comments..
Maybe Lloyd is accused of being a Marketer because he does his own marketing - by teaching about WBV - rather than using a shapely model and a strategically placed advert. (he could do that as I know of several well known celebrities that use his studios).
The statement on the Research page of Vibra-Train’s website is definitely provocative yet it is one that people in NZ respond to. Not blindly trusting someone but seeing that “arrogance” and going in to ask Why that statement?
When doing any form of exercise or therapy (including hospital) that involves the use of machines to improve one’s health and fitness, there is a huge trust involved; that the Instructor, Leader, Doctor, knows what they are doing and knows how to use the machine correctly for the procedure. Lloyd designed his own machines and programs and has tested them to his own very exacting standards so he is worthy of that trust.
His standards are so high that I can find them annoying, irritating even; when at his or another Instructors insistence perfect position on the machine must be maintained. I’ve had machines turned off because I was out of position.. No excuse is ever accepted and all most people can offer is, It’s hard!I have questioned everything and almost run out of questions to ask and everyone is welcomed to do that. So, I’ll be trusting Lloyd (and possibly any other WBV designer or Principle who proves themself and their machines to me)over the results of Academic studies.
My own experience and the benefits I’ve gained from using a specific brand of WBV training are more honest and valid than studies that I cannot know enough about to know if they are okay or flawed. Maybe I should offer to be a “poster girl” - Not a chance of that!
- Di Heap
August 2nd, 2007David, You said:
[Not to mention that you’re obviously not qualified to discuss science in any manner]
Sorry but this comment is laughable. A few nights ago, when I was “training” Lloyd was telling a customer how he, as a Mortician, did a final check to ensure the person was deceased (that after being certified so by a doctor). It was definitely Science - Biology 101.
Also I’ve been able to ask questions about chemical reactions within the body and muscle movement, bones, the nervous system and about responses and reactions within the brain, relating to exercise not specifically WBV and received answers that I’ve used in assignments for my Sports Course and got A grades in. So please don’t insult Lloyd when it comes to knowing Science. I find it hard to understand how he can know so much about Science and so much Engineering as well..
but he doesn’t need me to answer to you,for him.
July 9th, 2007
WBV - an acronym for Whole Body Vibration, which refers to a machine, or being in a position on a machine, with a flat plate that vibrates and stimulates the whole body. This brings about a monosynaptic response (myotatic reflex) in the targeted muscles for that position.
Monosynaptic just means a simple neural response that you can’t stop happening, like the jerk reaction when someone taps your knee with a medical hammer and
Myotatic Reflex is the stretch reflex contraction of a muscle that occurs in response to rapid forceful stretching. This is normal clamping down that prevents overstretching and tearing yet allows lengthening/ flexibility and muscle strength to build. (someone pls correct if I didn’t get that quite right)