Shouldering the burden.

[Your_Crazy]

The question is if your back is to weaker than your chest or if your chest is weaker than you back will it effect your shoulders? IE.. make them more prone to injury

If your shoulders are stronger then both or one or the other, would that have any effect?

[Rats!]

just get all of them strong and you dont have to worry about any of that

[Blaze]

You back is a group of muscles. Your chest is well, a group of muscles, in a way. And your shoulders are a group of muscles, all do their part. But if your asking that the shoulders take the brunt of everything assuming their stronger than the rest, no. Plus your chest isn't going to effect your back. It's your abs and your back that need to work together, to keep your core aligned and strong. Helps with posture too! :

[smm3]

Actually, any imbalance across any joint increases the risk of injury. Short term and long term. If your chest is stronger than your back then there is a constant pull on your shoulder to the front. It increases instability and promotes bad posture which in turn will increase injury potential.

That goes for any joint, elbow, knee, hip, etc.

Keep working those beach muscles only (bi's, chest, and abs) and call me in ten years, or sooner, when you can't stand up straight.

[skyman]

I started developing shoulder pain last year which I believe was from never doing any back work. It's now gone away after I have started working out my back as much as everything else.

[Dan C]

Originally Posted by smm3

Actually, any imbalance across any joint increases the risk of injury. Short term and long term. If your chest is stronger than your back then there is a constant pull on your shoulder to the front. It increases instability and promotes bad posture which in turn will increase injury potential.

That goes for any joint, elbow, knee, hip, etc.

Keep working those beach muscles only (bi's, chest, and abs) and call me in ten years, or sooner, when you can't stand up straight.

Absolutely. You can spot those bench "specialists" from a mile away, hunchback, rounded shoulders, with no back development... that's not good.

But now that I think of it, I've never seen the opposite, big back and no chest. At least it's not noticable, but that could be because it's not so obviously problematic.

When you consider a 'working man' be it construction, a slave laborer or someone from a hunter/gatherer society, they do a lot of "back work" with virtually nothing for the chest (few activities outside of exercise require strong pectorals). Do they have shoulder or postural problems? I don't know. I do know that the back is built to withstand more work than the chest, so you could reason that it's less likely to be a problem.

What do you think SMM3?

[Klinger]

The more I train the more I think direct pec work like benching is a waste. Working the back and legs and doing overhead pressing movements are my preferred methods.

Those are the things that translate to real-world strength. I mean, how often is it necessary to press something while lying on your chest? Maybe if a wall or a tree falls on you, but in that case you're probably cooked anyway.

[smm3]

Yes, I can say that you don't see it much. But I think that's mainly because our society has us hunched forward with just about everything we do (hell I'm straightening my posture as I type this); driving, sitting on the couch, sitting at a desk at work, flying, typing at a computer, etc. all these activities the staple of our workforce. It is no wonder the postural issues in our country. 80% of our population will have some kind of back pain in their lives, majority due to muscle imbalances.

Now, for your question, I do think it would cause an imbalance, but moreso in the form of instability in the shoulder joint. You know about the shoulder and its' anatomy, Dan. You can't tell me that an overpowering posterior pull wouldn't affect this susceptible joint. It is not as noticeable, because you don't have the obvious postural issues, but I have seen it in the form of frozen scapulas and rotator cuff (dislocation) issues more commonly.

But it is more common than you may think. Ever see one of these execs who are stressed out...look at the shoulders, hiked up to the ears. Traps, levator, splenius all overly tight. It's known to be a condition of stress, but these overly tightened muscles will lead to muscle imbalances that if not treated will take a lifelong affect.

[Dan C]

Originally Posted by Klinger

The more I train the more I think direct pec work like benching is a waste. Working the back and legs and doing overhead pressing movements are my preferred methods.

Those are the things that translate to real-world strength. I mean, how often is it necessary to press something while lying on your chest? Maybe if a wall or a tree falls on you, but in that case you're probably cooked anyway.

Good post! I've said the same exact thing (pressing while laying on your back) I don't know how many times.

My chest work is limited to weighted dips and 1-arm push-ups, and even then it's not a regular part of my program.

[Dan C]

Originally Posted by smm3

Yes, I can say that you don't see it much. But I think that's mainly because our society has us hunched forward with just about everything we do (hell I'm straightening my posture as I type this); driving, sitting on the couch, sitting at a desk at work, flying, typing at a computer, etc. all these activities the staple of our workforce. It is no wonder the postural issues in our country. 80% of our population will have some kind of back pain in their lives, majority due to muscle imbalances.

Good observation, very similar to a point that was brought up at a KB workshop I attended over the weekend. The instructor, Steve Cotter, pointed out how a full squat (ATG) is virtually non-existant in western society. With all the sitting we do we practically 'forget' the full squat position. The hip flexors/extensors become imbalanced (be it in strength or flexibility) which ultimately lead to back problems. Whereas unindustrialized nations work in the fields, by the river, etc., day in and day out, hunched over in a full squat position, yet they don't experience back problems like in the west.

Now, for your question, I do think it would cause an imbalance, but moreso in the form of instability in the shoulder joint. You know about the shoulder and its' anatomy, Dan. You can't tell me that an overpowering posterior pull wouldn't affect this susceptible joint. It is not as noticeable, because you don't have the obvious postural issues, but I have seen it in the form of frozen scapulas and rotator cuff (dislocation) issues more commonly.

I don't know, I've never seen or heard of anything like that. Sure, an "overpowering posterior pull" would make the shoulder susceptable to injury, I think, but I don't think that scenerio is easily achieved, if ever.

Our arms work in front of our body, and to a lesser extent overhead. To develop the posterior muscles to the point where it literally pulls the arms back, doesn't sound possible.

Now if we're talking trigger points and knotted muscles as a result of stress and nervous energy, that's different story, but as far as muscular overdevelopment through a full ROM... I don't think so... at least I have a hard time seeing the reality of it.

[smm3]

Yes, I can see your point. I guess due to the fact that we do work in front of our bodies, perhaps we keep these posterior muscles 'stretched out'. The issues I see are more caused by a defect so to say, whether it be TP, hypertonicity, or muscle guarding due to previous injury. So I guess a case of muscular imbalance in the sense of this conversation is rare and extreme.

Why is it you think that in the East, where the full squat posit. is more utilized, that they see less back problems as reasoning would say that they are even more 'stretched out'. Would that not cause a greater weakening of the musculature of the back and posterior chain?

[Dan C]

A lot of flexibility issues are a result of not enough strength in the stretched position. Golgi tendons and muscle spindles preventing further ROM due to the muscles inability to return itself to the 'normal' position.

If we keep the "use it or lose it" saying in mind, never going into a full squat would ultimately mean never flexing the hip through it's fullest ROM, thus never developing the musculature. Then one day you bend over to pick something up and strain your back as a result of weak muscles in the stretched position.

Or...

It could be that because the muscles are never stretched out, they stay tight causing a constant tilt in the pelvis. Once the center of the body is out of alignment, that'll lead to problems everywhere else.

Great topic! Extreme imbalances always create a domino effect of problems, finding the source and ways to fix it always makes for a good discussion.

[smm3]

I agree with what you are saying, and personally believe most issues to be a combination of the two options you have stated; overstretched muscles are weakened and the opposing muscle groups acclimate to a shortened/tightened state, usually throwing the pelvis in a constant posterior tilt, thus affecting the entire musculature from the calfs to the upper traps.

But, back to my question...what is it you think that prevents the rice field workers from developing the same issues? They are in relatively the same position only to a more extreme state (a deeper stretch posteriorly and more shortened anteriorly) so why would the imbalance not present itself?

[Dan C]

Because their movements are balanced. They flex and extend their hips through the full range of motion, when they squat to work and when they stand to walk. We sit all the time, but rarely do we squat... so we don't get that stretch.

[Maxgain]

Yup because it happened to me my traps and pecs developed fater than the back muscles causing my shoulders to come forward and press in on my pec minor causing pain