Exercise Science Does Fascia Matter? Part 2 by Ben Cormack | Date Released : 13 Dec 2010 2 comments Print Close As we saw in Part 1, fascia is a hugely important tissue within the body. Now we discuss why in the context of training it has less importance. It is important to note that the author is interested more in the training or exercising of the body, rather than a hands-on manual therapy approach with respect to fascia in this discussion. A reductionist’s view of the body is based on dividing it into its composite parts. The strength of the fascial debate and focus lies with integrating the body into a cohesive unit again. With an approach that focuses on fascia and the identifiable fascial meridians, the caveat is that they will not operate in this individual way when incorporated into functional movement. If we understand and learn specific fascial lines, then we must also understand that during function they will become integrated with each other. We must have an overview of the operation of the system as whole during the specific function we are training for. Breaking the fascial system down into more digestible segments may be a valid educational strategy, but will not give a true picture of fascial performance in function. Authentic fascial input will be created by the training variables dictated by the client’s or athlete’s function, rather than by the understanding of isolated anatomical structures. If this is not the pinnacle of the educational methodology, are we not just performing the same reductionalism that has already been done with previous training protocols designed to affect the neural and muscular systems in isolation? The basic principle that nerves innervate muscles that move bone is a pretty sound one. This is movement. Another pretty sound tenet is that we are affected by gravity, ground reaction and momentum. Forces act on the body; this means that the body is in a constant state of ever-changing tension, changing joint angles, and changing emphasis and demand on the myofascial system. Siff states “There will be changes in the centre of gravity, moments of inertia, centre of rotation, centre of percussion and mechanical stiffness of the system which alter the neuromuscular skills required.” (Siff, 2003) We will train the fascia only by creating the variables for the body to adapt its tension to. This will only occur authentically in the context of function related and integrated movement. Myers’ excellent documentation of the fascial lines is not a training guide. He describes it humbly as a map, but it can also be seen as a hugely important concept in the body. Trying to train a single fascial line means that we are not training the others. As with all parts of the body, isolation is impossible. Muscles appear to have loose functional groupings and fascial lines should also be seen in the same light. No fascial line will work independently of another in functional movement. Therefore, we should promote specificity. When we come to the actual functional activity, only the training that includes the correct input, movement patterns, and force output will enhance the given function. The function must dictate the training variables for true crossover from training to functional activity. Fascial lines will interact with each other as movement and tension changes in the body. Will an isolative saggital plane movement of the body, such as a bilateral posterior arm reach designed to affect the superficial fascial frontline, have a crossover to a gait-like motion that will see an interaction between all of the myofascial meridians? Probably the most universal function of human movement is gait. During gait, the inferior spinal segment flexes faster than superior, creating relative extension at the vertebral joints. This would be an inferior segment-driven motion rather than superior segment moving on inferior segment, as with an arm drive to the posterior. Although the resultant joint motion is the same, the proprioceptive information would be very different, especially when we factor in the forces acting on the body. This would mean the fascial line would be influenced in a different way. This also happens in conjunction with rotation of the pelvis and the opposite rotation in the mid to upper thoracic spine. Only the authentic and specific drivers of the body can claim to mutually train the composite parts of the movement, fascia, muscles, neural and bone, for the function of gait. As we have previously demonstrated, fascia will control bone motion by exerting a biomechanical force upon it through its stiffness. The resultant fascial deformation will create heat and friction and therefore dissipate force, so it will not return to its original shape and has to be reset by muscle pull. This joins muscle, fascia and bone together in a symbiotic function-related relationship that would be almost impossible, and also pointless, to separate. How Training Timelines Affect Fascia The time element involved in the contractibility or stiffness regulation of fascia also brings into question the training of fascia as an isolated structure. The response to training stimulus has been estimated at between minutes and hours. To test this, Yahia stretched strips of fascia and then rested them for 30 and 60 minutes. Subsequent stretching produced a more resistant or stiffer response. This is evidence that fascia will stiffen in response to the input that it is subject to (Yahia et al., 1993) . Viidik carried out a similar test on the anterior cruciate ligament (another collagenous tissue) (Viidik , 1973). Successive loading created reduced curvature in the stress relaxation curve in later loading cycles; this was described as preconditioning, since the internal tension of the tissue was altered over time. It could also be described as stiffness or tension regulation. A stiffening of the system in response to input could alter the entire systemic tension regulation of the fascial web and resultant myofascial performance. If the training motions were non-functional, would this inhibit the system in response to more functional activities? In the controlled environment of training we tend to have higher input levels. Therefore, the training effect on systemic tension will prevail in the timeframe outlined for fascial contraction or stiffening response. In a function-related, multi-dimensional approach with a wide variety of force vector input, this creates functionally authentic stiffening of the system for activity enhancement. Fascial stiffness could inhibit motion if created in the wrong way. It is only common sense to see that training for one function may inhibit another. Bodybuilders certainly do not seem the most fluid of movers. The predominance of external hip rotation during squatting does not predispose them well for the function of running, for example. This maybe an extreme and possibly cumbersome example, but nevertheless an example for adaptation in the system to imposed demand. This may create a sub-optimal environment for other myofascial functions. Reducing dimensionality by training according to specific anatomical structures such as specific fascial lines, especially if viewed as displaying single plane motions, also reduces the input into possibly the most important characteristic of the fascial web: proprioception. Although the direct tensile communication of the fascia may not always link together, the interaction with the CNS and overall tension of the system will remain intrinsically connected during a function specific motion. This leads to a unique propriopceptive signature for a specific movement. The proprioceptive nature of fascia and all proprioceptors, depend on the level of movement and therefore information present. Each movement of the body has a unique connection of joint motions that transmit information. Without this information the myofascial system may not know how to or be able to respond in the most efficient way. This may lead to alternative movement patterns that create sub-optimal motion in the body leading to tissue or bone stress and eventually breakdown. How Speed Affects Fascia Some trainers have prescribed slower speeds to specifically target fascia. Slower motions can stimulate Golgi mechanoreceptors. This slow motion has been hypothesized to affect the lower firing rate of specific Alpha motor neurons that decrease muscle tonus (Cottingham, 1985). However, this is not a simple reflex. It will be inhibited by the fact that the slower motions will be swallowed up by the elastic elongation of the contractile components of the muscle (Jami, 1992). This slow approach may lead to less fascial input through reduced stiffness, tension and subsequent mechanoreceptor input. Slow or even static loading rates may create a stiffening of the muscles in the system as the range increases (Gajdosik, 2005). This could also affect the fascial system in a similar manner. In an already stiff system, a lower rate of loading could be used to overcome the resistance to motion that could increase with the rate of loading. The question would first have to be asked why the system had chosen to reduce motion and then this would have to be addressed. This could be because of injury or dysfunction in a certain area. Taking this into account, we would want to increase the rate of motion to a functionally authentic rate as soon as possible. In a functional context, we move at the speeds that we have to in accordance with our activity. We do move fast, it’s as simple as that. Fascia will have its role to play in moving fast. It will be affected and respond accordingly, which is its authentic reaction to the demand placed upon it. The body has more compliant structures and then stiffer structures. Much of the body’s core, which needs to be more stable and deform less to protect the organs, has a high fascial content. This could provide a solid anchor to allow the extremities, which display more compliant ability through a higher predominance of fast twitch muscle fibers which are less collagenous, to move more effectively. In this way the system has utilized and integrated the different inherent properties available to it in the context of the task it needs to perform. The adaptation of tissue with different properties will happen at differing rates. A functional input will give us the functional output in terms of tissue reaction, adaptation, performance and health. Conclusion Fascia does matter. It matters because it’s an important structure in the body. The sheer volume of mechanoreceptors has a huge impact on the success of proprioception within the system. This is vital to the functional operation of the myofascial relationship. The stiffness of the fascial network allows us to be energy-efficient and fast and to dissipate tension over the system. The real strength in the fascial debate, however, lies in the evidence that should lead us to conclude that the body needs to be trained in an integrated and functionally authentic way. With that said about fascia, no one component in the body should take precedence over another during training. In this context, fascia matters very little; it is just another element within the body that allows us to move. If our function dictates our movement and training variables, then muscles, fascia, bones, and nerves will simply do what they are meant to do in the correct way and facilitate the success of the body. The contrived and isolated view of training any single part of the system will lead to ineffective systemic input and therefore decreased functional output. This is particularly important in the case of fascia that relies on and has implications for the whole organism. References Alexander, R.M. (2002). Tendon elasticity and muscle function. Coinp Bioehern. Pliysiol A Mol. lutegr. Physiol.,133(4):1001-1011. Basmajian J.V. & De Luca, C. (1985). Muscles Alive – Their Functions Revealed by Electromyography . Williams & Wilkins: Baltimore, MD. Cottingham, J.T. (1985). Healing through Touch – A History and a Review of the Physiological Evidence. Rolf Institute Publications: Boulder, CO. Coote, J.H. & Pérez-Gonzáles, J.F. (1970). The response of some sympathetic neurons to volleys in various afferent nerves. 208: 261-278. J Physiol : London. Gajdosik, R., Allred, J. & Gabbert, A. Stretching program increases the dynamic passive length and passive resistive properties of the calf muscle-tendon unit of unconditioned younger women. European Journal of Applied Physiology Volume 99, Number 4 , 449-454, DOI: 10.1007/s00421-006-0366-7. Jami, L .(1992). Golgi tendon organs in mammalian skeletal muscle: functional properties and central actions. Physiological Reviews 73 (3): 623-666. McMahon, T.A. & Cheng, G.C. (1990). "The mechanics of running: how does stiffness couple with speed?" J. Biomech. 23 Suppl 1:65-78. Meyers, T.W. (2001). Anatomy Trains . Churchill Livingstone Elsevier: Edinburgh. Rolf, I.P. (1977). Rolfing: The Integration of Human Structures . Dennis Landman: Santa Monica. Schleip, R. (2003). Fascial mechanoreceptors and their potential role in deep tissue manipulation -Excerpt from: Fascial plasticity —a new neurobiological explanation. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies 7 (1):11-19 and 7(2):104-116. Schleip, R., Klingler, W. & Lehmann-Horn, F. (2005). Active fascial contractility: Fascia may be able to contract in a smooth muscle-like manner and thereby influence musculoskeletal dynamics. Medical Hypotheses 65 , 273–277. Schleip, R., Naylor, I.L. & Ursu, D. et al. (2005). Passive muscle stiffness may be influenced by active contractility of intramuscular connective tissue. Medical Hypotheses (2206) 66 , 66-71. Siff, M. (2003). Supertraining . Supertraining Institute: Denver. Vidiik, A. (1973). Functional properties of collagenous tissues. Int rev of connective tissue res 6 :127-215. Von der Mark, K. (1981). Localisation of collagen types in tissue. Int rev of connective tissue res 9 : 265-305. Yahia, L.H., Pigeon, P. & DesRosiers, E.A. (1993). Viscoelastic properties of the human lumbodorsal fascia. J Biomed Eng 15 : 425-429. Zorn, A. (2007). Physical thoughts about structure: The elasticity of fascia. Structural Integration . Zorn, A. & Caspari, M. (2003) Why do we hold up the lower arms while running? Rolfine and Movement, Gravity and Inertia-Toward a Theory of Rolling Movement. Structural Integration . Back to top About the author: Ben Cormack Ben Cormack is a fellow of applied functional science having studied at the Gray institute under Gary Gray and David Tiberio. He is located in London, UK, and has been involved with training and conditioning of numerous athletes, including title-winning professional boxers, triathletes and ultra endurance runners. Ben has helped many people in chronic pain and also through the rehabilitation process from sports injury back to competition level. Ben is a regular PTontheNet author. He has also recently started running a seminar series in the UK based on his training techniques, experiences and the science behind them. Full Author Details Related content Content from Ben Cormack The Functional Role of Fascia in Posture and Movement: Part 2 Evan Osar, D.C. | Articles The Functional Role of Fascia in Posture and Movement: Part I Evan Osar, D.C. | Articles Myofascial Mobility Through Strategic Movement Anthony Carey | Articles Functional Muscle Function: Load to Explode Ben Cormack | Articles How the Myofascial System Impacts Training by Adam Wolf | Videos Training Fascial Lines with the Right Tools by Hayley Hollander | Videos The Role of the Fascial System in Moving From Pain to Performance by Sue Hitzmann, Debbie Karch | Videos Training The Fascial System by Ben Cormack | Videos Elastic Energy Storage, Part 2 Ben Cormack | Articles Elastic Energy Storage, Part 1 Ben Cormack | Articles Does Fascia Matter? Part 1 Ben Cormack | Articles Exploring The Fascial System, Part 5 by Annette Lang | Videos Exploring the Fascial System, Part 4 by Chuck Wolf | Videos Exploring the Fascial System, Part 3, with Geralyn Coopersmith and Erin Carson by Geralyn Coopersmith | Videos Exploring the Fascial System, Part 2 by Michol Dalcourt | Videos Exploring the Fascial System, Part 1 by Thomas Myers | Videos Fascia 101 - Part 3 by Thomas Myers | Videos Fascia 101 - Part 2 by Thomas Myers | Videos Fascia 101 - Part 1 by Thomas Myers | Videos Functional Muscle Function: Load to Explode Ben Cormack | Articles Elastic Energy Storage, Part 2 Ben Cormack | Articles Elastic Energy Storage, Part 1 Ben Cormack | Articles Does Fascia Matter? Part 2 Ben Cormack | Articles Does Fascia Matter? Part 1 Ben Cormack | Articles Get Off the Floor and Start Using Your Core, Part 3 Ben Cormack | Articles Get Off the Floor and Start Using Your Core, Part 2 Ben Cormack | Articles Get Off the Floor and Start Using Your Core, Part 1 Ben Cormack | Articles Boxing: The Art of Loading Ben Cormack | Articles Is Our Training Leaving Our Athletes Untrained? Ben Cormack | Articles Tempo Training Ben Cormack | Articles Please login to leave a comment Comments (2) Cormack, Ben | 03 Jan 2011, 09:27 AM Hi Lesley. Great question! Many problems in the body can be a reaction to another issue. A slumped kyphotic posture COULD be a result of dysfunctions in the body not related to that specific area. No matter how many retractions, and shortening of associated musculature, we perform of the scapulae if the body needs to utilize a lengthening of the muscles during function then it will!! During gait for example a lack of deceleration down the chain E.G ankles or hips may lead to a need for some deceleration up the chain or risk a severely compromised posture during motion. This may come from lengthening of the muscles of the upper back. In this scenario the pelvis may not be able to tilt and translate to the anterior creating relative spinal extension. This could be from both tight anterior or posterior musculature. Instead the superior spinal segment will flex with momentum and will need to be slowed to keep the cervical spine and head upright and create relative joint extension. Even if we were to have the strongest muscles and connective tissue imaginable they would not choose to resist helping in deceleration thus creating to some degree an upright posture in the upper back. The alternative would be a need for deceleration from the neck muscles closer to the primary driver of the head or no deceleration and risk the head flexing forward excessively.Therefore in this scenario a focus on pelvic deceleration may have more impact on the upper back when we factor in these specific issues. It maybe that with another set of dysfunctions a focus on the upper back maybe a more valid strategy. During function however we rarely work symmetrically as we would do with a bilateral row. Most function incorporates rotation. This means that we will have both protraction and retraction occurring in the scapulae. Their ROM tied together in a superior ring. This must be factored into our training protocols.A lack of understanding of root causes rather than symptoms when dealing with posture could be why we tend to have ineffective resolutions. If it were a simple as performing a few rows then the entire gym going population would not have any postural problems of this nature. We have to understand the body as a unit; one area will impact on another. A muscle may choose a different role during one functional activity compared to another and also when we factor in the ability of other muscles and connective tissue in the functional chain to perform their roles effectively. I hope this helps. Ben Cormack!! Reply Wills, Lesley | 03 Jan 2011, 04:05 AM Question. If I had, say, a client with a slumped appearance and I produced a program that basically helps strengthen the back and increases ROM in the front, would that all may be in vain if I haven't understood why the slumped appearance was there in the first place? It could have stemmed from childhood, say, now that client is 50yrs of age. Is there any hope, or if I do succeed in bringing the head back on top so it is less slumped, is it true that not working with the root cause may bring us back to square one (slumped again)? Or the reverse--that working on the client's posture could release the root cause if there was one? Great article, lots to think about. Reply Back to top