By Lloyd Shaw
Lately there has been some pockets of resistance to the Static Safety Program. So this article is to explore the other options being promoted and logically follow it to its end.
Opinions are put aside, logic should be your only gauge.
So far the main argument against the Static Safety Program has been its " too safe, and may not be giving the consumer the freedom to get the most out of their machine" . And they back this up by saying research has not shown moving on the machines causes any injuries.
Well a few logical points to cover on those statements ....
(1) I understand this argument in a constant supervision environment like a studio, but what about Home machines .......?
If you are not going to send someone home with a somewhat restrictive and maybe "too safe" a program, what is your only other option. Let them look at a variation of programs and just choose the poses they like. Or follow God knows what information found on the internet written by fake experts.
Or are these companies going to really freely supply supervision to all home users upon purchase of the product. And then offer refresher courses.
Sending them on their way with a program that is far too random to ever get confident at, or simplify it so they can get confident at it. Make it idiot proof if you will. What's so wrong with a program that accounts for 99% of peoples potential problems, mistakes made, and the small injuries almost everybody carries.
(2) The research...... they talk of has all been short term, under supervision and on old machinery. Some of it has even been outed as being highly inaccurate on machine specs. How can they possibly say with a straight face that this proves that someone at home is safe doing "whatever" on a domestic machine. I have yet to see a research paper where they follow a group of unsupervised, uneducated, random selection of the population ( old, young , injured etc... ) to see how they all cope.
Any commercial studio owner will tell you the vigilance that goes into keeping customers from not doing some pretty random stuff left to their own devices. No professional who has seen this behavior up close and personal ( gets to a point where nothing astonishes us any longer ) would actually recommend a machine sold to anyone without a set of strict instructions.
(3) The machines ........ Every single Physio or Trainer recommending "anything goes" is only doing so based on very old lighter designs. They know what advancements are coming but seem to be unwilling to future proof our industry to account for these coming changes. Logically speaking that makes no sense, if you know something is coming, isn't factoring it into your current reasons for doing something and adjusting accordingly what people look for in an "expert".
How many times have you heard the saying " Well they should have seen this coming " Well I have, and that's what the Static Safety Program is all about.
Here is a quote about the Static Safety Program from an "expert" ( note: who only has access to older designs )....
Glen Ruscoe..... " I must say that in my years of experience I have learnt that theories are usually wrong and sometimes may even have ulterior motives."
So what ulterior motives would I have had 7 years ago to create the Static Safety Program ...... ?
(1) Well first off I do not retail machines, and I personally support a number of companies that sell all types of machines to the public. So its logically not greed. I also encourage them to build better machines. Who else does that ?
(2) My theories are off ? It is possible, but I managed to write dozens of theories in my work to build better machines. Every single one was proven correct in physical experiments where I went on to build an entire company off that success. I have not yet had a failure.
(3) I am 4 years 6 months into a 5 year physical experiment where my body receives no other exercise but my own machines and the Static Safety Program. The results have been fantastic ( will soon be posted in another article so it wont be considered opinion ) . You can judge me.
(4) I am out to sabotage peoples functional strength ...... ? Again I talk the talk, and walk the walk. My mortuary work relies on functional strength lifting dead weight ( you can wreck your back very easily doing this ) , it is a profession I enjoy doing and have no intention of ever giving up. So would never take unnecessary physical risks that might jeopardize that.
Note: I have gotten significantly stronger over the last few years. So another of my "theories" proven correct.
Can anyone give me one logical reason for me misleading everyone on any of the subjects I write about.
Greed ? Jealousy ? I'm an idiot ? ................. We have a forum where your theories can be put forward on that one. Please feel welcome to make suggestions. In the mean time only one question remains......
Are they really advocating "anything goes" in place of a Safety Program. Should home users who have no access to supervision, be left to their own devices ? To be told to move around how they like on the machines ?
Or are they saying that no home machines should not be sold at all ?
Because you cant have it both ways.
