Where is the proof that 'Bone Conditioning' isn't BS?

***JohnnyCache*** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 12:47pm

point being, for you and whiteshark, et al, don't you want to know which historical methods you've been taught are meaningful? Which of them could be optimized, or dropped? I plan to teach someday, I'd really like to teach my students only true things.

**Diesel_tke** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 12:59pm

Originally Posted by JohnnyCache

point being, for you and whiteshark, et al, don't you want to know which historical methods you've been taught are meaningful? Which of them could be optimized, or dropped? I plan to teach someday, I'd really like to teach my students only true things.

Agreed. I would like to have all the BS filtered out.

**hungryjoe** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 1:05pm

Originally Posted by JohnnyCache

point being, for you and whiteshark, et al, don't you want to know which historical methods you've been taught are meaningful? Which of them could be optimized, or dropped? I plan to teach someday, I'd really like to teach my students only true things.

Hand conditioning has worked for me.

A gradual increase in impact force over the years has resulted in being to hit hard objects harder without pain in the striking area.

Callouses, bone density, nerve desensitivity ?

I know my right hand could take much more without pain than the left. That is, until a motorcycle wreck left me with a broken right wrist.

Using a lefty stance while my right had time to heal started to bring the left more in line with the right in relation to hand conditioning. This was over an extended period of time due to the extent of the damage.

The hands show no problems in dexterity.

Although not a scientific study, it is a long term observation.

Like most things in life, hand conditioning should be practiced in moderation.

**MaverickZ** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 1:22pm

First. What exactly qualifies anyone here, pro or anti, to conduct any sort of scientific experiment? Because until someone showing some qualifications, this is all just conjecture and pontification. This is especially true of the thread starter who has deemed himself capable of interpreting the results by starting the thread.

Second. Has anyone bothered to contact NASA? Considering the changes in bone density that happen between Earthside and space, they would be an authority on the subject of regaining or increasing bone density.

**Diesel_tke** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 1:24pm

Yeah, who's gonna call NASA!!!

**Matt Phillips** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 1:27pm

Originally Posted by Gezere

Originally Posted by Dale Dugas View Post
karate people have no idea how to condition their bodies or their hands correctly.

many karateka die from stomach and heart issues as those meridians are messed up with insane external only conditioning.

There actually is at least annecdotal evidence for this (the dying, not the meridians). Black Belt magazine did a piece on all the losses of prominant Karateka to heart trouble in the 90's.

**Matt Phillips** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 1:32pm

Originally Posted by Whacker

Isn't the point mostly to eliminate as many external variables as possible for the purposes of the study?

Well considering that we have only 1 volunteer, and that I have only 2 hands that can be independently tested, this is the simplest experimental design. Remember, this would never fly for publication, but we may be able to do it in a way that is convincing to this community. If we had a grant, and clearence to use human subjects we could do a real study. Do you have an actual problem with the logic of the design, given our limitations?

**Whacker** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 1:36pm

Originally Posted by War Wheel

Well considering that we have only 1 volunteer, and that I have only 2 hands that can be independently tested, this is the simplest experimental design. Remember, this would never fly for publication, but we may be able to do it in a way that is convincing to this community. If we had a grant, and clearence to use human subjects we could do a real study. Do you have an actual problem with the logic of the design, given our limitations?

No I don't have any problems with it so far. It would still be nice to perhaps get some kind of peer review before it happens as a form of sanity check. Agree it's not something that'll end up in a medical journal but still the more methodical and careful this is done, the better the results and reception IMO. Hell I might even be willing to participate. Is this just the hands? Is there any particular set methodology to be used, perhaps something from Dale?

**Matt Phillips** · Posted On: 5/22/2009 1:37pm

Originally Posted by MaverickZ

First. What exactly qualifies anyone here, pro or anti, to conduct any sort of scientific experiment? Because until someone showing some qualifications, this is all just conjecture and pontification.

WTF? We show our qualifications to the mods and get a tag. What more do you want? I'm not claiming to be an expert on bone density, but I can read (or write) a scientific paper, and design an experiment. Is anything more required here?