Korrect wrote:
Voltaire had it right when he said: "The role of the physician is to entertain the patient while the body heals itself" You've done your research and found conflicting views which is very common. Don't count on any help; its not there. Let nature heal the injury. You'll be OK over time.
Voltaire eh? I wasn't aware that medical science peaked in the 1700s.
More like Inkorrect wrote:
Korrect wrote:
Voltaire had it right when he said: "The role of the physician is to entertain the patient while the body heals itself" You've done your research and found conflicting views which is very common. Don't count on any help; its not there. Let nature heal the injury. You'll be OK over time.
Voltaire eh? I wasn't aware that medical science peaked in the 1700s.
That's not science it's philosophy. And it's more correct than not.
I never get treatment and I always heal more fully and rapidly than all my friends who get all the fancy treatments. Imagine that.
Not a bad question, certainly one that PTs and other healthcare providers better be asking themselves. Does massage/manual treatment/ART/graston/etc help? I certainly think so based on personal and professional experiences. Do we know how it helps? Eh, not really. Science tells us that it doesnt actually break up scar tissue or change tissue fibers but it does activate chemical mediators to assist in pain relief, maybe healing? There's also the hotly debated placebo effect. But, 100% not breaking up/release fascia, etc.
Ultimately the goal is to use these therapies to help get you to properly load the injured tissues because we do know that loading is the most important factor in healing.
johnny5 wrote:
More like Inkorrect wrote:
Voltaire eh? I wasn't aware that medical science peaked in the 1700s.
That's not science it's philosophy. And it's more correct than not.
Philosophical observations regarding the worthiness of medical treatment from 300 years ago , ignoring the advances since then, are not worth much. They didn't even know germs exist, or the value of washing their hands. Get back to us with your "philosophy" when you have cancer.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance wrote:
I never get treatment and I always heal more fully and rapidly than all my friends who get all the fancy treatments. Imagine that.
My favorite way to answer questions is "it depends." What's the severity and location of the injury? How good is your body at repairing itself in terms of thoroughness and speed compared to your friends and the rest of the population. I'm maybe you're an outlier or maybe you're right or maybe it's something in between. If massage works for somebody let them do it. If it doesn't seem to work encourage them to research and pursue other methods.
Nonsense! Massage doesn't harm scarred tissue, on the contrary it helps to make the scar less visible. Several years ago I cut myself pretty bad. I was at the pool, slipped and cut my leg with a cracked brick or something I don't remember what it was as I fainted because off the pain. After a few weeks when the wound healed my therapist recommended that I went to massage so that the tissue heals better. So I went to https://masakor.com for about a month or so. The result was great now the scar is barely visible.
ImaPT wrote:
Not a bad question, certainly one that PTs and other healthcare providers better be asking themselves. Does massage/manual treatment/ART/graston/etc help? I certainly think so based on personal and professional experiences. Do we know how it helps? Eh, not really. Science tells us that it doesnt actually break up scar tissue or change tissue fibers but it does activate chemical mediators to assist in pain relief, maybe healing? There's also the hotly debated placebo effect. But, 100% not breaking up/release fascia, etc.
Ultimately the goal is to use these therapies to help get you to properly load the injured tissues because we do know that loading is the most important factor in healing.
It's just in with the good blood, out with the bad. Massage, in large part, simply pushes blood out in front of the translating point of pressure, while drawing it in behind. So, it creates a localised area of increased circulation.
Which sounds to me like a perfectly reasonable theory about how it works, while also accounting for the benefits we see. I'm not sure it needs to be much more complicated than that.
I've been a sports trainer for six years and I'm studying a masters in PT, and to me this seems as good as any other explanation
I don't see a conclusive answer to OP's question here. PT's may be established but so are podiatrists and they preach a whole lot of nonsense.
Where's the controlled study where they took people (or rats or whatever) and scarred up their tissue, then massaged them, then dissected them and found the massaged group had less scar tissue than the control?
I'm convinced of increased blood flow, and a general sense that something good will happen, which may be a placebo.
emmanuilteleshev wrote:
Nonsense! Massage doesn't harm scarred tissue, on the contrary it helps to make the scar less visible. Several years ago I cut myself pretty bad. I was at the pool, slipped and cut my leg with a cracked brick or something I don't remember what it was as I fainted because off the pain. After a few weeks when the wound healed my therapist recommended that I went to massage so that the tissue heals better. So I went to
https://masakor.comfor about a month or so. The result was great now the scar is barely visible.
Great info, thank you!