Sal...

The fact you deliberatly keep using a term like WBV to explain an entire industry , even though you know better , makes you actually worse than the marketers you dislike.

They do it for greed.

You do it to prop up your own arguement.

You are all just as bad as each other in my books.

You still have not even tried this form of training for youreslf even though you wrote the first article debunking it 12 months ago.

You have to ask yourself one question folks. Would you trust a movie critic that had not even seen the actual movie. Just read others reviews ?

So dont bother with a comeback.

Lazy is not even the word for your lack of effort. And I dont do lazy.

this is an interesting response, someone who says they don't do lazy, yet relies on data from a NASA study that doesn't pertain to real people in any way shape or form. and don't bother dealing with the results of studies that don't support the use of WBV.

actually, comparing movies to WBV is appropriate since most movies - like WBV - are fiction-based.

I did not rely on anyones Data. I looked at what they hadn't done. I designed and built my own units surrounding my own Theories.

You are the one who apparently relies soley on others homework .

I do not believe you have ever been involved in inventing or developing something before . So the fact remains "everything" you use in daily life is a result of someone elses efforts but you take for granted where those ideas come from ?

Note: Most invention is 99% failure only 1% success.

As I have also said before , you have a good case with marketers being unethical. But I propose your mantra of " all machines dont work " is as bad as their " all machines do work ".

You should know better.

This from some of the blogs Sal recieved in 2006 .

"What's interesting to me is that you seem to have formed an opinion without trying the machine or first hand knowledge of it."

"I think his argument would be more compelling if he were to actually test WBV for himself and report on the results." (Sal Supporter )

Kind of makes a joke of his statement about himself...

"I call on my 20 years of experience when I form my opinions and make judgements."

here's a review of llyod's attempts to drum up support for a failed training method.

he tells me he has great research that shows that WBV works and he'd like to send it to me. he sends me the old NASA research that has nothing to do with human beings walking on the face of the earth. he also sends me the marketing materials from the manufacturer of one of these gimmicks.

when faced with research from neutral parties that reveal WBV to be a fraud he ignores this data and attacks the messenger.

no wonder WBV is failing to gain support.

Sorry Sal....

I only developed my first unit in 2004. Considering you have never designed and released anything ever yourself I would not expect you to understand the process.

Unlike you my reputation is built on hard work. Not copying someone elses. So im sorry if its not as quick as you want.

But thankyou I am trying to fight obesity, and I think you just help me identify a new type.

Obesity of the mind.

Yes I am still to prove myself to the world . but have 25 studios already in N.Z. and Australia and this growth is results driven. No fancy marketing.

We dont charge for peple with MS , MD , MND or Parkinsons and other life threatening disorders. We also sponsor people where their weight is a direct threat to their life.

And we are helping people.

You can sit behind your desk and dismiss that all you want. But it is far more real than your opinion.

this is quite a system here...tell people that gimmick A works because it's backed by research. then someone actually looks at the research and reports that the research doesn't back the gimmick's use, and reports that new research doesn't support the use of the gimmick, and advises that the gimmick should not be "bought."

supporters of gimmick A - in this case WBV - tell the person who is reporting on these findings that he/she isn't qualified to make a judgement based on the fact that the person never tried gimmick A. when in the first place we're told that research supports the use of the gimmick. but it doesn't.

interesting.

bottom line is that people have been told that research shows WBV does certain things, when the reality is that it doesn't.

"I call on my 20 years of EXPERIENCE when I form my opinions and make judgements."

Your words not mine. We have a saying here in N.Z.

Yea, Right !!!

Only you could find negatives about such comments as..

"WBV will be an ideal therapy for people with low-performance capacity"

"Appears that half-squat strength training could be rendered more energy efficient through addition of vibration,"

"feasible to introduce WBV into regular training programs for purpose of muscle hypertrophy and fat reduction."


The only fact here is that you have already painted yourself into a corner by publishing material about a subject you now admit you have not even experienced ( no excuses offered ). But putting your reputation on the line by saying it can never work.

If it does you will never live it down.

The fourth study titled "Influence of Vibration Training on Energy Expenditure in Active Men" says that Energy Expenditure and Perceived Exertion are higher when doing semi-squat position with vibration compared with non vibration squat and heart rate isn't significantly changed. Also EE and PE remain higher during recovery.

Quote:[Thus, it would appear that HS half-squat)strength training could be rendered more energy-efficient through the addition of vibration. Moreover, it would be feasible to introduce vibration exercises into regular training programs, particularly those whose key objective is muscle hypertrophy along with fat reduction.]

How can you write this up as if it were a negative result Sal? The wording of the result is "careful" as it is with many Studies, yet the result is positive!

In fact it's a result that my partner could tell you about as it's exactly the result he got from Vibration Training 2x weekly on a Specialised High-Force Sports Platform. He built up quad muscle (suitable for a Sprinter) and he was not happy at all as he is an Endurance Athlete. His complaint was not that Whole Body Vibration Training didn't work BUT that doing semi squat position on a high-force machine worked too well! He's taken a month off while continuing his running training and taking part in two run events and has just started WBV training again using a regular-force machine and the regular balanced program to help with general fitness and body core stability.

He laughs at your comment: "bottom line is that people have been told that research shows WBV does certain things, when the reality is that it doesn't."

It definitely did something for him. Firstly it gave him improved body core stability and overall fitness/strength, then it built up unwanted (for him) quads muscle hypertrophy (in both size and strength). Runners Run! Many avoid Cross-Training although they know they need it. Weights remain unused as they'd rather run for 60minutes. The only training apart from running that my partner was doing was Whole Body Vibration Training 2x week for 10mins.

If the Vibration Training didn't do it then maybe you can explain how he built up unwanted muscle hypertrophy by just running.

the conclusions reached by the researchers in this study rely upon Perceived Exertion as well as Energy Expenditure to reach their conclusion.

PE injects a subjective measure into the equation. with regard to EE, the researchers did not include a control group to see if other methods could also result in increased EE while performing the squat. this is typical of these WBV studies. there are several ways these researchers could have increased energy expenditure while squatting, none of which involve peforming the exercise on an expensive piece of equipment.

with regard to the anecdotal success story that you provide, as i mention in the piece, this is just rumor and gossip.

So your personal experiences should also not be repeated on blogs Sal , because in your own opinion they are worthless.

Strange thing to admit.

Energy Expenditure and Perceived Exertion

Try (or imagine) this test: 1. Stand in a semi-squat position on a non moving floor for 60 seconds. Consider your EE and PE. Rest for 5 mins. 2. Stand in a semi-squat position on top of your washing machine while it is in the spin cycle (vibrating)for 60 seconds. Consider the EE and PE required to remain in position for the 60 seconds. It's not Rocket Science to understand that EE and PE is higher when the ground/platform is moving. (and yes, obviously benefits of this are debatable)


Concerning Success Stories: Isn't that what happens everyday. Someone tells a neighbor a success story and the neighbor if needing that same result, tries the same method or at very least shares the joy. Human Life is all about community and stories. I'd rather try out something (in this case Whole Body Vibration Training especially as all brands of studio that I know of give the first session free)to see is it works for me, even paying a small amount of $'s over a trial period, than just mindlessly believe that it wont work no matter how many people's "rumor and gossip" says it does, especially, as you have pointed out so often, some of the studies lack control groups.

There are many people here who are living proof that WBV training (for fitness) and WBV therapy (for rehab and people with some medical conditions) works. A Body Composition Analyzer measures Percent Body Fat, Visceral Fat Mass, Waist-Hip Ration, BMI, Circumference of limbs etc and changes over time are evident. You will reply that the people are using some other method of "change" but for most this isn't so. All they've changed is to add WBV to their fitness program. For those needing weight reduction they do add some cardio and some diet controls. This has got to be good - in fact it can be Life Saving!

In the article you say "what should be obvious to everyone -- if you aren't moving, you aren't exercising". Your comments are about vibrating dumbells but no matter that, Yes, I agree. Have you seen a WBV platform? It moves! The person standing (in position) on it is definitely moving! Also there's no getting away from the working pain of exercise.

When on the machine my body is moving but I am not actively moving it. My body hurts - I feel some pain/effort in the targeted muscle group. I have measured gains (on body analyzer). I also have gains in learnt ability especially in body core stability and in arm (pull-ups) positions. Both of these named gains just might have also occurred without vibration - to what degree I don't know so, again you can claim rumour and gossip but for me, It works! I find it much harder to do a pull-up position while gripping vibrating handlebars (difficult to explain without a pic) on a machine than without the vibration.. the result difference, who knows? It works for me and at very low cost, way less than a conventional gym.

In my opinion WBV platforms are a valid way of fitness training and therapy use. You can write against it but unless you've taught your students never to question, you just might get them curious enough to "give it a go!"

Oh sorry , I get it now , only your experiences are real and worth repeating , everybody elses are fake ( rumor and gossip ).

Sounds fair to me.

These are all direct quotes from Sals blogs..

"and the muscle groups further away from the vibration get less of a vibration effect. So how can this machine help the upper body?"

I can gain from this Sal does not do bench press because his hands are too far away from his chest ? He simply rests the weight on his chest and does some kind of flexing movement ? Cool.

Refering to Vibration Training pads...

"this is nothing more than a bigger version of the electronic stim pads"

He got Vibration mixed up with Electric shocks ?

That is basic science , the kind of thing I learnt by the time I was 8 , who knows Sal , maybe you were sick that day ?

If you want to keep any credibility you will explain the massive holes in these comments. So people can at least trust some conclusions you come to.

Or you could just ignore these mistakes like the marketers you love so much.

keep commenting because the more you write, the more that you reveal how little you know. it's no wonder you've wasted your time trying to develop a product based on such an incredibly flawed premise such as WBV.

and don't bother discussing these recent studies that clearly show how ineffective and inefficient WBV is.

look on the bright side, at least you aren't involved with selling the $15k scam known as the ROM machine, although i'm sure with your background in WBV you'd be able to adapt your approach. they misuse and mistate research in order to sell their product as well.

I was told at a vibra train studio that you could burn a 1,000 calories in one workout. Sounds like a bit of a stretch to me. Is there any research to show it works on obesity?

Sal,

Lloyd Shaw would know far more about WBV and the effects on the human body because of his involvment in it than yourself.

Your statement:

"keep commenting because the more you write, the more that you reveal how little you know."

is beyond belief from someone who is commenting on something he has not even tried.

To put it bluntly about the research..

Most has not taken place or has been crap due to the following reasons.

(1) Past tests have had little thought put into them with most researchers clearly not knowing what to do with the machines or test subjects. Risky behaviour being the norm. Eg.. jumping up and down on a unit , full range of motion being allowed , carrying weights etc.

(2) Marketers or the manufacturor themselves supplying fake specs , couple that with the researchers forgetting to get the units tested by an engineer. Means even minimal positives in tests cant be repeated.

This has just been admitted by a researcher on vibrationtraining.net but they are going to release the study anyway.

(3) Cant get anyone interested in weight loss trails due to (now I am guessing here) lack of personal interest in or belief in fighting obesity using anaerobic activity.

Result...

I dont trusts the people who should be proving me right or wrong to put in the required effort. My theories remain theories.

Except for those who can get off their backside to try it though.

If the academic researchers had half an idea of what results Lloyd Shaw has attained with the clients that go to him, "some of which have never been charged a cent" they would stop wasting money on research that has already been done and spend it on a ticket to Auckland! I'm not saying that research is not good or that Lloyd has the answer to everything, but from what I have seen Lloyd is a good 5 years ahead of anyone else in this industry "Don't Believe Me?" Time has a way of exposing the truth, as we have just found out with powerplate NZ.
Honestly guys the best $ i ever spent was buying a plane ticket to Auckland to see for myself what Lloyd was about.
It almost frustrates me to the point of swearing when some of you so called academics run Lloyd down for what he is doing to fight obesity and desease.

Alot of people accuse Lloyd of promoting WBV for financial gain, where as I wonder how many of you would cut and run after being offered over 1 billion dollars to set up a WBV factory by a very large well known company? One thing I know is Lloyd turned it down flat!!!
You may want to think again before you accuse Lloyd of wrong motivation. :)

To be academic Mike it was only a % of $1.2B , not the whole lot.

Sal your comment...

"your time trying to develop a product"

As though its a negative is typical of someone who is limited to using other peoples ideas to earn a living. But I suppose you do only claim to be a teacher not an inventer.

Still waiting for your answer regarding your basic science skills.

Another point to make Sal ,

I have 25 studios , lots of staff at each one, why havn't I gotten half of them to jump on to the forums , pose as happy customers. I could bomb the net with so much propaganda no-one would know which way was up and you know it.

I do not think you even remotely understand my ideas , which is why you are finding it hard to deal with. But I can find no excuse for your deliberate attempt to confuse readers by suggesting electricity is the same as vibration. This was not an honest thing to do.

I will expect a public appology when this is all done.

wayne:
thanks...i'm sure lloyd knows a lot about WBV...he just doesn't know how to train people to exercise properly and lacks understanding as to the basics of conditioning. furthermore, you and he share the same lack of reading comprehension as i have made it quite clear for the past year that the research touted by WBV hucksters doesn't back their claims and therefore people shouldn't buy the equipment.

susan:
based on the claims of increased energy expenditure from WBV, certainly the WBV crowd will point to this as proof that WBV is effective in cases of obesity. however, anyone who claims that you can burn 1000 calories in a single vibration session is engaging in irresponsible sales tactics...stay away.

I must start my lengthy comment with the following points:

-I am a researcher, with great interest in WBV. However, I try to continue to maintain a level of questioning so that my view isn't too biased (everyone has some level of bias). My goal is to increase the knowledge of WBV in the scientific community and hopefully, convey that to the consumer through various media (like this one).

-I do not claim to know everything about WBV and therefore, I will say that everything is much not known about WBV and we are still learning (even if some feel that it is slowly). Potential buyers must be presented with an even view of WBV; that is has some potential but a lot is still not known about it, especially over the long-term.

-I am tired of the personal attacks against myself (see comment #22) and others on these blogs and my aim in these comments is to fully inform those individuals that stumble upon this article. Hopefully they will take the time to read this far.


My comments to Sal's article:

General Comment: When reading a research article, an individual can remove a single sentence (or part of a sentence) and discuss it as an item that is supportive of their point of view. However, this is essentially wrong when it comes to critiquing research. All information presented must be taken in the context of the article, what was measured, and the limitations (all studies have them). This is a common mistake in those who are not schooled in reading research (and reading research is a hard skill to learn). Don't be drawn into either side of the argument by accepting this as a scientific tactic since it will only mislead you (both for and against WBV).


1) "Manufacturers . . . have seized upon an incredibly thin volume of research in order to support the claims that WBV training can improve fitness levels."

This is a very true statement. In the world of research, WBV is a newborn baby. And manufacturers and marketers do what they do. Just because they abuse the research to support their sales though, doesn't make WBV inherently bad or inefficient. Marketing is not limited to WBV and buyers must beware in regards to everything that is thrown at them, not just WBV.


2) "Marketers of these devices have been making the claims that WBV is ideal for all members of the population despite the lack of any real evidence."

The fact is that we don't know if it is "ideal" or not. As with any thing that differs from a traditional resistance training and cardio workout, almost no one will argue that it is the best or only workout, by itself. However, it might be a great starting point, temporary supplement, and addition to the norm (just as many "fads" are in the fitness industry, i.e. kettlebells or chains). Still, doesn't mean that it is bad or inefficient.


3) "Most WBVers rely on some research done by NASA, and the former USSR"

Actually, there are over 200 articles on WBV out there (at least that I have found). Take a look at any WBV site and you will see that they list a multitude of articles (many of which don't apply to WBV or are not full research articles at all). The NASA/USSR concept is typically used in explaining the origins of WBV. Not that much research, actually, has been published by NASA or from the former USSR. Just in July so far, there have been 2 studies published (not including a Rubin study and a direct vibration study). I would say the research is very current.


4) "Since astronauts are the only folks who are going to be weightless anytime soon, the results of zero gravity WBV studies don't pertain to consumers."

Actually, zero gravity does pertain since there are a huge number of the world's population that are wheel chair bound (i.e. non-weight bearing on their legs) and thus, suffer from rapid muscle atrophy and bone loss. Since astronauts lose these even faster than these individuals or those with osteoporosis, they are a very good group to use. This is also a good model to compare to osteoporosis, a huge problem facing an ever aging generation (at least in the US).


5) "And of course there are the testimonials from those folks who have allegedly benefited . . ."

Moot point, you could say this with almost anything. All companies use testimonials or endorsements to sell things. Nothing new and not isolated to WBV.


6) "Other research touted by the WBV industry is similarly flawed and should be viewed as marketing department generated research and not scientific data."

I would think that those individuals who reviewed the studies that you proclaim to be worthless and the journals that published them would beg to differ. While everyone is welcome to their opinion, I don't remember what qualifications Sal has to make this judgment. Master's or PhD degree? Or just the bachelor's and the CSCS? Have you ever design a research study or taken a research design class? Basic or advanced statistics? Nothing against Sal but I don't think he is qualified to critically analyze research. That is like me trying to perform open-heart surgery; I am sure I could a few cuts and sew it back together but I don't think it would help the individual. This is directly related to my general comment as a lack of understanding of research is evident here (as it is with most who make comments on this blog).


7) "These studies rarely mention the massive expense of WBV machines and don't include critical study and analysis that compares WBV to other, less costly modes of exercise."

Last time I checked, the most cost effective models for fitness are gyms since resistance training equipment is also expensive. This is the model that Lloyd uses (and in my opinion, is the best). No single piece of equipment that is somewhat (and up to very) expensive is worth it by itself because no one piece is the panacea for fitness and health. For example, Nautilus started out expensive but the supply and demand of the market drove its price down; it will do the same for WBV machines. My hope though is that WBV becomes integrated in the existing gyms and is not presented as a stand-alone tool.

Also, many studies done on WBV have show it similar (not better or worse) than resistance training. Does this not qualify as "critical study and analysis that compares WBV to other, less costly modes of exercise"? Or does it only count if it supports an individual viewpoint?


8) "WBV will be an ideal therapy for people with low-performance capacity (muscle weakness in frail, elderly or diabetic patients).' Emphasis is provided to reinforce the position that WBV is not suitable for people who are in shape or even remotely capable."

Just because an exercise is "ideal" for one population doesn't mean that it is worthless for another. For a long time, it was believed that jump training in the elderly was bad for them until someone tried it and found that it is both helpful and can be related to their ability to catch themselves when falling. This is something that has been shown by research.


9) "WBV training needs to be performed at joint angles similar to angles used in the performance task to be improved." This reality makes WBV impractical for the vast majority of the population and certainly for anyone who isn't extremely limited."

Actually, this is a common theme in resistance training. It is called sport-specific training. Why would you require an adult of average health do perform deep squats? This doesn't make sense, is not functional, and does not enhance (and may worsen) their workout. If an individual can only move in a restricted range of motion, wouldn't that be better than not moving at all?


10) "It's worth noting that this is the first study to investigate the acute effect of UBV as it pertains to sport-specific strength and power, and the researchers found that UBV had no effect.

This is very different than WBV and should not be listed in the same group. A light-weight, vibrating dumbbell would not create enough tension in the muscle in order to cause a reflex of the amount necessary to elicit increase neuromuscular activation. Whereas, standing or squatting causes an increased tension in the muscle and vibration can be transmitted more efficiently. Don't confuse yourself and everyone else into believing that this type of vibration is the same as WBV.


11) This "science" is nothing more than marketing materials on steroids that are designed to intimidate and confuse people into thinking that WBV is a valid mode of training. Throwing scientific sounding terms at people is a tactic used by supplement and equipment companies in an effort to generate sales.

This is a very good point; however, it has been phrased in the wrong way. The "science" of WBV (which there is a science behind it) is being used in the unethically by marketers in that they present a bunch of articles on their web sites thinking that quantity will show that WBV works. I have seen articles on sites (including vibra-train.com) that have utilized a study called "Suppressive mechanism of gastric mobility by WBV", showing their obvious need to provide any research just to obtain quantity. In reality, this industrial study showed that WBV at 4 Hz for 10 minutes causes some gastrointestinal symptoms (i.e. reduced mobility due to suppressed intestinal muscle activity). I don't know why someone would want to show this as backup for their device or training method, but it is there in many places. This is a perfect example of misused research, not bad science.


12) "Only the most infirm should be exposed to WBV training"

Great point because WBV is going to increase in the treatment of different neuro-, muscle, skeletal conditions. It will be a great rehabilitation tool and will be used all over the world. Of this, I am confident.


13) "These researchers found that squatting at a greater frequency helps to maximize energy expenditure during exercise with or without WBV."

It is too bad you took this sentence out of context since the next sentence says that "cycle time duration (how fast they squat) must be controlled with vibration exercise is applied". This is applicable to future research on WBV and energy expenditure since how fast individuals squat on a platform changes the energy expenditure (something to be controlled for in future research).

This study also indicated that "WBV may also be of interest to those who exercise, at least partly for weight control." This means that WBV helps with individuals who need to lose weight (many of us). Furthermore, this study reports that individuals wanting to lose weight should perform slower movements on the WBV machine in order to metabolize fat. The article goes on to say that individuals also need to change their diet for results in order to achieve a negative energy balance (i.e. lose weight).


14) "PE is measured by the researchers' observations as to how hard the subjects are working at a given task"

Sorry but you need to review your textbooks for what PE is. It is also called the Borg Scale and is actually a measure of the participants' perception of how hard the task was. When this is done before and after an activity, it has been found to be a reliable (is consistent) and objective measure. If this study is flawed because of this test (which it is not), then there are over 2000 articles that are flawed because they use this scale as well, and many of them are traditional resistance training studies. Ironic, isn't it?!?!

Seeing as Sal has spent lots of time asking us questions about our right to have an opinion. But is being very dodgy when asked direct questions about his lack of knowledge in basic sciences and sports physiology.

(1) Electric shock = Vibration ?

(2) Pressure on hands cannot effect upper body workout ?

I will go around him and ask the science dept at his school and fill them in on his comments . Maybe they can get something out of him.

Hard to take anything he says seriously till them.

Come on Sal....Your comment

"an incredibly flawed premise such as WBV."

goes to your own belief you are educated enough to critic something as complicated as kenetic energy + physiology.

You going to rum away instead of explain ?

Sal,

I'm a distributor of both WBV machines and electro-stimulators. Enough has been rectified by David regarding WBV.

I would like to reply to a statement in your response #8 of the blog "The Healthy Skeptic: Madonna And The Power Plate Workout". You wrote referring to WBV:

"... this is nothing more than a bigger version of the electronic stim pads that were advertised as being able to develop muscles depending on where you connected the pads, especially in the abdominal region..."

I agree that the hyperbole about electro-stimulators has given them a bad rep in the US. However, this doesn't take away from serious electro-stimulator devices that produce training effects, when used properly. I have recently received FDA certification for one of these devices, to be sold over the counter. Many other devices can be purchased with a physician's prescription. These are routinely used by many thousands physiotherapists in the USA, for recovery of atrophied muscles following limb immobilization caused by injury.

In Europe, were the hyper of loosing-belly-fat-while-watching-TV impacted consumers differently, and with more sport-backed examples, the acceptance rate has been much higher. We recommend that people use it not as a substitute, but to supplement their exercise routine. There is actually something that electro-stimulators do better than voluntary exercise: they recruit close to 100% of muscle fibers, whereas voluntary exercise stimulates about 80% of muscle fibers. Professional teams and serious athletes use them.

But Sal said WBV machines and electro-stimulators are the same thing , so they must be right ? Or Sal would have done the ethical thing by now and informed us he was just guessing , to try and look smart.

God help the Kids he teaches.

Vibration training is dangerous. it is rumored to cause arthritis along with having no benefit on training what so ever! lloyd you make me ashamed of being a kiwi with your comments!!!

I am not getting involved in this . . . . . . . I was gona say debate but i will use propaganda! When there is money to be made people will talk al sorts of S**T!!! You fools trying to pass off your vibration crap should be ashamed! UP YA!!!

I am not getting involved in this . . . . . . . I was gona say debate but i will use propaganda! When there is money to be made people will talk al sorts of S**T!!! You fools trying to pass off your vibration crap should be ashamed! UP YA!!!

by the way Lloyd I have been involved in the fitness industry in NZ since i was 15 and have never heard of you or your studio!???

Hi Shane
Your name doesn't come up if I search "google NZ" or the Register of Exercise Professionals so you're not so well known yourself.

If you have heard of Vibration Training at all, you would have heard of Vibra-Train as it's NZ's no. 1 name of Vibration Training Studios.

Where are you getting your info from? You say Vibration Training is dangerous and it's rumoured to cause arthritis..that's laughable as it can help people with some types of arthritis. Please state your sources,thanks.

Ohhhhhhh vibration training studios! I thought Lloyd had studios related to health and fitness!?? I never said I am well known and because I know vibration training to be a crock of S**T I don't bother to find out who owns the studios, Like I said I have been involved in the health and fitness industry!

and my sources, well i was involved in the sale of fitness equipment in NZ for many years. I actually left due to my conscience, I would NOT sell crap that I know doesn't work so resigned when the market got flooded with vibration trainers and bendy bows! I have read many articles about vibration and joints and know all power tool manufactures try to avoid vibration like the plague! I have trained many many people and know what works and what does not. I think in a few years there will be many court cases linking vibration training to arthritis. I had a customer who told me about the study so can not direct you to it. his job was in the design of power tools. The evidence is not favorable for your vibration trainers. I will never take anyones word when it comes to the fitness industry only believe in something when I see the results! Like I said I have seen many vibration machines sold! and I have yet to see any RESULTS!!!

You KNOW?? Please state our source! How do you know? what investigation have you done? Have you even been to a Vibration Training Studio? Have you researched on the internet, magazines, studies, talked to people?? I'm curious

ah, okay. So you know of home user vibration machines and industrial vibration. A little research will tell you that Studio Vibration Training machines are very different to the above. You would be welcome at any Vibra-Train studio for a free session and you can ask all the questions you want. I dare you! Or if you are in Auckland you can go and see Lloyd at his Studio.

like I said i am not going to wast anymore time on this forum. I have realized you can spend just as much time debating a pointless topic as you can something worth while and you can only reason with reasonable people! When I see thousands off people lose weight due to vibration training i will come back to this forum. But Im sure it will be court cases I will see in the media!

Oh and Lloyd does have Vibration Training Studios that are definitely related to Health and Fitness. They've helped my fitness and body core strength and also recovery from a knee injury

I see you have been reading propoganda about losing weight using Vibration Training. Weight loss is only a part of the use of Whole Body Vibration. Weight loss does happen but Vibration Training needs to be used alongside some cardio work like walking ( just gentle walking for obese people) and of course a sensible diet. You can't pig out and Vibration Train and think it's a magic weightloss machine.
You are being quite ignorant if this s all you know of Vibration Training and you don't bother to find out more. You're right though: some people can't be talked with as they have already made up their minds and are very wrong but stuck in a rut!

It is the isometric contraction that is giving you the benefit not the vibration! An isotonic contraction would be far more beneficial. Also it is up to the inventor to PROVE their invention. that has not happened! Only a FOOL would expect someone to disprove their product before they prove it! It has been disproved many times! why would I research it? should I research every product that has not been proven yet? I have better things to do! anyway like I said, wasted too much time on here as it is! See ya.

Someone else will answer more knowledgebly than me but isotonic contraction is not useful to Vibration Training. Relaxing while staying in position is way it works. Some brands do get people to do dynamic work but for the general public this isn't necessary or even wise. Maybe you know more than you are saying as you really are stirring.

Shane...

I do not sell machines to the public or gyms etc....

I am a mortician.

Shane...

I have made it very clear my concerns about machines being sold to the public , including writing papers on the health risks involved.

The studies you refer to with occupational exposure is called ISO 2631.

But the fact I have to inform you of that speaks for itself.

Great to see Sal the expert rushing back to defend him self.

Ohh and Shane the only reason you have the end on your willy is to stop your hand slipping off! Try and do some research next time b4 you comment on something you no nothing about.

Shane, Your attitude to something you know nothing about is shamefull. You are basing your argument on rumour and what a friend has told you.

Why dont you do something different in your life - and think for yourself, research for yourself - thoroughly.

Until then as you say, dont "waste your time here". come back with some reasonable discussion based on fact. Not rumour and what friends tell you.

1. A couple years ago I found the website of a US maufacturer which said that they would "test" each user to determine that person's own vibration and that the machine would have corresponding Hz settings for a safe, optimal workout. Does anyone know which company this is (located in the mid-west I think)?

2. There was another machine which was being sold on the premise that it did not vibrate above the shoulders. I think this is a very valid concern and would like to know if anyone knows which ones do not vibrate the head as I think this is not healthy both from reading as well as my own experience on a variety of machines.

3. There is a device being sold through the airline cataloge (in the seat back pocket) for about $700. Does anyone know about the quality of this machine?

4. I have tried about 6 machines (from inexpensive to very expensive) and am ready to buy one but am VERY confused by all I have read. I need a machine for bone density (osteoporosis) as well as improving muscle tone and strengthing. Please advise on which US model offers the best value/quality.

5. Is there any safe device/method for an elderly person with spinal stenosis and chronic back and knee pain, who is pacemaker dependent?

Hi Vic

Please go this site and you will get the answers you need. You especially need to ask about using a machine if you are pacemaker dependent.

Yes please visit that site , and spend time reading all the articles.

But I will go through your questions here in brief.

(1) Nemes ( Bosco system )

(2) Rubbish , just a low energy platform.

(3) For $700 I would not expect much.

(4) Body-Shaker Junior or Hyper-Gravity personal.

(5) All conditions listed can be treated on a special unit I have designed. Apart from pacemaker , that will remain a solid contra-indication untill further tests are done.

Lloyd Shaw, you seem like a person with a lot of knowledge in the area. I'm in the market for 10 pieces for my spas. Which companies can you recommend me? Its really hard to distinguish good and bad by just visiting different internet sites. I'm in Central America. And as a plus could you give me the name of the persons I should contact?
Thanks.

Chris...

E-mail me . Bit to cover.

Chris, I know that Globus Italia has offices in South America, but no distributors in Central America. If you click on my URL you can then talk to the main office in Italy (they speak Spanish well enough) and get the coordinates of Central America agents that import their products and platforms.

In defense of the original article by Sal, it should be obvious that he was writing to a lay audience. For this reason I would not attack his scientific knowledge and think it is pretty useless for anyone to critique lay writing with technical prose.

I cannot defend the follow-up comments by Sal which somehow remain lay with a somewhat undergraduate flair when challenged by an opposing view of the literature. Unfortunately the same or worse can be said about Sal's antagonists on this board.

The peer reviewed literature available is limited on this subject. It is even more limited when one purports that one form of "Vibration Training" or equipment is superior to others for any outcome variable one cares to measure.
I think one of Sal's points correctly stresses the lack of well designed studies in this area. That is typical of most examinations of newer concepts which due to lack of funding begin to chip away at the problem using easier methods or by the initiation of pilot studies to discover feasibility and better directions before committing too much time and effort.

Media and marketing always take what they need from such scraps. I am no proponent of anecdotal support but it is easily the better choice from a marketing perspective. Therefore, it should come as no shock that the primary propelling force behind any business success using Vibration Training at this point is anecdotal.

No one is asking but if I have to weigh in on one side or the other, personally, I would take a wait and see position on Vibration type Training. It is certainly not a mature method of training nor is it a maturing method based on the literature so far for any given population. So my money is better left in my pocket. If I belonged to a fitness club of some sort that decided to spend money on obtaining these devices for their members to use. Why Not? I am already paying for the membership and it might put that spark back into my overall training routine.

The research should continue in this area or there about and I am sure it probably will. After all, my wife's vagina has certainly firmed up since she started using a vibration device!

Unwittingly your stance is more leaning towards our comments which is " give the real industry time to prove itself "

I have no problem with poeple not trusting something new and I in fact promote the questioning of all marketing.

But Sals " It can't work because I don't understand how it could" is not exactly a good starting point for a debate or critical article.

hey Xphyz sorry to see you couldn't satisfy your wife enough, must cost you a fortune in batteries :)

Couldn't help the crude statement at the end. I was getting bored with my own comment. I have no idea what you all are writing about. I just pump gas!

Sal,
Have read your critique on whole body vibration training with interest, and agree that much of the research submitted by the myriad of manufacturers would not withstand peer review; and that conclusions are extrapolated from these studies that do not follow from the studies hypotheses. That being said, I have had an opportunity to train on one manufacturers unit, following a protocol partly designed and endorsed by Mark Verstagen (don't know if he has "street cred" with you or not)and can offer only empiric evidence based upon my workout. A thirty minute session including warmup, balance training, anaerobic component,strength training, and "regeneration",kicked my posterior. While I am not in peak condition, I do work out regularly with weights, play B-ball, elliptical trainer, roller blade etc. I am a former competitive swimmer and runner and have experienced intense interval training in the past. I am an old school physical education teacher, formerly was CSCS certified, and retired as a Podiatrist several years ago, briefly had an affiliation with a local NHL team. Max pulse rate reached 180 bpm, experienced functional failure with static, and dynamic movements, sometimes with added load, other times with bodyweight only. Did experience doms, particularly glutes and quads. No unexpected adverse effects (granted, based on a single session).I do not believe that had I performed the same routine off the plate that I would have been significantly challenged.
As to certain "industry leaders", I have read a number of entries at this and other sites, and note that they spend inordinate amounts of time defending themselves and expounding on their credentials, and tend to use uneccessary technobabble to either impress the uninformed, or deflect legitimate questions for which thay have no credible answers. Controlled studies performed by unbiased researchers comparing a standard gym based workout to a comparable WBV workout should be undertaken. Verstagen has incorporated these units into all his training sites.

The reason why some of us start to sound as though we are using "technobabble" is we have given up trying to explain things like.....

" not falling over takes up energy and muscle movement , so not falling over 40times a second takes up more"

We are now having to educate people about how gravity works so they can grasp that basic
concept. No easy task without sounding like a teacher. Sorry.

I read Sal's initial article and I enjoyed it actually. Didn't agree with all of it, but could also see some points he was trying to make.
I then proceeded to read all 62 comments over the next hour and a half. A very interesting read.....

My husband and I tried a WBV machine for the first time a few days ago. The machine we were looking at purchasing is by Acupaedic and retailed at AUD$1820.

My husband reported he was a little sore afterwards, but the next day felt very energetic and able to complete work tasks in virtually record time - adrenalin perhaps?
For me on the other hand, I felt absolutely no difference during or after the exercise. Interesting because this actually lends some merit to earlier postings about the machine being more effective for people who actually need to exercise more, or for those who are in 'need' of increasing mobility. My husband has been overweight (120kg) for years now and I am exactly half his weight.

In regards to marketing ploys, these will happen with any product anywhere in the world. I know this is off the track, but what about that ridiculous robot vacuum cleaner that you simply turn on and this little circular, flimsy plastic thing rotates and scuffs around your floors apparently 'vacuuming'. You should have seen the marketing riff-raff here in Australia for that ridiculous thing! The place we tried the WBV the other day had this selling pitch: "Used by Madonna, NASA and more!" I mean come on.....I was not going to buy the machine because Madonna has used it!! ha-ha (I had to laugh).

As indicated by lack of information through studies pertaining yet unknown long term effects of vibration training on people with varying degrees of mobility/health issues, I think prolonged use could in fact cause some adverse friction to the body. In my mind, this is simply common sense. My apologies I can't source the following information very well, as my husband cut and pasted bits he found from the net and didn't reference which websites they came from! But in the pieces he has accumulated, the overwhelming majority state that although it is of no aerobic benefit, bone density is improved, and the body is toned and massaged. On the other hand, there is a clippit by Clinton Rubin from the State University of New York saying that much more research is needed because he suspects vibration levels can contribute to lower back pain, cartilage damage, blurred vision, hearing loss and even brain damage (from the body jiggling to the high-powered vibration)

So after doing a fair bit of reading on numerous sites, I have decided that the following information is probably best for me:
(Notice how I am remaining very unbiased and directing the following points as being the most applicable to ME.)

a) Using WBV over sustained periods is not recommended, but can be worthwhile and have some benefit in the short term.
b) There are too many reports out there to suggest that WBV is useless or ineffective. Consider the multitudes of available information, good or bad; if one really reads behind the lines, they will clearly see that there are SOME benefits to the machine and the stimulus provided by it to the body. As with all exercise products (and gosh I see plenty here on home shopping networks.....geez!) I believe there will not be one that can ever purport to be the one and only machine to cover absolutely every aspect of fitness. To me, that's common sense too. The day we can all enter into a portal and be zapped with glowing rays only to emerge seconds later looking tanned, fit and healthy.....will be the day I will sell the house and buy that flaming machine!
c) I think it would have to be a system used in conjunction with another exercise system, and for me I think a treadmill would be the best to use with WBV training. I lost 12 kilos and kept the kilos off over the last five years, and walking was the best and most readily available form of exercise I could have done at the time.
d) Until the price comes down on decent WBV machines, I think it may be more cost effective to use the machine in a gym setting to gain immediate, short term benefits at a fraction of the cost.

Thanks all for your contributions!

Hi Janak

A short reply to your comments. Using a good quality machine in a dedicated studio is the best option for now - similar to what you've said, until they are more readily available (with instructors when needed) in gyms and/or quality machines at affordable cost for home use, but machines for home use are not ever the same as studio machines unless you have lots of $'s to spend.

Weight loss is more immediate on a larger person needing to start exercise just as you've said but keeping weight stable or slow reduction works for all who need it. I have used vibration training for weightloss (among other benefits) and it works well but again as you've said, it's not magic.

Clinton Rubin's remarks were directed at specific types of machines - comparing then with the machine he was promoting, so could been seem as marketing. Many people have used high quality lineal vibration training machines for around 5 years now in New Zealand and other countries with good results. I have used a Vibra-Train brand machine regularly in studio for 18 months and my greatest concern was my health and safety - The results have been all very good!

If you want to buy a home machine please research more about vibration training and the types of machines first. This link
www.vibrationtraining.net
goes to a site with lots of info and you can ask more questions.

Have a personal trainer and get the healthy body....

What kind of personal trainers need to viral market ?

Go somewhere else King