“I use a very special exercise technique that:
– incorporates the lateral fascial line with the arm fascial line.
– is highly functional because it not only replicates a common movement everyone does in their daily activities, but also because it involves the lateral oblique subsystem.
– Due to the positioning of the load in this exercise along with the movement pattern involved, the core muscular is forced to activate to create spinal stability through stiffness, and the shoulder is given a small distraction force, which the CNS has to offset by creating joint centration and compression for enhanced shoulder stability.
^ The exercise I just described is a single-arm biceps curl. This ends today’s lesson in how the use of cool industry jargon and sciencey sounding words can be used to “rebrand” basic exercises, add unnecessary complication to simple applications, and therefore make the person who’s communicating in this manner appear to be offering more than they really have provided.”
I’ve overheard, (and read) similar words from trainers, especially during the rise of the functional training bandwagon and later from Internet Fitness Gurus. Literally, these people sound like they swallowed a Latin Dictionary, a Big Word of the Day calendar and a Physical Therapy student textbook along with committing all the impressive sounding words from the Anatomy Trains text to memory.
The problem? Hardly anyone can understand them. Not your typical client, not a decent percent of trainers (which includes me)and sometimes not even the person making the comment.
Realistically, does a long-winded and overly technical description serve the client/athlete, or yourself? I would argue, these people are simply trying to sound impressive, and things become interesting when they get called out.
Never bring anecdotes to a science fight, and don’t assume everyone knows less than you do.
I’ve manage to catch a few amateur Doctors /Internet Gurus/Local loudmouths off-guard by asking them to simplify their description. It has only been a few since they usually avoid the question entirely or tell me that I’m too limited to understand. They never asked about my background in the subject matter.
At present I have three clients with knowledge of anatomy and physiology. (1) A licensed massage therapist (2) a Military Medic and (3) another Personal Trainer. I also do some advisory work for highly qualified lifters. Even with their education and experience, I typically cue and explain things in the simplest of terms. I’m currently trying to simply instruction even more. Lab Coat talk is Plan C.