Channel 4 9pm

~Chameleon~

liam8282 wrote: »

I haven't done a degree in sports science, so I am not that clued on on the anotomy of the human body and individual muscle groups. Although I do enjoy going to the gym on a regular basis, so do know the excercises you are talking about.

Just to get the 30kg weight bar into position to perform a shoulder press you would have to use the rotator cuff set of muscles.

But I would expect even with a shoulder injury, somebody could lift a single potato from a desk.

Google would suggest that if you had a rotator cuff problem, shoulder presses would be one of the worst excercises you could perform, it also one of the worst for causing rotator cuff problems, so yes, I would question you being able to perform a set of 30kg shoulder press excercises with a rotator cuff problem.

Well, that would all depend upon which particular rotator cuff muscle was affected. There are four separate ones, each performing a different rotation of the shoulder joint.

As I said, the one which affects my ability to perform a forward flexion has absolutely no effect on performing overhead presses, which predominantly uses the deltoids and triceps anyway.

<snip google stuff>

Notice how potato lifting was not mentioned?

Hardly relevant.



I would say that reaching and controlling a gear stick is pretty much equivalent to reaching and picking up a potato. Even though you are reaching and lifting the potato, it wasn't exactly a lift upwards of any weight, it was more just placing her hand on the potato to move it toward herself, like reaching and moving the gear lever.

Not sure what car you drive which causes you to fully extend your arm to change gear but mine certainly doesn't. And besides, maybe she had paddle shift gears in her car. Had you thought of that?

Even without a degree in anatomy or physiology, I would say that pretty much all of the same muscle groups will be used in the two tasks.

What you say and what I know to be true are perhaps not quite the same

liam8282

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

What you say and what I know to be true are perhaps not quite the same

You need to initially extend your arm to perform the initial lift to get the weight into position to perform a shoulder press, so I would say each of the rotator cuff muscles is used at some point, during lift, excercise and them putting the weight back down.

But as I said I am not qualified to tell you what muscles you do and don't use, which is why I posted info from a qualified personal trainer & wiki which both agree.

Also the car had no adaptions, you can see her getting into it and driving it.

She did not have to fully extend her arm or stretch to reach the potato, it wasl placed on the desk in front of her, about the distance a gear stick would be in a car to the driver, which is why I used that example.

oldboy64

I have been watching these programmes and to be honest, on balance, some of the rules of 1949 would work well today.

It has become a country of 'what can I get' 'I want what I am entitled to' 'why should I wait, I want it now'.

As for being disabled - personally I think these descriptor things are useless.
People should be assessed as to their own abilities, not rigidly looking at specific scenarios.

I receive DLA (HRM & MRC), not because I am disabled but because of the things I can't do as well as an able bodied person and need help. But why don't they look at what I can do?

I can drive a car with no difficulties, I can use my upper body strength to do almost anything, I still work over 20 hours a week from home as I don't want to become bored. As long as I can get my wheelchair to where I want it, there is very little that I cannot do in life. Being in a chair isn't permanent I can walk/stand, I just find it easier to sit instead.

I don't consider myself disabled, I just have some difficulties that with a little thought, planning and ingenuity I can overcome almost everything - so why am I said to be disabled? Because the government say I am!

What is missing in this country is more grit and determination by people to overcome their lack of ability.

And to suggest that a family didn't know how to keep their home clean and tidy is beyond me. I feel ashamed to live in a country where the basics are a mystery - we must look like a 3rd world country to the rest of the world.

~Chameleon~

liam8282 wrote: »

You need to initially extend your arm to perform the initial lift to get the weight into position to perform a shoulder press, so I would say each of the rotator cuff muscles is used at some point, during lift, excercise and them putting the weight back down.

No, you don't, that's just inviting injury! The bar is kept close to the body at all times using a clean and press motion. There is no extension of the arm involved. Perhaps you need to learn how to lift a bar correctly! And when you get into the heavier weights you use a rack anyway so no lifting from the floor is involved.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyzLpODqxrE

But as I said I am not qualified to tell you what muscles you do and don't use, which is why I posted info from a qualified personal trainer & wiki which both agree.

Well, you are talking to someone who lives with a PT and is in regular contact with a sports physio so I think I know what I'm talking about. I don't feel the need to resort to Wiki to seek information.


Also the car had no adaptions, you can see her getting into it and driving it.

She did not have to fully extend her arm or stretch to reach the potato, it wasl placed on the desk in front of her, about the distance a gear stick would be in a car to the driver, which is why I used that example.

I never said the car had adaptations, semi-automatic models have both paddle shift and gear sticks. How do you know her car wasn't such a model? Anyway, this debate is pointless. I don't particularly care about what the woman can or cannot do. I was merely pointing out the flaw in your argument.

GlasweJen

I was interested in how the 1949 rules worked for tenants housekeeping standards. Personally I think they should be brought back, employing house inspection officers and people to teach home skills would also create jobs.

The woman made a point about moving from the city and never being shown how to maintain a garden which is fair enough but I can't believe no one has ever shown her how to clean, tidy or put things away!

I also noticed that the single mum had no carpet on the stairs but 2 TV sets in her living room, uncarpeted stairs with a toddler is a bit of an accident waiting to happen is it not? The stairs didn't even look sanded down.

I live in a private let and we get a visit every 6 months to make sure our house is in order before we get a new tenancy so it's not as if the reintroduction of these rules would create a gap between council and private tenants - it would level the playing field.


I wasn't surprised that unmarried mothers were given no assistance but I am surprised that the woman in the programme didn't know this and expected 1949 to be kinder to her than 2013. I think she did realise that she had it fairly cushy when she learned the hard way that she does have nothing, she does rely on the charity of the state and "her children's sanctuary" is actually someone else's house - the councils.


I do think the current housing rules should be revised so that young girls who fall pregnant are not prioritised for a house, there should be a balance of people allocated because all the current system has done is create areas where you can't walk at night due to ghetto-ing long term benefit claimants and single mums - the areas are inevitably full of violence and drugs (I'm thinking of "the Gorbals" in Glasgow which despite a regeneration is still a scary place with a methodone queue stretching down the street at 8:45 every morning).

cbrown372

oldboy64 wrote: »

I have been watching these programmes and to be honest, on balance, some of the rules of 1949 would work well today.

It has become a country of 'what can I get' 'I want what I am entitled to' 'why should I wait, I want it now'.

As for being disabled - personally I think these descriptor things are useless.
People should be assessed as to their own abilities, not rigidly looking at specific scenarios.

I receive DLA (HRM & MRC), not because I am disabled but because of the things I can't do as well as an able bodied person and need help. But why don't they look at what I can do?

I can drive a car with no difficulties, I can use my upper body strength to do almost anything, I still work over 20 hours a week from home as I don't want to become bored. As long as I can get my wheelchair to where I want it, there is very little that I cannot do in life. Being in a chair isn't permanent I can walk/stand, I just find it easier to sit instead.

I don't consider myself disabled, I just have some difficulties that with a little thought, planning and ingenuity I can overcome almost everything - so why am I said to be disabled? Because the government say I am!

What is missing in this country is more grit and determination by people to overcome their lack of ability.

And to suggest that a family didn't know how to keep their home clean and tidy is beyond me. I feel ashamed to live in a country where the basics are a mystery - we must look like a 3rd world country to the rest of the world.

Hope the drumming is going well Andy and I'm sure we can confirm your grit and determination due to your repeated signing up on this website after getting banned time and again.

GlasweJen

margaretclare wrote: »

Also, being granted a council house was deemed a privilege and not a 'right'. The new council estates were meant to be like 'garden villages' with residents who were proud of them and took care of their gardens.

There's a council estate in an area of south Lanarkshire that replaced all of the tenants gardens with AstroTurf because the tenants couldn't/wouldn't maintain them. The gardens are now all regulation length plan grass surrounded by fencing with no gate to give the appearance of a well kept garden while preventing tenants defacing the grass. Within the fences you see dirty nappies, broken TVs, abandoned furniture etc because the tenants just open their windows and throw out anything they don't want and can't be bothered to take down to the bins.

margaretclare

I agree with much that oldboy64 says above.

There was definitely an attitude of mind which was far, far different in the people among whom I grew up - we're talking the 1940s/50s. I was born in 1935.

Nowadays there is no poverty like the poverty they lived in, simply because there were no benefits. OK, there was my grandad's old age pension after years of hard work on farms. He was multi-skilled in all the countryside and farming skills, but he was classed as an 'agricultural labourer', none of his abilities, knowledge and skills were acknowledged.

My aunt was a polio survivor and spent most of her life sitting on the floor, from where she was intensely busy. Her hands were rarely still.

My mum was unmarried and went out to work in other women's houses and in farm kitchens. They paid her just what little they could get away with. They were supposed to pay her NI stamp - the one she worked for on Mondays was supposed to do that, but didn't. So she bought her own stamps. If she hadn't, she'd have gone on working until she died, which was only 3 years after she retired at 60. The last woman she worked for was 'oh you can't leave me, I never thought you'd want to retire...' and that was the expectation of richer women of that generation. They thought you worked till you dropped. Like the old butler in 'Remains of the Day' or the old nanny in 'Brideshead Revisited'.

What they gave me was opportunity, a chance of education, and also a set of values. I was often told about my granny, who died when I was 3. She had a saying that 'soap and water are cheap' and 'we may be poor but we needn't look poor'. I wonder what she'd say to that young woman who didn't know how to keep her house tidy? That couple, with the unemployed husband and several kids, seemed to have a lot of what my granny might have called 'clutter', a lot of unnecessary stuff, but were just clueless. No one had ever set them an example.

It's also worth remembering that the original council houses were planned with big gardens so that the tenants could grow veg and help to feed their families that way. The man had lots of time but not a clue how to use it. My grandad could have told him, how he grew all his own veg after a day's physical work in the fields.

I was going to be a part-time volunteer adviser for CAB, that was after I retired. I did the training about 10 years ago or so, but quite honestly, it began to get to me. 'I've just been confirmed 5 weeks pregnant, what am I entitled to, what can I claim?' and so on. Always the 'I'm entitled, I want it now'. Oldboy64 is right - the mindset has changed, the attitude, the total outlook. Can we ever get back that sturdy, independent attitude - which used to be so characteristic of the people we were once? I don't know. I doubt it.

schrodie

oldboy64 wrote: »

I have been watching these programmes and to be honest, on balance, some of the rules of 1949 would work well today.

Today in some instances they'd have to go out dressed like Robocop to evict scutty tenants and interview people behind a security screen which used to be the case back in the early 2000s.

Where I used to live we had a lovely 3 bedroomed that went up for sale and it was bought by one of these landlord types who didn't care who they rented properties out to and surprise surprise a familiy from the local council estate moved in and within 6 months the house looked like a bombsite and the inside (I was invited in one day!!) was filthy. There's a saying that "You can take the person out of the slum but can't take the slum out of the person."!!

liam8282

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

I never said the car had adaptations, semi-automatic models have both paddle shift and gear sticks. How do you know her car wasn't such a model? Anyway, this debate is pointless. I don't particularly care about what the woman can or cannot do. I was merely pointing out the flaw in your argument.

Because you could quite clearly see in the car when she got in it, you could quite clearly see in the car when she was driving it.

Also, the video you posted shows a woman fully extending her arms to reach the weight, fully extending to lift the weight, I would still say that every rotator cuff muscle was used in that example.

I don't need to resort to wiki, but I do like facts to back up my opinion. Rather than relying on what he or she said.

I agree, the debate is pointless. You have an argument for everything.