9 Months Pregnant and 24 Kipping Pull Ups

tom63 · April 25, 2012, 5:07pm

Yep. Again doing a pullup will not hurt a baby. They are stupid pull ups. suffering an injury with an unnecessary and sill exercise isn’t good in your last trimester. It’s not fun for anyone, but why do something risky right before you’re going to give birth.

If she blows out her shoulder and falls she can hurt both herself and/or the baby. doing something health care professionals like me would warn you against doing in the first place under any condition.

There are many things
I don’t do that carry greater risk than average to me, but are generally considered unsafe. I don’t drive without a seat belt. I don’t drive drunk. I wouldn’t put a child in my front seat with my air bags, even though with maybe 500,000 mils driven I never had a collision where the air bags deployed. I’ve never fallen from a chin up bar.

Risk vs benefit. Exercise someone shouldn’t do vs exercise someone shouldn’t do because they’re pregnant late in their third trimester/ If you shouldn’t do it in the first place you should definitely not do it when you’re in your late third trimester.

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:
I agree. For 99% of human history, a women’s activity level didn’t change because she was pregnant. That is still the case in much of the world today. If the cortisol released from being chased by a lion didn’t affect a fetus, I doubt the cortisol from some squats will.[/quote]

Oh for the love of God how the f do you know being chased by a lion didn’t affect a fetus LOL! Anyway and more importantly being chased down be a lion more than likely lead to death for both mommy and baby and anyone else who couldnt run 35mph!

Btw does anyone know the mortality rates of newborn children and expectant mothers prehistory? Or can we hazard a guess that it was kinda high![/quote]
It was just an expression - besides, the woman wouldn’t die as long as she could outrun one of her friends.
The point is, pregnant women in the past (and in many places today) are far more active than a typical north american.

Is there any evidence that this is harmful to the fetus? If there is no evidence either way, then why should a woman change her activity levels?[/quote]

I understand women in other places are far more active than the average north american woman but that is because they have to be! They have no choice as to the type of activiities they’re forced to endure in order to survive but we have the luxury of choice’ and choosing stupid high risk activities is moronic esp. when there are so many other alternatives that are not crowd pleasers or youtube fodder.

Im sure a pregnant woman in rural India would love not to carry water for 5 miles everyday and to hoe the fields from sun up to sun down but she cant and thats the main difference.

Btw this is not about how delicate women are or our (men) need to keep you all safe and under wraps, this thread is simply about people doing stupid shit and the kudos that crossfitters seem to generate from one another the more hardcore they get.[/quote]

roybot · April 25, 2012, 5:10pm

[quote]ragoo wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ragoo wrote:
Thank you, UtahLama. An actual answer. I agree, as far as exercises go, I could never really see the purpose in a kipping pull-up. But I couldn’t see how they were unhealthy for the shoulder. [/quote]

OK. I’ll give you a serious answer. As you know, CF borrowed the kipping pull up from gymnastics. The applications of the movement in CF are entirely different. It was simply not designed to be used in that way. Gymnasts see it as a method to transition between bar manouevres. They don’t max out on them just for the sake of it. Critical difference.

The risk of injury has already been covered, so no need to go over that again.[/quote]

Actually the risk of injury had not already been covered. Just because one or two people say an exercise is dangerous or unhealthy doesn’t just automatically make it so. So that’s what spurred my question. tom63 made a general statement that kipping pull-ups were dangerous, even for non-pregnant individuals and I was wondering why. Thankfully, tom63 and utahlama gave me legit answers.

Obviously, a gymnastics kip is radically different than a kipping pull-up. I was just curious as to why somebody felt a kipping pull-up was unhealthy for the shoulder region and I got my answer.[/quote]

Yeah, and if it’s bad for your shoulders, it carries an increased risk of injury to that area, doesn’t it? One follows the other. Cause and effect. Funny how that works.

SLAINGE · April 25, 2012, 5:13pm

There were a number of posts outlining the potential risks associated with kipping such as increased ligamental laxity caused by increased levels of relaxin and the effects this has on joint mechanics and the resultant increase risk of joint dysfunction, combine this scenario with a shift in posture, with exaggerated lumbar lordosis that comes with being heavily pregnant.

Check out this animation…

http://visibleproductions.com/index.php?page=asset_detail&asset_id=vpl_0499_001

We should all know at this stage that we should keep our posture in line while lifting / exercising and deviations away from correct posture esp. under load or that are repetitive can, overtime lead to injury. These potential problems are insidious in nature and usually say ‘HELLO’ further on down the line, usually after a few years of gawd awful exercise selection and or technique.

I envisage a wave of x-crossfitters visiting their physio’s in the near future or even a new injury named after some of the stupid shit they do (kipitis, tyreflipitis, snorklelips-itis…)

ragoo · April 25, 2012, 5:23pm

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ragoo wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ragoo wrote:
Thank you, UtahLama. An actual answer. I agree, as far as exercises go, I could never really see the purpose in a kipping pull-up. But I couldn’t see how they were unhealthy for the shoulder. [/quote]

OK. I’ll give you a serious answer. As you know, CF borrowed the kipping pull up from gymnastics. The applications of the movement in CF are entirely different. It was simply not designed to be used in that way. Gymnasts see it as a method to transition between bar manouevres. They don’t max out on them just for the sake of it. Critical difference.

The risk of injury has already been covered, so no need to go over that again.[/quote]

Actually the risk of injury had not already been covered. Just because one or two people say an exercise is dangerous or unhealthy doesn’t just automatically make it so. So that’s what spurred my question. tom63 made a general statement that kipping pull-ups were dangerous, even for non-pregnant individuals and I was wondering why. Thankfully, tom63 and utahlama gave me legit answers.

Obviously, a gymnastics kip is radically different than a kipping pull-up. I was just curious as to why somebody felt a kipping pull-up was unhealthy for the shoulder region and I got my answer.[/quote]

Yeah, and if it’s bad for your shoulders, it carries an increased risk of injury to that area, doesn’t it? One follows the other. Cause and effect. Funny how that works. [/quote]

Again, failed reading comprehension. I realize that if something is bad for your shoulders then it must also carry an increased risk of injury to that area. All that I was asking for was an explanation as to why someone thought kipping pull-ups were a risky exercise, such as anatomically or posture-wise, or unnecessary stressing of the rotator cuff. And I got what I was looking for from utahlama and tom63. I was never talking to you so I’m not sure what your problem is.

roybot · April 25, 2012, 6:02pm

[quote]ragoo wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ragoo wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ragoo wrote:
Thank you, UtahLama. An actual answer. I agree, as far as exercises go, I could never really see the purpose in a kipping pull-up. But I couldn’t see how they were unhealthy for the shoulder. [/quote]

OK. I’ll give you a serious answer. As you know, CF borrowed the kipping pull up from gymnastics. The applications of the movement in CF are entirely different. It was simply not designed to be used in that way. Gymnasts see it as a method to transition between bar manouevres. They don’t max out on them just for the sake of it. Critical difference.

The risk of injury has already been covered, so no need to go over that again.[/quote]

Actually the risk of injury had not already been covered. Just because one or two people say an exercise is dangerous or unhealthy doesn’t just automatically make it so. So that’s what spurred my question. tom63 made a general statement that kipping pull-ups were dangerous, even for non-pregnant individuals and I was wondering why. Thankfully, tom63 and utahlama gave me legit answers.

Obviously, a gymnastics kip is radically different than a kipping pull-up. I was just curious as to why somebody felt a kipping pull-up was unhealthy for the shoulder region and I got my answer.[/quote]

Yeah, and if it’s bad for your shoulders, it carries an increased risk of injury to that area, doesn’t it? One follows the other. Cause and effect. Funny how that works. [/quote]

Again, failed reading comprehension. I realize that if something is bad for your shoulders then it must also carry an increased risk of injury to that area. All that I was asking for was an explanation as to why someone thought kipping pull-ups were a risky exercise, such as anatomically or posture-wise, or unnecessary stressing of the rotator cuff. And I got what I was looking for from utahlama and tom63. I was never talking to you so I’m not sure what your problem is.[/quote]

My reading comprehension is fine, thank you. I gave you a serious answer and you’re just about as wilfully evasive and argumentative as a person can get. You said that “actually the risk of injury had not already been covered”.

I told you that the risk of injury is linked with with the exercise. Then you said in that last post : " I realize that if something is bad for your shoulders then it must also carry an increased risk of injury to that area". You didn’t NOT realize that because if you HAD, you wouldn’t have made that first statement to begin with. And MY reading comrehension is in question?

You got your answer -and not only do you show a complete lack of gratitude for people giving you responses (whether you agree with them or not), but you constantly make digs at reading comprehension, when you change your view with every post.

The nerve to tell me that my reading comprehension is lacking when you talk out of both sides of your mouth is supremely arrogant. If you only want certain people to answer your questions, then PM them. This is a public forum and if you post an open question it’s fair game. “My problem” is that you have a chronic inability to be wrong and conduct yourself like something half way between a troll and a five-year-old.

If you don’t like my answers (and I don’t think you are deserving of any at this point), either put me on ignore or skip over any post with my avatar in it. I am not going to tip-toe around you. It’s that simple. Do you have the self-control to do that, or are you going to carry on holding two opposing stances while telling me I can’t read?

ragoo · April 25, 2012, 6:05pm

Just because you tell me “that the risk of injury is linked with with the exercise” doesn’t just suddenly make it true. I’m pretty sure you don’t go through life just blindly accepting everything anybody tells you. I was looking for an actual reason, something anatomy related or some sort of proof, which YOU never gave me. I received the answer I was looking for from tom53 and utahlama, AND I said thank you, which to me, is showing gratitude.

SLAINGE · April 25, 2012, 6:48pm

@ roybot & ragoo

lads lads lads… calm down

ragoo · April 25, 2012, 8:00pm

^^^ hahaha…nice vid

hockechamp14 · April 25, 2012, 8:12pm

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Gymnasts have an incredibly high injury rate and shoulders are up there. It’s as risky sport.
Now doing these in a general population is even riskier . Why not do regular pullups or chins? Nice dead hang without excessive stretch on your rotator cuff muscles ?
[/quote]

This. Dated a couple gymnasts, and both had to stop competing after reaching a pretty high level because of accumulated injuries and such. Gymnastics like many other sports tends to weed out many competitors en route to elite levels via injury. So saying that “well gymnasts do it” isn’t really a good argument.

Further, keep in mind most of the gymnasts you see are about 15 years old or some shit, and started training before their bones even fully set. So their bodies haven’t been abused yet, and their bodies have probably even adapted to the task before they were fully grown.

On another note, I don’t understand how your baby isn’t important enough to just fucking chill out a bit in the gym for 2-3 months. Do some gasp machine exercises, maybe go for a walk. Shit, no reason not to be active, but there’s no reason to be throwing and swinging your body around, nor exerting yourself heavily. I’d especially be worried in anything that uses the valsalva maneuver, but I don’t know if crossfitters know what that is…

OBoile · April 26, 2012, 2:55am

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
there’s really not much of a choice in driving, so analogy fail.

there’s choice is selecting exercises that have a lower risk of injury ;)[/quote]
All she has to do is install a chin-up bar in her house and driving to the gym is avoided.[/quote]

But what if she has to to drive to the store to buy the chin up bar? Risky. Having to drive home from work to use the chin up bar is even riskier. [/quote]
That’s what husbands are for. Single mothers can order one via the internet. :)[/quote]

Why do I get the feeling that you don’t believe what you’re posting?[/quote]

My last couple of posts were somewhat in jest… but I absolutely believe pregnant women aren’t nearly as helpless as many people think.[/quote]

I know you were keeping it light, but we’ve looked at the pros and cons of kipping pull ups in enough detail that the benefits do not outweigh the risks. Not one person here has said that women are helpless and, as I said, doing an injurious exercise just to send a message to people who seem like they’re being buzzkills, is incredibly selfish and reckless.

I don’t believe that anyone on this thread would condone what those women are doing if they were friends or relatives.

“It’s her body” doesn’t justify it when they are doing this for totally the wrong reasons.

Like I said, even competive athletes scale back their training. We will not see a Preglympics any time soon. The whole idea behind a pregnant pull up progression is to ramp up training, not rein it in. That’s all I have to say. [/quote]

I’ve never done kipping pullups and don’t really have an opinion on them so I’ll refrain from commenting on them specifically.

However, I would not be upset if a friend or relative did this. From what I understand, every woman’s pregnancy affects them differently. Some women may be able to handle these just fine while others may not.

OBoile · April 26, 2012, 3:02am

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:
I agree. For 99% of human history, a women’s activity level didn’t change because she was pregnant. That is still the case in much of the world today. If the cortisol released from being chased by a lion didn’t affect a fetus, I doubt the cortisol from some squats will.[/quote]

Oh for the love of God how the f do you know being chased by a lion didn’t affect a fetus LOL! Anyway and more importantly being chased down be a lion more than likely lead to death for both mommy and baby and anyone else who couldnt run 35mph!

Btw does anyone know the mortality rates of newborn children and expectant mothers prehistory? Or can we hazard a guess that it was kinda high![/quote]
It was just an expression - besides, the woman wouldn’t die as long as she could outrun one of her friends.
The point is, pregnant women in the past (and in many places today) are far more active than a typical north american.

Is there any evidence that this is harmful to the fetus? If there is no evidence either way, then why should a woman change her activity levels?[/quote]

I understand women in other places are far more active than the average north american woman but that is because they have to be! They have no choice as to the type of activiities they’re forced to endure in order to survive but we have the luxury of choice’ and choosing stupid high risk activities is moronic esp. when there are so many other alternatives that are not crowd pleasers or youtube fodder.

Im sure a pregnant woman in rural India would love not to carry water for 5 miles everyday and to hoe the fields from sun up to sun down but she cant and thats the main difference.

Btw this is not about how delicate women are or our (men) need to keep you all safe and under wraps, this thread is simply about people doing stupid shit and the kudos that crossfitters seem to generate from one another the more hardcore they get.[/quote]
By your logic, why should anyone be active since we don’t have to?

tom63 · April 26, 2012, 11:41am

That’s not what he said. Until 100 years ago, one of the most risky things a woman could experience was pregnancy. Deaths were much greater during childbirth than now. Infants died at a greater rate.

Listen to your OB GYN guy when you’re pregnant. You have plenty of time to wreck your shoulders after you deliver.

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:
I agree. For 99% of human history, a women’s activity level didn’t change because she was pregnant. That is still the case in much of the world today. If the cortisol released from being chased by a lion didn’t affect a fetus, I doubt the cortisol from some squats will.[/quote]

Oh for the love of God how the f do you know being chased by a lion didn’t affect a fetus LOL! Anyway and more importantly being chased down be a lion more than likely lead to death for both mommy and baby and anyone else who couldnt run 35mph!

Btw does anyone know the mortality rates of newborn children and expectant mothers prehistory? Or can we hazard a guess that it was kinda high![/quote]
It was just an expression - besides, the woman wouldn’t die as long as she could outrun one of her friends.
The point is, pregnant women in the past (and in many places today) are far more active than a typical north american.

Is there any evidence that this is harmful to the fetus? If there is no evidence either way, then why should a woman change her activity levels?[/quote]

I understand women in other places are far more active than the average north american woman but that is because they have to be! They have no choice as to the type of activiities they’re forced to endure in order to survive but we have the luxury of choice’ and choosing stupid high risk activities is moronic esp. when there are so many other alternatives that are not crowd pleasers or youtube fodder.

Im sure a pregnant woman in rural India would love not to carry water for 5 miles everyday and to hoe the fields from sun up to sun down but she cant and thats the main difference.

Btw this is not about how delicate women are or our (men) need to keep you all safe and under wraps, this thread is simply about people doing stupid shit and the kudos that crossfitters seem to generate from one another the more hardcore they get.[/quote]
By your logic, why should anyone be active since we don’t have to?[/quote]

tom63 · April 26, 2012, 11:45am

It’s quasi silly ass I’m hardcore. Amd you’re rigt about the last 2-3 months. Walk, garden exercise on machines. Whatever. Be safe. My ex gave birth to twins. She was on bed rest the last two months. Se listenend and the kids were just fine.

Yes, it is a high risk pregnancy. but a pregnant woman is compromised physically compared to the same person pre pregnancy. Just be careful.

[quote]hockechamp14 wrote:

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Gymnasts have an incredibly high injury rate and shoulders are up there. It’s as risky sport.
Now doing these in a general population is even riskier . Why not do regular pullups or chins? Nice dead hang without excessive stretch on your rotator cuff muscles ?
[/quote]

This. Dated a couple gymnasts, and both had to stop competing after reaching a pretty high level because of accumulated injuries and such. Gymnastics like many other sports tends to weed out many competitors en route to elite levels via injury. So saying that “well gymnasts do it” isn’t really a good argument.

Further, keep in mind most of the gymnasts you see are about 15 years old or some shit, and started training before their bones even fully set. So their bodies haven’t been abused yet, and their bodies have probably even adapted to the task before they were fully grown.

On another note, I don’t understand how your baby isn’t important enough to just fucking chill out a bit in the gym for 2-3 months. Do some gasp machine exercises, maybe go for a walk. Shit, no reason not to be active, but there’s no reason to be throwing and swinging your body around, nor exerting yourself heavily. I’d especially be worried in anything that uses the valsalva maneuver, but I don’t know if crossfitters know what that is…[/quote]

tom63 · April 26, 2012, 11:47am

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:
Looks like the other vid didnt show up?

Well its the same madness as above except the heavily pregnant woman is squating X 30 and push pressing X 15 for 3 sets??? Seriously wtf are these fuckin eejits thiking???

The poor ould babby will come out lookin like scrambled egg’ but thats sooo hardcore man

[/quote]

Watched it again.
I just shake my head at the stupid out there.

SLAINGE · April 26, 2012, 11:57am

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:

[quote]OBoile wrote:
I agree. For 99% of human history, a women’s activity level didn’t change because she was pregnant. That is still the case in much of the world today. If the cortisol released from being chased by a lion didn’t affect a fetus, I doubt the cortisol from some squats will.[/quote]

Oh for the love of God how the f do you know being chased by a lion didn’t affect a fetus LOL! Anyway and more importantly being chased down be a lion more than likely lead to death for both mommy and baby and anyone else who couldnt run 35mph!

Btw does anyone know the mortality rates of newborn children and expectant mothers prehistory? Or can we hazard a guess that it was kinda high![/quote]
It was just an expression - besides, the woman wouldn’t die as long as she could outrun one of her friends.
The point is, pregnant women in the past (and in many places today) are far more active than a typical north american.

Is there any evidence that this is harmful to the fetus? If there is no evidence either way, then why should a woman change her activity levels?[/quote]

I understand women in other places are far more active than the average north american woman but that is because they have to be! They have no choice as to the type of activiities they’re forced to endure in order to survive but we have the luxury of choice’ and choosing stupid high risk activities is moronic esp. when there are so many other alternatives that are not crowd pleasers or youtube fodder.

Im sure a pregnant woman in rural India would love not to carry water for 5 miles everyday and to hoe the fields from sun up to sun down but she cant and thats the main difference.

Btw this is not about how delicate women are or our (men) need to keep you all safe and under wraps, this thread is simply about people doing stupid shit and the kudos that crossfitters seem to generate from one another the more hardcore they get.[/quote]
By your logic, why should anyone be active since we don’t have to?[/quote]

Oh c’mon thats weak’ you know what I mean! Way to build a strawman…

Btw using the example of a pregnant woman being chased by lion in the same sentence as costisol levels and squats’ is ilogical and quite frankly bonkers!

SLAINGE · April 26, 2012, 12:11pm

[quote]tom63 wrote:

[quote]SLAINGE wrote:
Looks like the other vid didnt show up?

Well its the same madness as above except the heavily pregnant woman is squating X 30 and push pressing X 15 for 3 sets??? Seriously wtf are these fuckin eejits thiking???

The poor ould babby will come out lookin like scrambled egg’ but thats sooo hardcore man

[/quote]

Watched it again.
I just shake my head at the stupid out there.[/quote]

Didnt you know’ intelligent programming and exercise selection is out and stupid is in!

OBoile · April 26, 2012, 10:21pm

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Nobody is saying that she should not exercise…let’s go ASK A FUCKING DOCTOR SHALL WE.

"This was written by a OBGYN in response to a post on the Crossfit forums regarding WOD-ing during pregancy. I know it will convince no one, but it seems well thought out.

First of all, if you get overheated, baby can’t cool down. This is also why pregnant women are told to stay out of hot tubs. So, intensity needs to be dialed back a lot.

You need to keep your heart rate under 140 bpm. Baby can usually get enough oxygen, but with a supremely high heart rate, it makes it difficult.

When pregnant, your body produces a hormone called relaxin that allows your ligaments and tendons to stretch to allow for the baby to get through the birth canal. Extreme stretching or pulling on tendons and ligaments (pullups, etc.) can cause irreversible damage because they are much more susceptible to overstretching. Can cause one to develop hip dysplasia, shoulder and other joint issues, and diastasis recti. Diastasis occurs naturally during pregnancy, it is the stretching of the connective tissue that holds the rectus abdominus together. If it gets overstretched (or you have weak connective tissue), it won’t come back together and you end up with a permanent pot belly.

Lastly, if you suffer falls in the last half of pregnancy, there is a risk of placental abruption. This means that the placenta detaches from the uterine wall and the baby bleeds to death. This can happen spontaneously as well, but my husband who is an ER physician has seen this happen from falls and domestic violence more than enough times for me to believe it is a serious risk.

Jumping and hanging from things while pregnant is just not a good idea.

I won’t claim to know what goes on hormonally while exercising when pregnant but on the CF pregnant forums, there are a lot of miscarriages reported. I have friends who are figure and fitness competitors and a lot of them had miscarriages and had trouble conceiving when training at that intensity level.

I would tell her that its okay to do some basic circuits with light implements (not for time), but there is no reason to be lifting super heavy and especially not doing any jumping/hanging/kipping, etc. The risk to benefit ratio is too high. Just getting out and walking/jogging with muscle endurance circuits is good."
[/quote]

There are a couple of points with this post that show my point about society (and many doctors) believing pregnant women are far more delicate than they actually are.

The whole 140 bpm thing was discounted some time ago yet doctors who haven’t bothered to keep up to date still say it obviously:
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/exercise-during-pregnancy/AN01560
OBGYNs will know lots about pregnancy for sure, but the vast majority know very little about exercise and will simply repeat what they heard years ago whether it is true or not.
I checked out the crossfit forums today, and going through the first 7-8 pages, I didn’t see any comments about miscarriages. What exactly is ‘a lot’. Comments like this are how misconceptions and “old wive’s tales” get started.

OBoile · April 26, 2012, 10:25pm