Or Jones was a businessman and had a machine for everything else. It was just something else to sell to someone with money to burn.
I can’t recall where i read it recently, but i read that the key to that exercise is for the lower body to remain stationary, even strapped in, for optimal results. Might it have been McGuff or Hutchins? I’ll look thru some books
Jones found that there were some people with low-back pain who could not extend the spine without tremendous pain. But many of them could rotate their torso against resistance without pain. And doing so worked some of the same muscles that contributed to spine extension.
The MedX Computerized Rotary Torso machine locked your hips into place as you rotated your torso against resistance. Jones discovered that this machine was a valuable cog in low-back strengthening and rehab.
1 Like
Thanks Dr Darden. What is the appropriate way of using this machine? Light- to moderate loads with slow turns? More in terms of a rehabilitation device than excercise? That would explain a lot.
Moderate resistance at first along with slow turnarounds. But the involved muscles can become very strong. Performed at the end of a workout, the Rotary Torso becomes a brutally intense final exercise. Many of the small muscles involved in breathing are taxed.
2 Likes
I would like to begin training the obliques but I cannot find anything other than rotary torso.
This may sound crazy, but taking batting practice for softball has really done a great job of strengthening my obliques and it is very fun. So maybe if you could go to a batting cage, hit off a tee, or just take dry cuts.
If nothing else that sounds like fun 
1 Like
Use a side bend with one dumbbell. See page 128 of my book The New High Intensity Training.
2 Likes
It isn’t an isolation exercise, but… some people recommend loaded carries, particularly a suitcase carry.
Or non-rotational exercises like a side plank, or pallof press with bands or a cable machine.
What rep-range do you recommend? I am thinking high reps, around 20 each side, or so.
Why 20 reps?
Good point! I was thinking pretty straightforward 1-2 sec pos/neg reps - BUT - I realize on afterthought that a normal cadence of 4-5/4-5 secs is better and safer. At least I did it in a slower cadence last attempt.
I’ll rephrase my question: How slow a cadence do you recommend? I wouldn’t expect 30-10-30 advisable here. A 10 sec pos/neg cadence may also seem a bit too much.
I will give the rotary torso another chance every second workout, and see what happens over time.
I’ll try the sidebend, thanks. I forgot about that exercise. Tried it as a teenager but never got much out of it. Of course, being older I am more in tune with proper form and how to contract the muscles as I am exercising. It’s worth another go.
As an aside, when I was a kid I thought Andy McCutcheon had the best physique. I thought Lund captured him at his best in that book. The lean, athletic build is timeless. He was a Greek statue.
You’ve asked some fine questions. Try your concepts and report back.
1 Like
Arthur Jones was correct about the lower back being “The Most Important Area of the Body.”
He admitted that his first attempt of creating the Nautilus lower back machine was a failure.
I use my Nautilus lower back 1st generation
machine isometrically only!
Dr. Stuart McGill states:
“Isometrically training the rectus is consistent with its architecture and stabilizing function to enhance performance and power development in the hips and extremities.”
Or, HiT aficionados can just not train the core (HiTers hate this word usage), and be like Drew! At least they would do no harm!
The first gen lower back is one of the first machines I got but most of the time I don’t use it. I found I liked it better when I put my legs on top of the rollers instead under them. I didn’t use it often but when I did it seemed to work my lower back ok but I wasn’t trying to use heavy weight. If I was to go back 50 years andvdo this all over again I’d start out doing some kind of deadlifts as it works many more muscles that you use when bending over to pick something up.
Scott
Tried the 4/4 cadence this evening, 10 strict reps on each side. Felt I needed to add some more weight than before (but still only using 1/4 of the weight stack). Used the belt this time to fasten the legs. That made a great difference. A very controlled movement. Felt great and my obliques were hardened, even though I never went close to failure (after all, this is only trying out the equipment).
Will try the 10/10 sec cadence next time, and probably add a little more weight.
I think the major point here is to not overdo the movement. Probably a great excercise to do NTF. Will return with additional comments after further trials (and hopefully some mistakes to learn from).
Drew does Deadlifts and that’s a really good exercise for developing your spinal erectors. Back extensions are another great move to target that area. Such a great muscle group to develop as it’s often a weak link.
Personally, I like RDL’s, done with lighter weight and higher reps, stopping short of (low back) failure. I’m no longer a fan of high load pulls from the floor, training to a grinding final rep. I just get hurt too often doing that.
Dead lifts and back extensions should strengthen those spinal erector muscles, in a basically isometric fashion. What I find interesting is that folks who dead lift a lot of weight often demonstrate unremarkable strength in the flexed position, when tested on a MedX back machine. At least that was James Fisher’s observation, made in a recent HIB podcast.
That got me to thinking a bit about the issue of specificity. It seems the academic world is coming to the conclusion that training with high loads is superior for displaying strength, but there is a significant degree of specificity in that outcome. You get the best results if you training for strength using exactly the same movement that will be used for measuring strength. But isn’t that exactly what happens with a MedX low back machine? You train for strength using exactly the same equipment and position that is used to measure strength. So I am starting to wonder if, because of specificity, the ability to display a high level of isometric strength in a flexed position on a MedX machine might not be as significant as originally believed…
1 Like