Thread: Standing Calf Raises

You are talking about the machine loaded type of standing calf raises, with pressure applied at the shoulder. Try doing one legged, with your toes raised (I use any machine with a floor stabilizer member, a bar that is 4 or so inches off the floor, narrow enough that I can stand on it with my toes and raise and lower myself. I hold a weight in the opposing hand and steady myself with the hand on the side I am exercising.

With a plate in hand, 20 reps is just perfect. This is one of the few that I stretch inbetween sets, else I cramp up. I alternative legs, and do 3 sets per side. Great calf developer. Use this alternately with the seated calf raise machine and with toe presses on the leg press.

Originally Posted by boilermaker

What are your thoughts on this. I have some arthritis in my cervical spine and although it isn't the type that occurs between the discs, I have some reservations about doing standing calf raises. I don't like all the direct downward compression that occurs doing the movement, so I've switched to doing my straight leg calf work on a seated leg press machine. Is this an overreaction?

It targets the soleus more than the gastrocnemius. Any movement using plantarflexion done with bent knees does this. If you are so worried about it, do straight-legged calf raises on the Leg press machine.

Trouble: Thanks, I'll try those as well as doing them on a leg press machine.

Dale: I do think avoiding spinal compression like is exerted on it during standing calf raises on a plate loaded machine is wise. Also, I do straight legged calf extensions on the leg press machine. I also do seated calf raises with a bent leg on the contraption desiged for that. Thanks.

you still get lots of spinal compression when you are on a seated leg press machine.

may want to do them standing, one leg at a time, holding a DB at your side.

Do I hear an echo in here?? I use raised pivot point to get maximum ROM (up on the tiptoes to dropped heels).

P-funk is pointing out that, in the seated calf raises, you have to apply counterforce to keep yourself stable, by gripping down with the hands - this puts compressive stress down through shoulders, into the spinal column, loading it, albeit not nearly as much as the standing calf raise machine would.

Boilermaker: did you know there is a connection between arthritic inflammation, pain and intestinal disorders?

Originally Posted by Trouble

Boilermaker: did you know there is a connection between arthritic inflammation, pain and intestinal disorders?

No, I didn't. Mine isn't an iflamation, though. It's a narrowing of the nerve canal where it exits the vertebrae on the left side. It doesn't cause me pain. Just a numb patch over my shoulder blade that comes and goes.

Originally Posted by boilermaker

No, I didn't. Mine isn't an iflamation, though. It's a narrowing of the nerve canal where it exits the vertebrae on the left side. It doesn't cause me pain. Just a numb patch over my shoulder blade that comes and goes.

you mean stenosis (a narrowing of the intervertabral foramen (canal)?

Originally Posted by P-funk

you mean stenosis (a narrowing of the intervertabral foramen (canal)?

Yes, that's right. And it causes a tingly, numb patch that comes and goes randomly. Doesn't seem to have other effects yet, though I've been told that it most likely will as I age.

Maybe P-funk can make sense of this citation


To me, it doesn't suggest compressive loading is an issue, but I am unsure of my interpretation of the biomechanics that causes this nerve problem. Several other recent abstracts seem to hint at spinal disc and vertebral degeneration.

Originally Posted by Trouble

Maybe P-funk can make sense of this citation


To me, it doesn't suggest compressive loading is an issue, but I am unsure of my interpretation of the biomechanics that causes this nerve problem. Several other recent abstracts seem to hint at spinal disc and vertebral degeneration.

Whether it plays on my current condition or not, I just don't see the point in exerting that much compression on the spine when there are other exercises that accomplish the same results as standing calf raises. So I will be doing other forms of straight legged calf raises. I tried your suggestion of single leg raises while holding a plate today and liked them.

Sorry, I just got curious about the mechanics of the affliction. The gradual narrowing could be overgrowth- congenital or degenerative in cause.

My gym doesn't have a standing calf raise machine; I've never used one and never would; I won't squat to test my max for the same reasons (avoiding excess disc compression).

Yeah, I like that exercise as well. I get weird looks from new members who haven't seen this exercise before. OTOH, I got quite a few clients who now do this move. I've seen the one legged standing calf raise done standing on a flat floor, and by a few who had good balance, when using a plate under their toes. Haven't seen it described by others (done as I suggest, on the floor support member of any applicable resistance machine in a gym, where you can use a light hand for balance support, which steady and smooths execution). Pretty sure others have figgered out this angle, its just not in the books.

Originally Posted by boilermaker

Yes, that's right. And it causes a tingly, numb patch that comes and goes randomly. Doesn't seem to have other effects yet, though I've been told that it most likely will as I age.

what is causing it? Bone spur? Or is a genetic? Did they tell you why the canal has narrowed?

Avoid exercises which force you into extremes of extension (even to much extension) could agravate it.

Originally Posted by Trouble

Maybe P-funk can make sense of this citation


To me, it doesn't suggest compressive loading is an issue, but I am unsure of my interpretation of the biomechanics that causes this nerve problem. Several other recent abstracts seem to hint at spinal disc and vertebral degeneration.

yes, that study is just confirming that which is already pretty much known about the spine and the effects of things like flexion and extension on the intervertebral foramen. When you flex the diameter increases, when you extened it decreases.....if you have an osteophyte (bone spur) the extension could be really painful because not only does the diameter of the foramen decrease, the bone spur also places pressure on the nerves.

There are a number of things you can do to work on spinal alingment and work on strengthening your postural positioning. Some corrective exercises etc.....please don't think I am taking the easy way out here....but, the spine is a very very touchy subject....and, I am not there to actually assess you or see what I am dealing with.....so I am not going to be an ass and just start spouting things off to you in the way of exercises etc.....You should really find a therapist or trainer that knows their shit about helping you with this, so that they can give you some advice specific to the current shape that you are in.

Originally Posted by P-funk

you still get lots of spinal compression when you are on a seated leg press machine.

may want to do them standing, one leg at a time, holding a DB at your side.

Wouldn't that still cause spinal compression through indirect loading via the clavicle?

Also, how does spinal compression occur on this?

Originally Posted by Trouble

Sorry, I just got curious about the mechanics of the affliction. The gradual narrowing could be overgrowth- congenital or degenerative in cause.

Kineseology of the Musculoskeletal System: Foundations for Physical Rehabilitation. Donald A. Neumann,pg. 295-297

Lumbar Flexion: Its effect on the diameter of the ontevertebral foramen and migration of the nucleus pulposus:
Relative to a neutral position, full flexion of the lumbar spine increases the diameter of the intervertebral foramina by 19% and increases the volume of the vertebral canal by 11%. Therapeutically, flexion of the lumbar region is often used to temporarily reduce the pressure on a lumbar nerve root that is impinged by an obstructed foramen. In certain circumstances, however, this potential theraputic advantage may be associated with a potential theraputic disadvantage. For example, flexion of the lumbar region generates compression forces on the anterior side of the disc, which tend to migrate the nucleus pulposus posteriorly. The magnitude of the migration is small in the healthy spine. In a person with a weakened posterior annulus, however, posterior migration of the nucleus pulposus increases pressure on the spinal cord or nerve roots. These contrasting therapeutic effects of flexion in the lumbar region are to be considered when planning an exercise program for a person with generalized lower back pain.

Extension of the Lumbar Spine and Its Effects on the Diameter of the Intervertebral Foramen and Migration of the Nucleus Pulposus
Relative to the neutral position, full lumbar extension reduces the volume of the intervertebral foramina by 11% and reduces the volume within the vertebral canal by 15%. For this reason, clinicians often suggest that a person with nerve root impingement, from a stenosed intervertebral foramen, limit activities that involve hyperextension. Extension however, tends to migrate the nucleus pulposus anteriorly. Persons with a nuclear protrusion or prolapse may find, therefore, that extension reduces the pain associated with pressure on the spinal cord or nerve roots. The normal lumbar lordotic posture may restrict the migration of the nucleus pulposus within a weakend disc from approaching the neural elements. It is uncertain whether the nucleus pulposus migrates in a similar manner in both healyh and degenerated discs.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

Wouldn't that still cause spinal compression through indirect loading via the clavicle?

Also, how does spinal compression occur on this?

When seated the spinal load is graeter then when standing.

However, when seated in a posture that is slightly tilted back (as this leg press), the spinal load is less.

But, who ever sits on those things properly? Also, the tilted back posture of that chain may allow the pelvis to posteriorly tilt (if the hamstrings are tight), causing lumbar flexion which may be a position that increases pain for him (or it might not....case specific).

Originally Posted by P-funk

When seated the spinal load is graeter then when standing.

Certainly, but would the spinal load be greater on this machine compared to if they were just seated in general? I know it wouldn't be comparable to having 200lbs on his back.

But, who ever sits on those things properly?

Anyone who wants to work out with me.

Also, the tilted back posture of that chain may allow the pelvis to posteriorly tilt (if the hamstrings are tight), causing lumbar flexion which may be a position that increases pain for him (or it might not....case specific).

The olympic lifts, if done improperly, could also lead to injury.

.

touche.

1) true- anything can LEAD to injury...but, if you are already injured....as in the case of boilermaker, it would better not to test the waters.

2) true- the seated position has less spinal load then standing. But, once you load the weight on the leg press and start using it, I am sure that the spinal load is far greater then that of the standing position (again, we are back to standing, one leg, holding one DB, calf raises as the safest option).

3) true- anyone that works out with you has good form. if they don't....you fire their ass.

I'll have to find the MRI report that my neurologist gave me. It was a buildup of bone spur material from what I remember. It was found back in 2002. Let me make clear that I was not experiencing any pain or discomfort from doing standing calf raises. This is more of a proactive step that I'm taking to move away from unneccessary spinal compression. Also, it is not in the lumbar section of my spine. It is in the cervical area. I think, C-2 but I'll have to find my report to know for sure. Thanks for all the advice and info here.

Originally Posted by boilermaker

I'll have to find the MRI report that my neurologist gave me. It was a buildup of bone spur material from what I remember. It was found back in 2002. Let me make clear that I was not experiencing any pain or discomfort from doing standing calf raises. This is more of a proactive step that I'm taking to move away from unneccessary spinal compression. Also, it is not in the lumbar section of my spine. It is in the cervical area. I think, C-2 but I'll have to find my report to know for sure. Thanks for all the advice and info here.

Oh, okay...cervical stenosis. Sorry, I didn't see you mention that earlier. I must have missed it.

It is good that you aren't having any pain.

Originally Posted by P-funk

2) true- the seated position has less spinal load then standing. But, once you load the weight on the leg press and start using it, I am sure that the spinal load is far greater then that of the standing position (again, we are back to standing, one leg, holding one DB, calf raises as the safest option).

That was my question, where is the additional spinal compression coming from? The force vector goes through the hip, not the spine. I don't see how using the leg press machine would lead to greater compressive force in the spine than sitting in general. Does having the force directed through the hip somehow affect the spine? I am just not seeing how being seated with the laod directed through the hip would lead to higher compressive forces than standing with the spine directly or indirectly loaded.

I am sure the answer is in that big ass book I am sure you memorized while in the hell that is GreyLock...Give me the answer, dammnit.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

That was my question, where is the additional spinal compression coming from? The force vector goes through the hip, not the spine. I don't see how using the leg press machine would lead to greater compressive force in the spine than sitting in general. Does having the force directed through the hip somehow affect the spine? I am just not seeing how being seated with the laod directed through the hip would lead to higher compressive forces than standing with the spine directly or indirectly loaded.

I am sure the answer is in that big ass book I am sure you memorized while in the hell that is GreyLock...Give me the answer, dammnit.

1) When I made my first statement about the leg press I was thinking the plate loaded ones where you are lying down at a 45degree anlge (or more) and the load is coming down on you. that is a lot of load. I wasn't talking about the one you showed the picture of.

2) You are right about the force verctor going through the hip. The compressive force on the spine though is going to come from the musculature working at the hip as their involvement at the hip (and the psoas directly on the spine) is going to create force in the lumbar region. Also, you are sitting in a semi-flexed posture, so depending on musclue tightness in the hip, that will change lumbar compression. At least that would be my guess. Could be wrong though.

How old are you boilermaker?

OK, I found my MRI report for my brain/cervical spine. I'll type it up. This will take a few minutes. I was a little off on what I reported earlier as far as some of the terminology.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

How old are you boilermaker?

22

Originally Posted by P-funk

1) When I made my first statement about the leg press I was thinking the plate loaded ones where you are lying down at a 45degree anlge (or more) and the load is coming down on you. that is a lot of load. I wasn't talking about the one you showed the picture of.

2) You are right about the force verctor going through the hip. The compressive force on the spine though is going to come from the musculature working at the hip as their involvement at the hip (and the psoas directly on the spine) is going to create force in the lumbar region. Also, you are sitting in a semi-flexed posture, so depending on musclue tightness in the hip, that will change lumbar compression. At least that would be my guess. Could be wrong though.

1)I hate the hip sled, f*ck that thing

2)Ahhh, now I see, so at the lower lumbar region...Makes sense.

Giving up all spinal loading at 22 would suck.

I'm 35 now. This MRI was taken in 2002

There are mild degenerative changes of the cervical spine at C5-6 with relative disc desiccation. There is also very mild diffuse disc bulge at this level, however, there is no spinal stenosis involving the cervical spine.

There appears to be prominent uncovertebral joint disease on the left at C6-7 with prominent osteophyte/disc complex which results in marked narrowing of the left neural foramen and may be positioned to effect the exiting left C7 nerve root; clinical correlation would be needed.

There is mild neural foraminal narrowing on the left at C3-4 and C4-5. The spinal cord demonstrates appropriate morphology and signal intensity.