Talk:Whole-body vibration

WBV types

It seems to me there are two different thing going on in the article. One is just whole body vibration as a phenomena that may be work related and have certain effects on the body. The other is some kind medicine or therapy thing, possibly alternate or complimentary. Might it be reasonable to separate the article into two different ones, dealing with each? I'd keep the name for the work-related one, and add (Therapy) or some such for the second. Rjmail (talk) 01:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if it makes sense, because then you'd have to add a third one related to WBV exercise or workout.--Gciriani (talk) 03:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I was thinking one would be dedicated to the effects from the environment, and the other would be on WBV used as a therapy or whatever.Rjmail (talk) 15:00, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

It looks like there were already two articles, one was Vibration training, which then has been merged.--Gciriani (talk) 15:46, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I think that is unfortunate. Rjmail (talk) 15:48, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the distinction is pretty clear in the current article layout. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:30, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

The German Wiki article refers to vibration training (Vibrationstraining) not just WBV and defines separately Bio-mechanical stimulation (BMS) I Quote "In the related biomechanical stimulation (BMS) or biomechanical oscillation methods, on the other hand, local muscle groups are stimulated directly or via the associated tendons by means of special vibration devices. Vibration training is offered in a variety of areas (competitive sports, fitness, rehabilitation, medicine, prevention, beauty) and used to improve performance of the muscles and to improve coordination and balance." This is a whole separate topic area and there are many machine manufacturers (mainly German) and therapies based upon it and Wiki has no mention of this, so I think we need to add this. Vladimir Nazarov created such machines in the 70's to directly target local muscle groups, they are still produced today in Russia by numerous manufacturers and mainly used in the beauty industry. I think there needs to be clear distinction between WBV and BMS, where by BMS has a separate page as it is a separate topic. Dr Mildran (talk) 23:00, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Created a new page Biomechanical stimulation (BMS) as this is clearly a different topic area, new page currently awaiting review Dr Mildran (talk) 13:01, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Replacing with reviews

Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) should apply to this article, and there are a great multitude of reviews/secondary sources for this topic. When looking at ones made during the last 6-7 years I found these:

• Whole-body vibration platform training in patients with neurodegenerative diseases (Cochrane 2012)
• Whole body vibration training for adults with fibromyalgia (Cochrane 2017)
• Whole body vibration in sport: a critical review (J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2014)
• Whole body vibration and athletic performance: A scoping review (EurJHM 2014)
• I also think the Mayo Clinic article is a good source: Is whole-body vibration a good way to lose weight and improve fitness? (2017)
• And for occupational exposure: Low back pain among farmers exposed to whole body vibration: a literature review

Thus, I think we should use these reviews to replace all primary sources that fall within the same scope. Also, is there any other relatively recent review that would be fitting? Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:37, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:01, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Citing Solecki L is misleading as the Abstract quotes the following:

A literature review was performed for the years 1990-2007. It covered reports addressing the problems associated with the prevalence of low back pain and musculoskeletal disorders among farmers. In addition, the anticipated relationship between low back pain and whole body vibration in farmers was evaluated based on 12 reports for the years 1987-2009. The review confirmed that the prevalence of back pain is significantly higher in farmers exposed to whole body vibration than in the control group (not exposed to vibration). The frequency of back pain is related with whole body vibration, as well as with prolonged sitting position, wrong body posture and physical work load (especially lifting and carrying loads). The prevalence of these symptoms increases with the increased vibration dose and duration of exposure. Disorders in the lower section of the spine were associated with age, accidents (concerning the back), cumulative dose of whole body vibration, and overload due to wrong body posture. Long-term exposure affecting the whole body is harmful to the skeletal system (degeneration of the spine). The results of the study suggest that the repeated or constant exposure to mechanical shocks may increase the risk of low back pain. The investigations confirmed that there is a dose-response type of relationship between exposure to whole body vibration and pain in the lumbar section of the spine.

There seems to be confusion in terminology around vibration and mechanical shocks, (these are two separate things) the later is well know to cause spinal injury and pain and is seen in many activities where such impact force is applied e.g. power boating, motocross, armored tank driving, tractor driving. Also the author states many other factors which can all give rise to back related injuries i.e. prolonged sitting position, wrong body posture and physical work load (especially lifting and carrying loads). These are more likely the greater contributing factors than vibration exposure alone. The study would only be valid if the control group were non-tractor driving farmers doing very similar activities.

The link to greater exposure is a very tenuous one indeed, just the act of sitting on a tractor for longer periods exposes the driver to greater periods of sitting with poor posture and mechanical shock, if you then analyze the actual driving position of a tractor driver it is a very rarely permanently facing forwards position, in many activities they turn (twisting the spine)to face backwards (observing what is being trailed during tillage or other activities) hence twisting action upon the spine which is well known to cause aggravation to the lower back muscle groups and cause lower back pain. Also the older the tractor the more likely these factors arise, i.e. no-shock dampened seats (directly mounted to chassis), manual or non-ergonomic controls of 3 point linkage requiring twisting of the spine to operate. With more modern tractors most of these issues have been taken into consideration as far as possible to reduce these aggravating factors, but the major factor of turning and twisting the spine to look rearward still prevails.

I suggest this is a study in which the link is not clearly proven (too many other aggravating factors involved) and a study with a better proven link to pure vibration actually directly causing spinal injury should be found. Dr Mildran (talk) 09:35, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Merge from Power Plate and Galileo (vibration training)

After applying the same principles as in section above, not enough material remained in those articles to justify a wp:fork from here, so I merged them to here. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:47, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hyphen or not

It is a moot point whether there should be an hyphen between whole and body. Arguments for no hyphen: that is what I see in the article lede at this moment; this page on the HSE website spells it once with an hyphen and four times without. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:44, 31 May 2018 (UTC)