COMMENTS

Posted by: Dineke Kleyn-Langeveld | 04-Jun-2009 06:32 AM |

Hi Steve,
Good to read positive stuff about the vibration training.I was at first a bit sceptic being a personal trainer (you know what we are like) and even having a bad experience trying it out, I have been working with it for two years now intensively (We at vibragym work one on one with the clients)A lot of people use because it is short and intense, but I worked with quite a few people of which one was told she could not walk again after being paralized.She started just having her feet on the plate for months, after persevering she started to come in with a walker instead of a wheelchair.
Myself, (by the way I am 64,) if I do RPM and have not used the vibration for a couple of days my legs get quite tired during class.
Anyway I would love to learn more about vibration training for rehab as such.
Warm regards
Dineke Kleyn, FC Vibragym, Whangaparaoa,New Zealand.
P.S.The machines I work with are the only medical certified at the moment.

Posted by: Di Heap | 04-Jun-2009 06:59 AM |

A dedicated site with articles (lots of info) and comments. You can also get all your questions answered (Note: the site does NOT sell anything)
www.vibrationtraining.net

Posted by: Robinson Australia | 04-Jun-2009 07:31 AM |

I have a client who required knee surgery so cardio training was impossible for her. After using my vibration technology she lost a few kilos in a few weeks, and it definitely wasn't because of her diet! So put it down to the vibration techniques.

Posted by: Anonymous | 04-Jun-2009 10:27 AM |

Have made vibration training available to members as an added value, however they were rarely used as most feel they get more out of functional exercise. We also have a large rehab based membership, along with Physio's, who never use these platforms. Have noticed that the vibration training studio continually move to smaller and smaller premises - so are not doing very well. All in all vibration platforms very over rated.

Posted by: David Driscoll | 04-Jun-2009 10:56 AM |

Could we have a reference for this quote please "This process also uses up to 100 per cent of a muscle’s fibre, "
The reason we have science is because people's anecdotal stories aren't reliable as evidence. Just read what the majority of papers say, vibration training has its place but the claims made by most people selling and promoting it (like this article appears to be) are massively exaggerated.
I predict this will mostly be another trend trainers will move on from in a few years; to the next pseudo-scientific gimmick.

Posted by: Sean | 04-Jun-2009 11:31 AM |

Vibration training is a fad, a rip off. It is snake oil of the lowest order. It lacks any credible research back up and has no physiological rationale behind it whatsoever.
Its success is entirely because it is easily marketable - both clients and wanna-be trainers can be produced en masse thanks to bogus certification programs and cheesy marketing - all working towards the ultimate goal of making the people who manufacture these contraptions a large amount of money.
Compare this with say kettle bell training - incredibly effective but nowhere near as successful in the fitness market - why? Because it requires a lot of knowledge to coach effectively and safely - and because its bloody hard work, therefore unsuitable for silly ads showing slim ladies mid exercise smiling happily like they are on drugs or something.

Posted by: Nick | 04-Jun-2009 11:31 AM |

Vibration training is not the future of training and has very little use in anything beyond rehabilitation work or massage.

Posted by: Jamie | 04-Jun-2009 11:39 AM |

I believe it is pointless as it is limited (new fitness frontier lol). If a larger plate were to be made say 6m by 6m there would be some benefits as variety from your normal work outs as whole work outs/routines could be done on this larger vibrating plate.
Although all of these new gadgets and thingamabobs are just so people can get rich as there is nothing like old fashioned hard work and sweat. TTFU which is short for Toughen The F&*% Up (excuse the language) we are all looking for the quick way (including myself on occasion) out, around and through the obvious, which is TTFU do the hard work get the pain, common sense with food and you will be rewarded with results.
I believe any activity if it gets people off their bums is good so to contradict myself if all these gadgets helps people to get up and move great but I do believe people do get ripped off with most of these things quite regularly which gives us all a bad name and makes me sad .

Posted by: Cunningham Australia | 04-Jun-2009 01:05 PM |

First heard about vibration in late 90's' used extensively in Europe and was part of the Russian space program long before it was a fad! Fair amount of data regarding bone density is also available. chill out guys, the world is already an angry place do some yoga?

Posted by: Sharyn | 04-Jun-2009 02:13 PM |

Looks like more for abs and upper body - what about glutes and hammies / quads ?

Posted by: Chris | 04-Jun-2009 02:14 PM |

Hi, Reminds me of the old vibrating belt that was supposed to remove fat from your hips. I didn't fall for it then and I feel skeptical now. If this works then how do we test the results, if any. I think we tend to jump to doing what's easy and not do what is necessary and that's moving and making the body work efficiently and functionally. I would like to know how a vibration can do any of the things mentioned. There are so many trendy things out there, the public go and buy these things and they never get used. I wonder if my massager at home would achieve the same result. No sounds like one of the many things that make people spend more money when our motivation should be basic fitness and well being. I will stick to what I know works and not what is trendy I think.

Posted by: Anonymous | 04-Jun-2009 02:59 PM |

Have been using a power plate machine for around 4 months in an attempt to lose weight and tone muscle in problem areas like thighs and stomach. I found a pilates studio nearby that offered vibration training and signed up - despite the negative connotations that come with a fitness 'fad,' I've found that not only have I lost cm from my thighs and stomach, it has improved my strength as well. It's inspired me to take a better interest in my health and well being especially now I have had an increase in confidence from using the power plate. I did some research on the machine not too long ago and also found a study in the UK that was released showing that power plates assist in weight loss.
Despite the skeptics, I'm a convert. It may be the 'trendy' exercise regime but it sure works for me.

Posted by: Dean Jolly | 05-Jun-2009 06:07 AM |

Chris Cunniham is correct, Eastern block found use for it, BUT definitely NOT as a tool for all the claims being made, nor would anyone who actually uses common sense in their understanding of physiology favour it over self enhancement application. SAID principle.
Still it's there as part of the learning process, and usually they lead on to discovering more about self-applied action, I mean what else does one do when they cant get relief for shoulder issue from local knowledge, then some how vibration helped.
I get it, BUT there is more applied science available, most in industry just don't know it.

Posted by: | 05-Jun-2009 08:30 AM |

There are now over 100 published research articles on the proven benefits of Whole Body Vibration (WBV).
In this months issue of Womens Health p13 Michelle Bridges comments on vibration training as the future of fitness.
When I visited the UK last July I was staggered at the results my friends had achieved using WBV and subsequently set up a studio last Sept running classes on the machines or one on one.
I have been overwhelmed by the huge benefits my clients have achieved in joint mobility, pain relief, balance and co-ordination in the elderly , sustained weight loss and toning particularly with females (yes, you can get into those inner thighs!) right through to core strengthening and improvements in sports performance for athletes.
Yes there are some machines out there that are gimmicks or toys and some just suited to vibrational therapy. You need a machine that will get to 26Hz which is the maximum number of times your muscles can contract and relax in one second.
For those skeptics out there near the Eastern Suburbs in Sydney come and visit me and I'll give you a free punishing workout that you'll feel for days, oh, and you'll sweat too!

Posted by: Ed | 05-Jun-2009 09:21 AM |

Have look at the 'Research Review' article by Dr Mike Climstein in the Spring 2007 issue of Network magazine (go to the Publications tab at the top of this page and select Network magazine). Mike evaluates a study entitled ‘‘Influence of Vibration Training on Energy Expenditure in Active Men’ and, although questioning some manufacturers’ unsubstantiated claims, he also directs readers to check out research studies that have been conducted with regard to whole body vibration exercise and their specific areas of interest online at the ncbi website.

Posted by: Di Heap | 05-Jun-2009 09:36 AM |

I'm a registered fitness consultant working as a Vibration Training Instructor at Vibra-Train's Auckland City Studio.
All are welcome for a free first session. Be prepared to work-out very hard. On our high force, lineal, purpose designed Vibration TRAINING machines this is not easy, s*xy, soppy exercise for the lazy! I can guarantee you pain and can, in one session, prove to doubters that Vibration Training on Real Machines is a great addition to your fitness regime.
The above commenter said that machines must get to 26Hz. This is when using Pivotal Vibration machines for fitness training. It is essential to differentiate between that and High Energy Lineal Machines where 43Hz is the premium for Work-Out although frequency is only one factor in the design equation.
I encourage all fitness professionals to learn all they can about Vibration Training. It's a training method that's here to stay. Scientific studies are now providing the evidence to back up what Users already know.

Posted by: Di Heap | 05-Jun-2009 10:11 AM |

There is a HUGE difference between Vibration TRAINING and Vibration THERAPY. That's the big problem with the this article. It's good to stimulate discussion but the writer is a seller of a handheld vibrating device - which is NOT Vibration Training at all. They are either very uneducated or simply marketing to Not make the distinction. (After reading the article several times I have to comment on this). This is the worst sort of marketing for this industry as it adds to confusion for the general public rather than educating.

Posted by: Di Heap | 05-Jun-2009 11:50 AM |

Quote from above: "For those skeptics out there near the Eastern Suburbs in Sydney come and visit me and I'll give you a free punishing workout that you'll feel for days, oh, and you'll sweat too! "
Again, I'm going to point out that this quote is from someone who has a Studio that provides Vibration TRAINING using Premium Speed Pivotal Machines. This type of Vibration Training, using a machine that has a see-saw action, involves both static and dynamic poses on the machine. It's hard work (I have tried it) and I ached the next day similar to after a weights work-out at the gym.
The other Premium category of Vibration Machine is the High Energy Lineal (Upright Vibration only) platform. Positions on this machine are usually static (non moving). The user feels intense burn (pain like pressure) in the targeted muscles during the 60/120 second poses but most do not feel any "after exercise ache" the next day.
Physicians tell us that aching and pain is a warning mechanism, it's existence tells us NOT to repeat the action that caused it yet we expect to feel it after exercise! We justify this because of the micro-tear in muscle fibres to promote growth process. In my job I really enjoy vibration training body builders - those who go hard in the weights room. They get a workout that compliments their program and no added after-pain. Pain felt after a lineal vibration training session is usually because the person was outside of perfect position on the machine, or had a pre-existing injury that I was disturbed (not a major as ongoing training or vibration therapy will help with healing). Of course there are many different brands of machines, some very good, but others give high frequency uncontrolled vibration that goes up/down, left/right, back/forward - quite severely pushing/pulling the user in many directions at once. Still other "as seen on tv" contraptions are usually so low force that they neither hurt nor help for training and can sometimes be useful for gentle therapy/rehab purposes. Marketing these machines as Vibration Training is a big stretch and results in the type of comments people have written above - fad etc.

Posted by: Lloyd Shaw | 05-Jun-2009 12:35 PM |

This type of article is highly misleading and is at the very essence of why others in the fitness industry think Vibration Training is a crock.
Here are some major facts to consider...
(a) Just because it moves and elicits a response that does not make it Vibration Training. That's like saying horse riding is Vibration Training and the horse is the device ?
Light Vibration = Vibration Therapy ( released approx. 1870 ) Never shown potential to build muscle or burn fat. But fantastic Physio values.
Flexi-Bar / Wobble boards or any other device that elicits this response through Gravity , Body weight or your own exertion = Involuntary Reflex Training. True it elicits close to 100% stimulation, but that does not equate to training. Without the pressure in the movement no anabolic activity can take place. ( been around forever )
Heavy Mechanical Vibration + Working directly against gravity in given pose = Vibration Training ( new )
Health professionals / Marketers etc.. only out to make a buck deliberately blur the line between these technologies, attach the catchphrase "Vibration Training" to it in an unethical bid to confuse the consumer.
They are the enemy of our industry and the consumer.
Why can I say this with such conviction?
Because I was Power Plates Product Manager and only got involved with this technology through my mortuary work ( don't ask ) I left when they deliberately decided to blur the lines all in the name of profit and go from a small steel machine with dense mass which showed promise ( now the Vibro-Gym ) to a plastic low mass machine from China ( much cheaper to build ). Right at a point when we were getting close to moving forward into better designs, we were sold out and they went backwards 40 years. The industry has suffered ever since.
All previous machines had massive limitations both in design, size, max weight ( could not take obese people ) and results that could be obtained But it was a beginning.
Note: Power Plate had previously trademarked "Vibration Therapy" but we were working towards a "Training" system. I originally wanted to set up studios called Vibra-Train that carried the newer larger commercial Power Plates I had designed and hoped they would build. We were obviously not going in the same direction so I set up Vibra-Train with the original steel Power Plates, Vibro-Gyms and Body-Shakers to continue my research into commercial training machines.
I have since continued to support companies like Vibro-Gym , Body-Shaker, Fit-Vibe , Galileo, Hyper-Gravity , Hyper-Vibe , WaveExercise and other companies doing their best to move forward while being as close to honest as you can ask from any company. Not being involved in the retail market has allowed me to be unbiased and write numerous articles for vibrationtraining.net , in theory , training and consumer protection.
It is this simple folks...
Anyone saying that all 250 brands on the market, no matter how they are designed or built , all do the same thing, are not being up front and honest.
I have personally designed 25 machines, and they do not do the same thing, or why would I bother ?
My best advice, try before you buy, do NOT listen to the marketing, and be skeptical of everything you hear. Even those trainers out there who do not get it, be "old school" but not "ignorant" ( there is a difference ). At least test a proper training unit before you make a decision as to weather this science has merit of not.

Posted by: Lloyd Shaw | 05-Jun-2009 01:10 PM |

And in case anyone thinks I am being to hard on the Flexi-Bar guy, go and read his history page. Only ever used and shown results on rehab . In their own words it is just a cheaper version of a popular Physiotherapy tool. No leap forward in design or function.
Versions of this has been around for centuries in Asia where they used bamboo poles. But all of a sudden it has a new name. Vibration Training.

Posted by: Di Heap | 05-Jun-2009 01:25 PM |

A question for Dineke Kleyn-Langeveld, VibroGym. As I am involved in this industry I like to know where other studios are located. I understood that Maxe Jansens Studio had closed. Have you taken it over? It would be good to meet you.

Posted by: Kylie Morrison | 05-Jun-2009 09:40 PM |

After researching vibration training for almost 18 months I took a leap of faith and purchased a Power Plate for my home studio. I use it primarily to enhance functional movement patterns and increase intensity in Pilates based exercise. For the cynics who think it is a fad with no credibility I suggest you start reading the research. My clients also love the feeling of being invigorated after they exercise rather than simply exhausted. Anything that increases adherence to exercise, decreases stress hormone response, and assists in increasing bone density, lean muscle mass and circulatory response in otherwise sedentary populations, for me, is worth it's weight in gold!

Posted by: Steph | 05-Jun-2009 10:23 PM |

All I have to say is the Flexi-Bar is a fantastic tool. I do use in my studio at this present moment on the Gold Coast and of course just like anything else, there are the people who love it and there are the people who hate it. Basically the people who "hate it", are people with poor coordination and basically impatience. It takes time for some people to grasp the connection between the body and the bar. Sure fighting isn't going to help. Once you got it, you can take to a higher level and that's when it becomes more of a workout. It's for sure a great tool to add to a Pilates/ Yoga classes or to a PT session.
Another toy to add to the collection and great with swiss ball, and Bosu balance work!
To make a full Flexi-bar class you basically you need to combine with squats, push up, core and balance work.
And of course do not forget how great is for rehab work!
One more point: 100 times better than the Bodyblade.

Posted by: Jay Bonaretti | 06-Jun-2009 08:47 AM |

Unfortunately, whilst there may be some research out there to back up the effectiveness of this for rehabilitation purposes, there is a lot of misinformation floating around the industry to suggest that it is an effective tool for weight loss.
I published a comprehensive review of the currently available research of this technology in regards to weight loss where I also considered some of the highly misleading advertising that is currently being aired:
http://www.aminoz.com.au/vibration-machines-a-255.html

Posted by: Lloyd Shaw | 06-Jun-2009 05:15 PM |

Jay.........
You did a review on weight loss studies done on rehab machines. What is exactly your point , that you have just figured out they would fail
? That was predicted in 2004 and already written about extensively over the last 5 years and quite a few people have worked hard to expose it.
Doing some homework and at least some legwork, plus testing multiple products, both old and new, and then commenting might have given you a better understanding of what a massive subject you were writing about. Not just sit behind a desk and "read some stuff".
This is exactly the kind of slack research marketers rely on to rip off the public, just in some strange reverse.
Read this....
http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20090511/can-vibration-plates-shake-off-weight?ecd=wnl_lbt_051309&em=Z2xld2lzQGNsZWF
So not all studies have shown no promise, and instruction and better machinery is coming all the time. You could have at least mentioned part of that.
I understand everyone's concern over allot of the lies out there, and an overview of the industry is always welcome, but to not understand how technology develops, and the hurdles it faces , makes it look like you don't appreciate how everything you take for granted get perfected.
Nothing you use in the gym as "traditional" methods of exercise was perfected or even understood straight away. Joseph Pilates developed his system in 1910, he died in 1967 with no one knowing who he was.
It was not till the early 90s that Doctors cleared people to do weight training, up till that point most thought it would damage your joints.
I can bet your Grandparents did very little " traditional " exercise their entire life. It just a catchphrase trainers like to use for " nothing I don't understand ".
Our Industries Eg progression .......
1875 > Steam powered Vibrational Therapy devices used in the medical and gymnastic industry, Dr Gustav Zander put up centers across Europe and the U.S. Dr George Taylor and J.H. Kellogg was his competition in the U.S. . Their main focus was simple stimulation. Mainly blood flow. The entire gym system , with exer-cycles , indoor rowers, etc.. ( all which were ridiculed by athletes at the time ) collapsed due to the war and following depression.
Vibro-Therapy was used quite a bit in rehab centers across Europe after WW1. were a James, Alexander Alexandrovich also researched it help with Asthma and other disorders.
But generally it was sold as a cure all for everything including tumors by dodgy salesmen. (These people probably sell cheap machines on E-Bay now).
1960 > Hyper-Gravity loading principles applied to various space programs. Evidence of some sporting scientist/coaches looking at potential for athletes.
1995 > Commercial interest in products , but due to lack of exact science , marketing hype outdoes potential of existing units.
2004 > New era of “exact function” education into Training and design begins.
It still has a long way to prove itself, maybe 50 good honest , well thought out studies by researchers not so grant hungry they take anything that moves , and we might convince some people.
In the mean time giving a more balanced view based on reading AND experience might protect the consumer a little better. Education = protection.

Posted by: Gavin Aquilina | 11-Jun-2009 10:38 AM |

At the ACSM conference in Seattle 2 weeks ago, there was a detailed review of research.
Findings, there are 3 primary different types of machines, there is much research out there and these are done utilising mixed protocols (many flawed) and varied objectives. At present there is not multiple research supporting each other.
The major outcomes from the presenters were:
Yes, vibration training does achieve increase and maintenance of bone density.
Yes, vibration training does increase muscle activation.
To achieve these two outcomes you require different training protocols.
The vibration frequency that provides safe and effective training is 30Hz.
The studies demonstrated that results are achieved by those who are de-conditioned but there are very limited benefits to be gained by conditioned and athletes.
One of the summaries was that you can gain great results (for both bone density and muscle activation) by performing activities without the vibration plate and that the vibration plate may ehance this. Vibration plate without these activities does not achieve the same results.
There was a presentation by a lady from the US International Organization for Standardization. She questioned the safety of vibration training as per US ISO 2631 (google this), admittedly this is exposure to vibration frequencies for prolonged periods as per work place environments but she bought about some very pertinent points questioning safety aspects, some of these:
- Avoid sitting on the vibration plate and performing activities
- Work place vibration resulted in vascular remodeling of arteries resulting in a thickening of the lumen and vessel diameter decreasing
- Standing on the plate dampens some of the negative aspects of force transfer
There was a review of approximately 60 - 70 research papers, many with flawed protocols and small study populations. Areas that the research was summarized into were:
Bone density - Positive
Muscle activation - Positive
Hormonal responses - Mixed research no support
VO2 and energy expenditure - Improvements for obese
Body fat - Non significant
Back pain - No difference between whole body vibration and core conditioning exercises
A final comment, people are using very subjective reasons for supporting vibration training, for those who indicate decreases in body fat, have you worked out whether the vibration training is a catalyst for other lifestyle modifications, if these same people did the same exercises and nutrition modifications without vibration training would they have achieved the same outcome. You see the same false positive association with people taking supplements and training, they believe the supplements achieve the results but as we know the supplements by themselves would achieve very limited results.
For bone mineral density and muscle activation for the elderly and de-conditioned there is strong support as long as you use the correct training protocols.
A good recent study:
Jnl of Strength and Conditioning Wilcock 23(2) 593 - 603, 2009

Excellent comment Gavin - Network

Posted by: Lloyd Shaw | 12-Jun-2009 12:58 PM |

There may be a small number of basic types of platforms but hundreds of variations can be made to effect different responses. And the "30hz is the best" only came from the "longest stretch reflex" according to EMG tests, which in no way means its the best. They have even failed to come up with a theory on why it would be best let alone prove it.
Something to think about...
The machine I have seen put the most muscle mass on someone according to a BCA tests only goes 43hz @ 0.7 mm
But 7 other variations were added . The kind of variations people who talk about Fq and Amplitude as the main spec points know nothing about.
"US International Organization for Standardization. She questioned the safety of vibration training as per US ISO 2631"(Google this)
Why don't you Google that with my name next to it, and see the work we did in 2003 , working out safe exposure levels "before" the safety programs were released .
Got to love these "expert" types getting on the bandwagon now years after the real work has already been done. And being so simplistic in their statement it means nothing, it just sounds good to the uneducated.
Eg....
You use the same involuntary reflexes to catch yourself as you do to catch a ball. The distance between you and the thrower is the amplitude, the frequency of the throw is obviously the FQ. If you catch a volley-ball its not that hard to repeat over and over, but change that to a medicine ball and the workload changes considerably. Your form also has to be more precise or you risk injury.
So the Fq may not change, nor the amplitude , but EVERYTHING , including optimal training effects and safety poses, fatigue factors, anabolic responses etc.. can due to the simple change in mass.
And that's just 1 variation in 9 in just a very basic Lineal negative response platform. If you start introducing positive ( pulling ) responses it goes to 24 quite quickly.
The researchers who repeat that Fq and Amplitude are "everything" are only repeating what they hear from companies who have no real idea what they are playing with, so cover up their ignorance with mass marketing and buying off researchers ( with grants ) to repeat their crap.
Both groups are the lowest common denominator in our industry.
Valid Research.... ???
Do you know how many researchers " forgot" ( re were not smart enough ) to tests the machine to even see what they were doing prior to the research. They just went off the manufacturers specs , and with such companies like Power Plate faking specs left right and center. This practice from unethical marketers and lack of foresight from researchers has skewed results to such a point they are basically useless and can not be reproduced.
Direct quotes from David Basset-Jones who did studies on the Power Plate in 2005 , later to find out he was lied to........
“As far as having “engineering reports” done on machines, I would argue that it is the ethical responsibility of the manufacturer to do this testing and report the results. The blame is not on the researchers but the manufactures ”
“As far as my ( Power Plate ) study in 2005, we only measured the accelerations (which were different than the manufacturer’s claimed accelerations). This was done without an individual standing on the plate.”
” I also feel that there are some researchers (myself included) that would like to perform product testing so that consumers can be informed of the true specs.”
“We are testing it loaded and unloaded. Believe it or not, you are not the only one who has wondered if the Power Plate, being made of a softer material than steel, affects the vibration characteristics.”
“I agree that all plates should be tested before (and while, to go above and beyond) they are being used for a research study…..I can only wish that I thought of this prior to doing this study”
“I am more concerned about the errors/limitations of my research than you are. This was years of planning, testing, and analyzing that I put in to this project. I could not account for limitations in the study that I was not aware of at that time.”
Now this from 2009 to show the practice still exists....
Medscape Medical News
ACSM 2009: Whole-Body Vibration Improves Function After Hip Replacement Surgery
Jordana Bieze Foster
June 3, 2009 (Seattle, Washington)
" Exercises were performed on a Pneu-Vibe vibration platform, at manufacturer-calibrated frequencies between 25 and 40 Hz and amplitudes between 4 and 6 mm. However, Dr. Maddalozzo noted that the researchers’ independent measurements put the actual frequency between 21 and 32 Hz and the actual amplitude between 0.82 and 1.1 mm "
Unethical manufacturers + researchers pretending to be smart = my industry treading water

Posted by: Mindy Thiesen | 18-Jun-2009 08:28 AM |

I don't care how efffective vibrational training may be, just being on the machine gave me a headache! No thanks.

Posted by: Di Heap | 18-Jun-2009 09:07 AM |

Hi Mindy, You statement lacks all the information necessary to address it. Like, what type of machine you used or what brand? Was it a higher quality machine in a studio or gym, or was it an "as-seen-on-tv" unit?
Had you eaten before you used the machine - you really must as it's hard -out exercise if you use a higher force platform. Did you drink adequate water before, during and after your session?
Did you have the guidance of an experienced vibration training instructor or PT who knew how to use the machine correctly? Where you in correct positions on the machine with your head and neck correctly placed?
And lastly a warning, again, all machines are not created equal! Even if you eat, drink etc (as needed for all exercise) and use the machine correctly you just might have been using a crappy machine - one that has uncontrolled vibration going in all sorts of directions. I tried a bad one and it made me feel sea-sick. If you tell me where you live I will try to arrange a session on a good machine for you.

Posted by: Stephanie Pettersen | 20-Jun-2009 09:36 AM |

I have wrote a comment before and have been reading the latest comments. I basically think people should try the Flexi-Bar before writing negative comments. How can anyone write a comment on anything if you never seen, touch or tried?
I have used and use at this present moment in my Studio on the Gold Coast and that's why I wrote my comment before and writing again now. I think the Flexi-Bar is unique and it has a huge potential within the Australian Fitness Industry.
And again in my opinion it works better than the Bodyblade because I have tried both. Anyone can swing the Bodyblade but guess what? Not the Flexi-Bar...If you don't have the momentum with the Flexi-Bar, you got nothing...So it is great for people with poor coordination.

Stephanie Pettersen from cyclelates.com.au
4 x Times World Bodyboarding Champion

Posted by: Di Heap | 23-Jun-2009 06:21 AM |

Stephanie, I agree that people should try a method or machine before being totally negative about it. I have nothing against Flexi-Bar as an exercise or therapy method BUT it's a real stretch to call it Vibration Training as the author of this article has done and to compare it to PowerPlate.
A different term is needed for hand force vibration.
Vibration Training is the term used for motorised controlled vibration delivered (usually) via a platform that the user positions on in squats and other exercise poses. Being motorised and controlled in factors like frequency, amplitude etc, it's very different to a hand powered device, no matter how good that device is. I consider this article very misleading.
Di Heap
www.vibeplus.com

Posted by: Steve Schiemer | 13-Jul-2009 04:21 PM |

Response written by Blog Post author: Steve Schiemer

It seems that I have really opened a can of worms with my piece about Vibration Training recently. After reading through some of the posts, I thought I should take the time to address some of the issues raised.

Firstly, I am really surprised by the number of ‘angry’ postings (for want of a better word) about a subject that very few of the respondents have actually used. If you have tried a Power Plate/Vibro-Gym or a FLEXI-BAR and don’t like it, I completely understand. Like anything, it is not for everyone. Surely though, if you haven’t actually experienced something, a final judgement should be reserved until you do? It is akin to me looking at a personal trainer’s profile and deciding that they are not a good trainer, based solely on reading their bio. I am sure the personal trainer in question would argue that they should be given a chance and allowed at least one session with me to prove themselves. In fact they would probably argue that they should do a few sessions with me so we can get to know each other and workout what works and what doesn’t. Surely any new piece of kit deserves the same response – if not for the trainer, for the sake of their client, as it may be something they really take to.

As to this being a marketing ploy because I am the director of the company which sells FLEXI-BARs in the UK, I was asked by Network to submit the piece for discussion because of this fact. I have been involved in this field for the past 5 to 6 years, have run training courses, spoken at fitness events, and spent a lot of my time speaking with physios, coaches and doctors about this type of training. We do not sell in Australia, so there is currently no real personal advantage for me to write the piece. It is also why I am confident that all bar one of the respondents has never used a FLEXI-BAR.

One area that was hotly discussed is that most vibration devices, especially the FLEXI-BAR, are therapeutic, rather than for fitness. That is, they are for rehabilitation of injuries, and not for ‘fitness’. It is absolutely correct to say that FLEXI-BAR began as a rehab tool, and is still used for that. However, it is also used as a fitness training tool, specifically to strengthen the core muscles, improve coordination and balance, and improve sport specific performance. Anyone who has participated in a FLEXI-BAR class or PT session will tell you that the addition of vibrations while performing any number of ‘traditional’ exercises makes those exercises much harder. Again, only actual experience can get this across properly. Added to that the German, Austrian and Finnish Winter Olympic Teams, the British Ski Team, the German and Austrian National Football teams, FC Bayern Munich, Newcastle United FC and many more use FLEXI-BAR as a fitness/strength tool. The Ministry of Defence in the UK began using FLEXI-BAR as part of its rehab programs for injured soldiers, but has now included it in the Basic Training program for new recruits, as the increase in core strength has improved the number of new recruits who finish the course. With today’s technology, it is possible for something that begins life as a rehab tool to cross over to the fitness world. Just look at Pilates, Aqua, the Step platform, and Dyna Bands, all of which started in the rehab world, but are now seen as mainstream fitness tools.

Finally, I really want to address the whole research issue. I am more than aware that the whole area of vibration technology needs much more research before we can be absolutely sure of just how effective it is. I have spent the last five years trying to get studies done (as has the German manufacturer). It is extremely expensive to do a full, double blind study that satisfies all the required criteria for good, solid research. What many people do not realise is that if you can find a research department who will agree to do a study (not easy to find), there is the issue of cost. A good study on a large enough group costs tens of thousands of pounds. In fact, anything up to and beyond £50,000 (AUS$100,000). It is extremely difficult for a research lab or university to find such funding. If a business can afford to pay that kind of money (mine certainly can’t), then any results are frowned upon because the research is funded by the company selling the product. As a result, getting research done is all but impossible. Occasionally a university student will ask to do a small study, but so far only one has actually followed through on this. I would like nothing more than to have more research done on both FLEXI-BAR and any other form of vibration training. Hopefully, with the increasing attention this type of training attracts, the funds will be released for research.

For the person who wanted to know where I got the figures regarding muscle fibre recruitment, see below.

Shepherd, J. All shook up – can vibration training enhance sport performance? http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/vibration-training-and-performance-33404 [Accessed 3 September 2007].

Posted by: Lloyd Shaw | 24-Sep-2009 02:15 PM |

I do not think you get the reason people are "angry" at you. Its your blatant mis-use of the term "Vibration Training" to describe the Flex-Bar you sell. It has NOTHING to do with the Flexi-Bar being effective or not, ( which by the way it is ).
Please note readers...Vibration Training is specific to MECHANICAL vibration, so unless his flexi-bar now has a hidden motor built into it, he is trying to use techno-speak to fool you. And how do I know this? Try looking for the first person to ever list Vibration Training as a Trade-Mark term and ask them what it means.

Post a Comment

Hate it Love it!

Do you have feedback? (optional)

Full Name (optional)

Email Address (optional)

So we know you’re not SPAM, please enter Word Verification in the box below:

COMMENTS

Post a Comment

Hate it Love it!

Do you have feedback? (optional)

Full Name (optional)

Email Address (optional)

So we know you’re not SPAM, please enter Word Verification in the box below:

COMMENTS

Posted by: Adam Stanecki | 02-Jun-2009 10:43 AM |

This post doesn't actually answer the question in the title. I can answer it (although you may consider me biased as I am affiliated). CrossFit is safe for everyone. It is fully scalable. It is not simply "stringing together some difficult drills/exercises". There is validity and empirical evidence behind the program. Do not judge it based solely on internet posts and videos. CrossFit is contrary to many common fitness models and therefore causes discomfort among many in the industry. Different doesn't mean wrong. If you want to try it for yourself, I'll provide a free trial at my gym. Go to http://www.crossfitvictoria.com for more info.
Regards, Adam Stanecki.

Posted by: Williams Australia | 04-Jun-2009 09:44 AM |

I own and run Australia's current Personal Training Business of the Year and have sat on the Board of Fitness Australia ACT branch, and whilst i am a big believer in variety to people's training, i am still not sure that Crossfit is safe for everyone. I have been and tried it for myself and i found it quite extreme even after training and competing for 15 years. The problem i believe we are and will see, is trainers setting themselves up wanting to do CrossFit training with their clients,but they lack enough experience to be able to cater for a variety of clients and to be able to scale it back to suit the various fitness levels they may come across. I am not 100% sure on what training or qualifications are required at this stage to be a CrossFit qualified trainer, but i am sure it is something that can be addressed to make the trainers more qualified and to be able to offer lower impact options of the training.
Time will tell if it will take off in Australia, and at this stage it is not something i will tell my clients to try unless they have a very high level of fitness.
I run a Mini Commandos style of training for around 20 primary schools per term and at this stage i will not teach it to our youth, preferring to focus on developmental fun exercise programs.
With time, better training and more understanding of the CrossFit style of training, it may be something that can be taught down the track.

Posted by: Graeme Beath | 18-Jun-2009 09:49 AM |

Like Adam I am biased but I think there is a perception as relayed by Scott that CrossFit is always intense or extreme. I condust mostly outdoor PT sessions & am a CrossFit Cert 1 trainer but I don't train people in a Crossfit gym (yet - it a goal). My own training is Crossfit & i'M 55 so it's not just for young fire breathers. I would also comment I pretty much beat most new younger people coming out of a globo gym environment untill they build up real firtness.
CrossFit training is functional; really functional not just standing on a bosu. Technique is paramount and a very large amount of time is spent getting proper movement before anyone is released on an exercise program. Workouts are infinitely scaleable and the most intense routines can be modified for 80 year olds & 8 year olds. I use it on most my squads but they don't know it. I've also had disabled people doing movements they didn't think possible simply because no one showed them how. I currntly have a rehab client from car accident.
The intensity comes at each level.
Check out Adams web site & you'll find links to other affiliates around the country. Go, look & talk to the trainers & don't always think about hard core. Once you are hooked though you will want to go hard & you'll accept ripped hands from pull ups, scraped shins from Oly Lifts & general soreness. The guys who opposse it have generally never tried it or talked to anyone who has given it e serious evaluation.

Posted by: Anonymous | 18-Jun-2009 10:38 AM |

I agree with Adam. I've experienced Crossfit and it was an extremely hard, satisfying workout - due to my own commitment level. I think the problem is that it is actually hard to push yourself to that level alone as yes, it is uncomfortable. By the same token yes, it does get results (provided you know when to stop i.e. when your form fails). I've seen some videos that perhaps don't support this style of training as the subjects push passed the point of losing their technique and it all looks a little too painful and potentially dangerous) but based on my personal research and experience I would suggest Trainers try it for themselves before making a quick judgement. The principles behind it are sound and so I think easily scaleable across a variety of populations.
I am a PT and regularly use this style of training with my clients (ranging in age from 20-something to 70-something). I don't think it's a particularly new concept rather the intensity level that attracts attention. That said, I don't just throw Clients in at the highest level of intensity or I'd never see them again. It's a matter of introducing the principles at an intensity hard enough to get results but at a level they can cope with so they don't go away sore to the point that it interferes with their life and they don't want to come back.
I think pushing the intensity as high as you can during your workout while maintaining correct technique is very much optimal training.

Posted by: Anonymous | 20-Jun-2009 04:19 PM |

I am a PTI in the Army and have been for 21 years, the crossfit phenonenum has its place. Where I work we conduct crossfit for all ages, but at a level they can cope with also. I have tried it and my strength gains were excellent, that said I did not look at the times or reps of other people on the web site Crossfitfx.com and rested between each bout of sets when fatigued. You can make up your own and work your way into it, alot of people start off hard and unprepared and consequently receive an injury or accute muscle soreness. My suggestion work in slow and set achievable goals.

Posted by: Brendan | 22-Jun-2009 06:06 PM |

As above i'm all for Crossfit. As a holder of a Crossfit certification I can honestly say that anyone that is willing to bag this type of training has not tried it. It is fully adjustable to suit all ages, genders, fitness and functional levels. In the words of Crossfit " the only difference between an elite athlete and a elderly trainee is one looks for functional dominance the other looks for functional competence " Crossfit supplies both camps with the required level of fitness over a broad range of modalities, that is a broad level of general fitness.
As for the comment about "bad form" All afilliates and trainers conduct a foundation course teaching the core movements and correct technique to all the various exercises used in the Crossfit workouts. This has to be completed before any trainee is let loose on any workout.
To my knowledge not many Globo gyms teach their clients how to Clean, Press, Snatch or swing a Kettlebell safely? Signing a direct debit seem to be the only pre requisite to training.

Posted by: Anonymous | 06-Jul-2009 02:31 PM |

Is it for everyone? Training's about being holistic,working on all muscle groups,flexibility, imbalances, food,stress,educating clients about their bodie etc.So pick a series of exercises that are well balanced for your client ,work them hard, safley and at their level, this is Cross training,been doing it for 15 years.

Posted by: Darryl | 04-Sep-2009 11:54 AM |

i am have been doing both the main CF and the navy seals CF as part of PT for my employment. i'm not a big believer in it and still thinks its dangerous, and to some degree, even pointless. i believe a lot of injuries are caused by this random approach, and the mixing of exercises that should be seperate. eg, doing high reps of heavy lifts interspersed with other activities. we shouldn't be doing heavy lifts after completely wearing yourself out on other activities, as form naturally goes out the window. and i dont believe in the notion of training body parts that are still stiff and sore from previous workouts, but thats what invariably happens as the workouts are random. we have a certified CF instructor at work, and he suggests sacrificing a small amount of form to ensure you push the barrier and make improvements (which was taught to him by coach glassman on his course). in my experience, after doing CF for some time, a new person to CF can walk in and complete and even beat regularlt CFitters. people who do conventional weight and cardio programs seem to have absolutely no difficulty completing ANY of the WODs, which suggests to me that CF trains mediocrity, or a very poor standard, in the fitness domains it promotes. i am currently in a tactical police unit and have subjected myself to some very rigorous training programs. i gave CF and long trial, and my strength and cardio decreased dramatically. we have had shoulder and knee injuries, not to mention more than 1 hernia case. all this from people who are very active and very well trained. physcially and mentally. also, the CF website has SOOO many photos of these really muscular guys. marketing ploy? i think so. if anyone thinks those physiques are gained by CF alone are sadly mistaken. that only will come from long, dedicated weight training, genetics, and a well balanced diet (not the cave man diet). as i said i trialled CF for a long time with a very open mind. im not trying to offend anyone involved in it, im just putting forward my opinion and experience. cheers

Posted by: Darryl | 04-Sep-2009 11:54 AM |

i am have been doing both the main CF and the navy seals CF as part of PT for my employment. i'm not a big believer in it and still thinks its dangerous, and to some degree, even pointless. i believe a lot of injuries are caused by this random approach, and the mixing of exercises that should be seperate. eg, doing high reps of heavy lifts interspersed with other activities. we shouldn't be doing heavy lifts after completely wearing yourself out on other activities, as form naturally goes out the window. and i dont believe in the notion of training body parts that are still stiff and sore from previous workouts, but thats what invariably happens as the workouts are random. we have a certified CF instructor at work, and he suggests sacrificing a small amount of form to ensure you push the barrier and make improvements (which was taught to him by coach glassman on his course). in my experience, after doing CF for some time, a new person to CF can walk in and complete and even beat regularlt CFitters. people who do conventional weight and cardio programs seem to have absolutely no difficulty completing ANY of the WODs, which suggests to me that CF trains mediocrity, or a very poor standard, in the fitness domains it promotes. i am currently in a tactical police unit and have subjected myself to some very rigorous training programs. i gave CF and long trial, and my strength and cardio decreased dramatically. we have had shoulder and knee injuries, not to mention more than 1 hernia case. all this from people who are very active and very well trained. physcially and mentally. also, the CF website has SOOO many photos of these really muscular guys. marketing ploy? i think so. if anyone thinks those physiques are gained by CF alone are sadly mistaken. that only will come from long, dedicated weight training, genetics, and a well balanced diet (not the cave man diet). as i said i trialled CF for a long time with a very open mind. im not trying to offend anyone involved in it, im just putting forward my opinion and experience. cheers

Posted by: James H | 10-Feb-2010 09:32 PM |

I personally think there are ups, and plenty of downs to Cross fit. DOWNS A cookie cutter approach to exercising multiple people is dangerous. No concern for technique, even though they say scale it down, the competitive aspect allows people to push well beyond their capabilities The only safeway to train an INDIVIDUAL is to thoroughly assess them and then program design accordingly, crossfit does not do this UPS The community it has created on local, national and global levels is pretty phenomenal. The concept is great. Charles Polequin is surely one of the most highly respected people in this industry and he has a lengthy article highlighting his thoughts you can read it here.. www.tmuscle.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance/question_of_strength_vol_47 Cheers.

Post a Comment

Hate it Love it!

Do you have feedback? (optional)

Full Name (optional)

Email Address (optional)

So we know you’re not SPAM, please enter Word Verification in the box below:

COMMENTS

Posted by: Anonymous | 12-May-2009 08:27 AM |

Good article, hate the exercise. I think that any fitness professional is more than accountable for the safety of exercises that members/clients preform. If they are doing any that can put themselves in danger of injury then they should be told and corrected, after that its up to them to consider the consequences of what might happen if they continue.
I would not give the BNP, or any exercise that has a high injury risk, to a client. Obviously all exercises have some element of risk but ones like the BNP where the risk is almost equal to the benefit should be left out and something more suitable preformed. Leg extensions, another high risk exercise.

Posted by: Josephine | 12-May-2009 08:33 AM |

Specialising in the over 50's market I do not go near these exercises, I found the comments refreshing that not everybody agrees with the old" Tuff to be Buff" syndrome. Welcome to new ideas, thank you all for entering into these discussions..
Cheers.........Josephine!!!!

Posted by: Luke Magee | 12-May-2009 09:14 AM |

I definitely agree with Nathan, i would almost never prescribe i high risk exercise to a client. But in the realms of my own training these high risk exercises do come into play. I don't think this is contra-indicative that what goes for me doesn't go for a client. I think there is room for these exercises, but only in high experienced and advanced cases where high levels of technical supervision are being provided, especially when using free weights.

Posted by: Sam K | 12-May-2009 09:28 AM |

Shouldn't all exercise be founded in principles of well being? Exercises that potentially endanger your physical well being are against everything I believe as a trainer. This exercise is yet another hangover from the world of body building, where building size precedes common sense.

Posted by: Mario Frapiccini | 12-May-2009 10:02 AM |

Do not use it at all I do not think it provides any real benefit to the masses, i.e the danger is higher than any benefit they will get.

Posted by: Phil Raymond | 12-May-2009 10:20 AM |

Great article,I have for a long long time advised my clients why I will not have them perform this exercise.As a bodybuilder myself I feel my shoulder development is up to par with a lot of my competitors and ever since the mid 1990's when I tweaked my rotator and for the next 6 months tried to rehabilitate my injury with a lot of pain involved.
My shoulder development back then was to say in the very leas-average,where as for the past 13-14 years I have never performed this exercise again and my development has grown a lot. There are a lot of machines and alternate exercises to use rather than potentially placing my clients at risk of injury and potentially stopping the income that they so kindly provide.

Posted by: Max Rafferty | 12-May-2009 11:43 AM |

All trainers have a Duty of Care to their clients (i.e a legal responsibility based around their level of understanding). So being a “fitness professional” does make you legally accountable, and no personal trainer wants to hurt their client (I hope) and then be financial accountable for that injury. So, for the benefit of the client and the trainer’s financial situation “know thy exercise” and screen the client!

Posted by: Pete | 12-May-2009 11:58 AM |

Is it functional? ... Is the movement applicable to real life situations? It may be for some, in which case like all movements, learn it light with good form and increase load to meet your goals.
If it's not applicable or directly useful to press heavy things from behind your head try doing it in front :-)

Posted by: Dave Martin | 12-May-2009 11:59 AM |

Good read, Like Phil's comments I too have suffered in the past with Shoulder problems attributed to various training excercises including BNP. As a competitive bodybuilder in the 80's and 90's my own education was limited around Good exercise V's Bad. The last time I prescribed this exercise was 1994! and these day's there are safer alternatives to medial and posterior targeting

Posted by: David Hoffmann | 12-May-2009 12:29 PM |

When you look at the relativity of this exercise in day to day life for a client, I would not prescribe this to any of our clients as I cannot think of a movement that they will effectively carry out this movement. Again it is up to us as professionals to look at the exercises we believe will place people at risk and not prescribe them. There are many alternatives for us to use, and does Mrs Jones care if her posterior deltoid is buffed?

Posted by: Teresa Quinn | 12-May-2009 12:58 PM |

This exercise as I am aware was outlawed when I did my training back 6yrs ago so I have never used it on any of my clients. When I have seen clients using said exercise , it has always been with bad posture and technique, and I have always advised clients on it use and the risks involved and have left the decision to them .
As a personal trainer I think it is my duty to all clients to keep them safe and to inform them on any changes regarding outlawed exercises, the reasons why , and an alternative exercise. We all as trainers should be keeping ourselves updated and as an industry try to give the same advice to keep our industry a professional one.

Posted by: Brian Cooke | 12-May-2009 02:09 PM |

All shoulder press exercises involve concurrent outward rotation/abduction which produces capsular instability. Whilst BNP is the most extreme of the press options each should be preceded by some functional assessment. The old argument that BNP is the most effective option for medial and posterior deltoid recruitment surely went out with Conan. Posterior deltoid is a horizontal shoulder abductor and plays almost no role in abducting the shoulder in the frontal plane. Let's discuss something a little more divisive like vibration technology perhaps.

Posted by: Chris. | 12-May-2009 03:02 PM |

BNP always a hot topic,First Question i would ask client/instructor is there anything in your day to day activities that require you to be in a unsafe position with a weight above your head???
Weight training should be functional to meet the individuals needs.

Posted by: David Max | 12-May-2009 03:16 PM |

I think that the BNP is a very "grey zone" exercise. I personally use it with my Olympic lifters.
There is certainly no alternative when it comes to Olympic lifting.Though for most athletes, the benefits of this exercise can be produced by a mix of various exercises which are lower risk. This exercise makes me think of box squats, an exercise that should NEVER be performed without a coach present, as injuries aren't only possible but they should be expected.
Safety should always be a trainers and an athletes first concern, as strength, speed and power are all just a back or rotator cuff injury from disappearing.

Posted by: Joe Bonington | 13-May-2009 03:51 PM |

Great Subject. I agree with David Max. This exercise does have a place. As a strength and conditioning coach, it is taught in the breakdowns of "O"lifts as a straight BNP or as a "Push under" and then as a "Drop Under". Unless these groups are worked in such a way the integrity of a clients snatch can suffer. It also has cross over into any sport where a push pattern is required where the head may be forced into flexion... all codes of Rugby and all forms of grappling. For your general population... No way, not a hope

Posted by: CHRIS | 13-May-2009 06:25 PM |

I was a PT trainer (male) until i developed chronic psoaratic arthritis as a result of a serious bout of food poisoning from a restaurant 6 years ago. I am no longer a trainer as my time and considerable effort is spent on just trying to get through each day.
However, as one of the many who ditched the BNP, it is now the only exercise that maintains my ability to raise my arms above my shoulder. It is as painful as hell (due to the arthritis, not the exercise itself) but so is pressing to the front. However, the front press does not maintain my ability to raise my arms above my head no matter how much painful stretching i do and it is not long before i can no longer do this if i don't do the BNP.
Thought you all might like to know this in the context of my individual situation and the benefit of the BNP to me as opposed to the Front Press.
P.S. Celebrate your good health every day.

Posted by: mark roskell | 13-May-2009 08:43 PM |

hi,
I got certified as a personal trainer quite a few years ago (mainly so i could further my own knowledge for my training - i am a drug free powerlifter). I have had many friends come over to my place over the years and say they could never squat, or BNP (for example), because they always get injured while doing them and have been told that they are an unsafe exercise.
After 5 minutes of showing them how to do the exercise, they are doing it safely.
Every exercise has its merits, and I believe that with the right coaching / teaching, the vast majority of people can do any exercise and not get injured.
Done incorrectly, any exercise has the potential to injure [some more than others.
Regards,
Mark Roskell

Posted by: Yochum Australia | 15-May-2009 01:06 PM |

I would not give this exercise to any of my clients. Most of us deal with the normal population whom we have a duty of care towards. If we are looking at our clients as individuals with individual needs and wants then I cannot see anyone requiring BNP in their repertoire of exercises. There is a multitude of choice which we can delve into without resorting to exercises that are out of date, potential harmful, and arguably with little positive outcome. Use your imagination and the knowledge you have and are continually developing to deliver a balanced, outcome based program which meets the needs of each client no matter what their goals.

Posted by: Anonymous | 17-May-2009 09:02 PM |

Like everyone else, why put a client at risk?
A lot of bodybuilders still love it though

Posted by: Sheena | 20-May-2009 02:19 PM |

This exercise is definitely not encouraged in our gym. As others have said, the chances of the general population needing to press heavy weight behind their heads is virtually zero! Clients have made time to come exercise, so why waste it doing a non-functional exercise?

Posted by: Anonymous | 17-Jun-2009 04:14 PM |

I have used the matrix roll involving BHS it si effective hoever I would be very selevtive as to which client I woudl introduce it to.
I am more interested in the question" Does being a fitness professional make you accountable..." I am appauled at the number of "fitness professionals" who do not maintain registration or increase knowledge. A plummer MUST be licensed to work with water pipes. How is it a person who is invloved in anothers wellbeing and health DOESNT have to be licensed????

Posted by: Christine Atkins | 15-Sep-2009 03:33 PM |

I agree with Nathan 100% Cheers Chris

Post a Comment

Hate it Love it!

Do you have feedback? (optional)

Full Name (optional)

Email Address (optional)

So we know you’re not SPAM, please enter Word Verification in the box below: