I was taught that we are supposed to massage from distal to proximal, isn't applying force from the knee towards the foot counter to that, or am I just thinking to hard?
Ed, I beg to disagree with your table height measurements. I am 6'1", so that is 73". Your recommendation would mean my table height is approx. 36.5". That is way to high, though I understand where you are coming from with the height for preserving our limbs. I have always gone by where the table rubs my knuckles is an adequate height. Care to discuss further?
My table height is also adjusted by the size of my client and or the techniques that I am using. Do you not agree? I am only 5'2" and that seems to be a little high for me as well to measure that way.
Also I might add that a taller person has a better reach across the client's body where as a shorter person may need to lower the table a bit more and adjust in the body mechanics, do you not agree with this?
I agree, total height does not take into account the distance of the hands from the floor. Your arms, legs, or torso may be longer or shorter in comparison to someone that half there height works. Its generally best to error too low. Especially if you don't have an electric table. You can always use a lower horse stance, but to reach up for that thick body is tough, and they are often the ones wanting more pressure. You don't always get a chance to change the height between clients, and always bending down/kneeling to change the height is its own stressor.
This has always been a struggle for me as well. I'm 5'3" and I've always felt more comfortable working on a table that seems a bit low for my height. I think it mostly depends on your limb length and your client's size :)
A lot of videos seem to only focus on lower body mechanics; I appreciate your guidance on keeping the shoulders safe, mine has been an issue
Thank You for this video. I found it very helpful. I have been struggling with body mechanics and this has some good tips.
Finally. THIS is what I was looking for.
I was taught that we are supposed to massage from distal to proximal, isn't applying force from the knee towards the foot counter to that, or am I just thinking to hard?
Thank you so much!
Ed,
I beg to disagree with your table height measurements. I am 6'1", so that is 73". Your recommendation would mean my table height is approx. 36.5". That is way to high, though I understand where you are coming from with the height for preserving our limbs. I have always gone by where the table rubs my knuckles is an adequate height. Care to discuss further?
My table height is also adjusted by the size of my client and or the techniques that I am using. Do you not agree? I am only 5'2" and that seems to be a little high for me as well to measure that way.
Also I might add that a taller person has a better reach across the client's body where as a shorter person may need to lower the table a bit more and adjust in the body mechanics, do you not agree with this?
I agree, total height does not take into account the distance of the hands from the floor. Your arms, legs, or torso may be longer or shorter in comparison to someone that half there height works.
Its generally best to error too low. Especially if you don't have an electric table. You can always use a lower horse stance, but to reach up for that thick body is tough, and they are often the ones wanting more pressure.
You don't always get a chance to change the height between clients, and always bending down/kneeling to change the height is its own stressor.
Client's bodies vary quite a bit! So I'd think if anything you'd want to set the distance to the clients back (when they are prone)
This has always been a struggle for me as well. I'm 5'3" and I've always felt more comfortable working on a table that seems a bit low for my height. I think it mostly depends on your limb length and your client's size :)
Well said.
🙏
louder