Finally words we fully agree upon.
Thanks for the contribution and correction on plasticity DanPartelly.
However, I wanted to point out that there is already research showing that EMS (also known as NMES, indirect* stimulation) is not just a candidate for plasticity, but a reality.
You seem to imply that indirect* stimulation has not yet shown plasticity. Please see the following studies:[ul]
[li]Neuromuscular Adaptations to Electrostimulation Resistance Training; Maffiuletti et al.; American Journal of Physical
[/li]Medicine & Rehabilitation, Feb.2006, 167-175.
[li]Functional and biochemical properties of chronically
[/li]stimulated human skeletal muscle; Nuhr et al.;Eur J Appl Physiol (2003) 89: 202–208
[/ul]
NOTE *:
For those unfamiliar with the distinction between direct and indirect stimulation.[ul]
[li]Indirect Stimulation is what most readers of this thread are familiar with: pads attached to the skin to contract the muscle; the stimulation is indirect because it stimulates the nerves (i.e. motor neurons), which in turn stimulate the muscle fibers.
[/li][li]Direct Stimulation: electrodes going directly to the muscle fibers, which is typically done in a lab, or through implants.[/ul]
[/li]Giovanni Ciriani
I used the term loosely, unfortunately, not linked to direct / indirect stimulation. My wrong.
and btw, thanks for your nice thread on EMS.
Dan,
Since you seem very well versed in muscle physiology,
here is the distinction I’ve been struggling with, which you could help me with. What would be the right terminology to distinguish between the following?
[ul]
[li]Minor muscle adaptions, i.e. those that involve only increase of cross section of the muscle, and
[/li][li]Major muscle adaptions that involve a reorganization of muscle fibers types, i.e. significant change in the percentage of slow and fast twitch.
[/li][/ul]
I’m attaching an example to clarify* what I mean. Can you help?
Giovanni
Note*: quoted from Maffiuletti et al.; Neuromuscular Adaptations to Electrostimulation Resistance Training; American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Feb.2006, vol.85 no.2, 167-175.
Giovanni,
I never used a specific term to refer to one or another. IMO, they are equally important. For example, the small (but essential)changes which occur in the sarcoplasmic reticulum of a muscle in response to speed training, would they be major or minor adaptation ?
I personally referred to them by their name i.e: hypertrophy, hyperplasia, myosin heavy chain shifts, myosin light chain shifts, buffer capacity and so on.
Im really sorry if this is not helpful in any way, but I never considered an arbitrary classification for skeletal muscle adaptations.
I think that’s very useful. Thanks! 
I am reading trough EMS Theory, which is excellent collection of posts (thank you),and I have one question.
During the contraction caused by EMS pulse is there a need to augment it with maximal voluntary isometric contraction?
Duxx,
It’s a good question! I think Charlie may help in here. (Glad you are enjoying the EMS Theory thread)
My educated guess is that since EMS recruits preferentially fast fibers and then slow fibers (this is not an absolute since fibers are mixed), and voluntary contraction goes the other way around (first slow then fast), the two could complement each other.
However, if you are able to increase current intensity to the max, and recruit all fibers possible, you may not be able to augment at all, because all fibers are already contracted. If one is not able to increase current intensity to the max, or if one doesn’t have a good professional stimulator, then simultaneous voluntary contraction may help. Again this is my educated guess.
At the National Strength and Conditioning Association, 2007 convention in Atlanta, I remember a Sport Medicine doctor presented a study in which he showed the increased benefits from doing EMS dynamically (as opposed to isometrically). This is another subject altogether, but it shows that it’s possible to do things differently and obtain results.
Giovanni
Grazie Giovanni. Your answer was simmilar to what I had on my mind
Another questio. During the EMS should the limb be fixed to imovable object, or normally ‘locked’ into extension? Also, is there any different effects on force-length curve depending on the length of the muscle when it was stimulates? I guess, achieving the longest position of the muscle will yield greatest transfer to other joing angles… what do you think?
I have finished reading through EMS Theory thread and I must thank you for clarifying the electrical parameters and their meaning, especially the difference between Russian currents and square-wave protocol. Great job and very interesting.
I would also love to ask you would you be so kind to provide differentiation between EMS, TENS, MENS, their usage and protocols.
I have found some interesting data on Globus website.
In short, normally flexed in an intermediate position, against a resisting surface.
If you look at the pad position videos of Globus, limbs are always in an intermediate position. They are better off locked against an object, furniture, bench. See for instance the position in this short pad placement video in my site, by clicking on Video Pad Placement; in it, a world-level beach volleyball athlete, is being prepped for dynamic EMS with a leg press.
We recommend to use completely extended limbs only if needed by particular cases. EMS specialist Giampaolo Boschetti, who has extensively consulted for both Globus and Compex, explains that training should target the positions in which most power is transmitted by the muscle. Therefore, if for example, in a sport event your quads do their peak work between 45 and 90 degrees of flexion, you probably are better off immobilizing your foot against the wall at a 60-70 degree angle.
Good question. In short:[ul]
[li]EMS = Muscle training.
[/li][li]TENS = Pain therapy.
[/li][li]MENS = Microcurrent for medical therapy.
[/li][/ul]The more correct terms are NMES, TENS and MENS.
The main difference between EMS* and TENS is the pulse width: typically between 200-450 microseconds are best in EMS to trigger neuro-muscular activation; typically between 20-200 microseconds are sufficient in TENS. Lower pulse widths are all it is needed to trigger sensation and nociceptive nerve paths, which are closer to the skin, and send signals up to the brain, to mask pain.
MENS (Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation) is a completely different ball game. Current intensity is in the hundreds of micro amps (i.e. typically 0.1-0.6 mA, rather than 20-60 mA as in EMS), it acts at cellular level; typical uses are in edema, inflammations such as epicondylitis (tennis elbow) etc.
Note*: variations on the abbreviations and long-forms used instead of EMS are: Electro-Muscle Stimulation, Electrical Muscle Stimulation, Electro Myostimulation and combination thereof. Some authors use the acronym ES, but most research articles use NMES for Neuro-Muscular Electrostimulation. Electronic Muscle Stimulation is a misnomer (some companies with low ranked products, i.e. those who sell cheap stimulators, would make you believe that the secret is in the electronics, the guts of the machine, rather than the fact that electricity flowing through your neuromuscular junction).
Do you have any information about the use of microcurrent across the brain?
No. I only remember reading an article in the New York Times, this past year, that talked about the use of “tiny” electrical currents with certain patients.
I use CES (Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation) regularly and I find great benefits from that.
Could you please elaborate on the benefits you see? General health or performance oriented?
Thanks.
Benefits in both general health and performance, while entirely subjective.
Lower stress, more mental clarity, increased concentration. The organism seem to function better and at lower energy. While my observations are very unscientific, I continue to use CES (20 minutes each day, or on/off) because I feel better (there is plenty of grey publications on CES).
Thanks. How expensive are the units?
400 $ and up
Thanks. I appreciate it.