So I have decided to focus on the 1500/1650, partly because I seem to have misplaced the three fast twitch fibers I once owned, and partly because guys named Smith are now swimming the 500 and even the 1000. Geek suggested that I build my endurance with dryland work, but unlike him I have a job and limited time to train, and I don't really want to give up pool time. Any suggestions?
It requires constant maintenance. Here is what I did beginning in 2003:
1. Saw a PT and did RC exercises (which I still do regularly). Without my PT I would not be swimming.
2. Used ice and anti-inflammatories (Vioxx was amazing).
3. Modified my workouts, avoiding paddles (which I now use) and fly (which I am swimming again).
Started to see improvement after six months. I switched to bilateral breathing later (2005?), but it took quite awhile to feel natural.
Ditto congratulations on an excellent 1650.
In terms of item #2 on your list, what do you--as a cardiologist--think about the following:
Vioxx's link to heart problems (knowingly suppressed for four years) that damaged Merck's once admirable reputation
the idea that plain old generic ibuprofen and naprosen are Cox-2 Inhibitors, though not selectively so--why would Vioxx be any better? Just an individual response on your part?
the idea that shoulder overuse problems (including rotator cuff "impingement" problems) are increasingly viewed by orthopedic researchers as tendonosis rather than tendinitis, and that kiboshing inflammation is exactly the opposite of what you want to do
that most of these problems, unless there is traumatic damage (SLAP lesion, rotator cuff tear, and so forth) are self-limited, and that you might have healed over time without VIOXX, perhaps even faster
and that the RC exercises (and ice) may have been the most valuable elements here by 1. tightening an overly lax capsule, keeping the humeral head stabilized, and 2. providing some pain relief and increased blood flow?
The reason I ask is that it seems to me there really has been a sea change in how swimmers shoulder is being viewed--and yesteryear's idea of attacking inflammation (via NSAIDS or cortisone injections) is more and more emerging as counterproductive (there is no evidence of inflammation, for one thing) and injurious (retarded healing rates and, with cortisone injections especially, evidence of weakened connective tissues.)
It requires constant maintenance. Here is what I did beginning in 2003:
1. Saw a PT and did RC exercises (which I still do regularly). Without my PT I would not be swimming.
2. Used ice and anti-inflammatories (Vioxx was amazing).
3. Modified my workouts, avoiding paddles (which I now use) and fly (which I am swimming again).
Started to see improvement after six months. I switched to bilateral breathing later (2005?), but it took quite awhile to feel natural.
Ditto congratulations on an excellent 1650.
In terms of item #2 on your list, what do you--as a cardiologist--think about the following:
Vioxx's link to heart problems (knowingly suppressed for four years) that damaged Merck's once admirable reputation
the idea that plain old generic ibuprofen and naprosen are Cox-2 Inhibitors, though not selectively so--why would Vioxx be any better? Just an individual response on your part?
the idea that shoulder overuse problems (including rotator cuff "impingement" problems) are increasingly viewed by orthopedic researchers as tendonosis rather than tendinitis, and that kiboshing inflammation is exactly the opposite of what you want to do
that most of these problems, unless there is traumatic damage (SLAP lesion, rotator cuff tear, and so forth) are self-limited, and that you might have healed over time without VIOXX, perhaps even faster
and that the RC exercises (and ice) may have been the most valuable elements here by 1. tightening an overly lax capsule, keeping the humeral head stabilized, and 2. providing some pain relief and increased blood flow?
The reason I ask is that it seems to me there really has been a sea change in how swimmers shoulder is being viewed--and yesteryear's idea of attacking inflammation (via NSAIDS or cortisone injections) is more and more emerging as counterproductive (there is no evidence of inflammation, for one thing) and injurious (retarded healing rates and, with cortisone injections especially, evidence of weakened connective tissues.)
