Structure

When you look at the thoracic vertebrae, what do you see? If you’ve been following along you’ve noticed we did this last week too with the lumbar vertebrae. One of the things I try to teach in my courses and mentorships is how we can develop our critical eye by looking at a structure and practice understanding what the shape can tell us about its potential function. So, when you look at the thoracic vertebrae, what do you see? How are they different from the lumbar vertebrae?

The first thing that we might notice about the thoracic vertebrae is the accommodation for the articulation of the ribs. The ribs (most of them) attach to their corresponding vertebrae as well as the one immediately above. Ribs 1 and 11 and 12 only attach to their corresponding vertebrae. The articulation of the ribs to the vertebral column and around to the sternum create a very stable and protective case for our most vital organs and spinal cord. The ribs act as a force distributor or disperser (I’m sure that’s a word, right?) and transfer impact through the ribs to the sternum as evidenced by frequently seen fractures of the sternum after thoracic spine injuries. The stability of the thoracic spine is only second to the stability of the sacrum. The sacrum and thoracic spine both gain mechanical stability through bony articulations as well as strong ligamentous support. The stability of the thoracic spine is further reinforced by the disc to vertebral body ratio: Small disc, big body. This means movement is relatively limited before one vertebral structure starts to run into another. We can also observe this in the long spinous process (dinosaur spikes) on the back of the vertebrae. If we move into extreme extension those girls start to run into each other.

Read more

What do you see when you look at the lumbar vertebrae? Look at the shape of the bones, specifically the body of the vertebrae. What are the descriptive words that come to mind? Big? Flat? Tall? Round? No wrong answers. It’s your interpretation of a shape.

Structure

Now look at the shape of L1 vs L5? What is the difference? More importantly, why is there a difference? This, IMO, is a good representation of the idea that everything in our body (and beyond) exists in a spectrum to accommodate variability, or the right tools to meet the varied demands of different tasks.

The descriptive words I’d use to describe the lumbar vertebrae are

• Big

• Wide

• Massive

• Tree trunk-esque

What does this tell me about their capacity, or what they do?

• Support weight

• Bear load

• Distribute force

• Workhorse

Decidedly non scientific words.

The lumbar vertebrae are indeed massive. Their total mass is approximately twice that of the cervical vertebrae (7 cervical vertebrae instead of 5 lumbar vertebrae). The main job of the lumbar vertebrae is to bear the load from the rest of the axial skeleton (head and trunk) plus the arms. That explains why the vertebral bodies are so big. They are like the semi trucks of our spine. Their main job is load distribution and absorption.

But why the change in shape as we move up the spine? (L5 is the bottom, L1 is the top as we move towards the head). Back to the things about existing on a continuum. As we move closer to the thoracic region, the demands of the spine change. And it would be super weird if we went directly from massive and made for load to not as massive and made for other stuff. Because our bodies aren’t black and white. We exist on a gray scale, like literally everything in the entire world.

Read more

The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and the WHO with the support of the CDC, the American Medical Association, and the Office of the Surgeon General launched a global initiative to mobilize physicians and other healthcare providers to promote the idea that exercise is the closest thing we have to the so-called fountain of youth. In doing so, the ACSM recommends 150 minutes of moderate cardio respiratory activity per week as well as 2 resistance training sessions per week to reduce our risk of all cause mortality. Only 25% of adults currently meet these guidelines and only 20% of adolescents. When we do meet these guidelines we can reduce all cause mortality by about 30%, which is honestly as close to a magic pill as we currently have, even with all of the longevity maxing, peptides, red light therapy, and cold plunging that’s happening in the billionaire class.

Before the billionaires of today spent their fortunes trying to hack their way into eternal life, longevity maxing was the quest of mystics, healers, and physicians of antiquity. The first recorded recommendation to exercise for health and wellness came from Susruta, a Hindu physician that lived around 700 BCE. Susruta recommended moderate physical activity for health, taken every day, but if it was too vigorous it could be fatal. Disease was thought to be a disequilibrium of the “dosas”, or intangible qualities that when in harmony, promoted health. Exercise was one way to bring them back into balance. Centuries later, Hippocrates prescribed walking for patients with consumption and Herodicles, considered the father of modern sports medicine, prescribed exercises to patients suffering from injuries sustained while competing in sporting events, common in Greek physical culture. Disease, for which exercise was prescribed, was considered an imbalance of the four humors: phlegm, yellow bile, black bile, and blood. It was believed that idleness, overconsumption, and excessive exercise could lead to disease, or the imbalance of the humors.

Sounds familiar. Ancient culture seemed to come to similar conclusions as the ACSM: Exercise, when done consistently over time, is beneficial in mitigating disease. While today we may scoff at the idea that disease is due to an imbalance of dosas or humors, it’s not too far off from modern conclusions. We still don’t have a great explanation for why some diseases manifest in some people but we can see that exercise helps.

That begs the question: do we need to know why it helps? Or do we just need to get people to do it? I mean, i think we should be curious and remain curious about why it works but not need to know why it works to advocate for it. As exercise professionals, not physicians, we occupy a very special place in someone’s health ecosystem. We usually see them before disease is present, we see them significantly more often than they see their doctor, we develop personal relationships with them, we are a trusted component to their overall health and wellbeing. Because of this we can have an oversized influence on their day to day behaviors and beliefs. That means we have a duty to help them meet basic exercise guidelines: 150 minutes of moderate physical activity and 2 days of resistance training.

Pilates doesn’t inherently check those boxes. We have to think a bit outside the repertoire if the only thing our client is doing is coming to Pilates. We need to encourage them to seek out exercise that stimulates their cardio respiratory fitness. Walking, jogging, swimming, rowing, skipping, dancing…something that makes them out of breath. Better if they do it with friends because that generally means they will be more consistent. Pilates can check the box of resistance training. This is where we can shine. We are primed to help people understand the benefits of getting stronger, building muscle, increasing resilience and capacity. But this isn’t inherent in the Pilates repertoire. We need to understand the principles of strength and adaptation to help move our clients in the right direction. We need to understand basic exercise science to help them get stronger. Because they will plateau. And when they do, we need to understand how to continue to move them forward.

Don’t get me wrong, I think that there is more to exercise, Pilates specifically, than just building strength and resilience. Pilates is like moving meditation. In an ideal world we would all do some weightlifting, some cardio stimulus, and some Pilates or Yoga or Tai Chi. But really, who has that kind of time and money. Minus the longevity maxing billionaires I mean.

I’ve been enjoying writing this Substack. It feels like authenticity in an increasingly AI driven world. And I think the father we dive into how AI will inevitably shape the way we conduct ourselves online we will want crave need authenticity. We will want to see the typos, the weirdly crafted sentence that actually works, the marks of human touch to the information we’re consuming. At least that’s how I think of it. And I see this a a space to cultivate that.

What you read here will always be written fully by me. My words, my typos, my weirdly crafted sentences. Because I need this outlet to make sure I’m still human. And I really appreciate that you’re here with me.

As many of you know, my business is centered around a few things:

• teaching real bodies in my studio 5 days a week

• delivering education and mentoring to Pilates instructors in anatomy, biomechancis, and exercise science

• partnering with studios and Pilates education companies to bring anatomy, biomechanics, and exercise science to teacher training and studio upskills

And this Substack is now a part of that ecosystem. My byline says “Demystifying biomechanics through the lens of Pilates” and my goal is to do just that. Up to this point most of my posts have been half philosophical musings and half cited, educational content that more specifically matches the promise of demystifying biomechanics through the lends of Pilates. I would like to keep using this space as an opportunity to wax poetic, as they say, while also satisfying the promise of delivering content that helps Pilates instructors learn to leverage anatomy, biomechanics, and exercise science to help usher Pilates education into the 21st century.

Pilates instructors shouldn’t have to spend thousands of dollars on a Masters education like I did to feel confident in foundational exercise science concepts.

So, that’s a lot of rambling to say that I’ve added a monthly subscription option for those subscribers who want a little bit more. This is how I’ll be structuring my Substack

• One article a month, waxing poetic on things (still Pilates/movement/science things) that are taking up space in my brain. This will always be free

• Weekly articles that are written to more specifically fulfill the promise of demystifying biomechanics through a Pilates lens. So these articles will be more educational, more technical, more citations…you know, the stuff Pilates instructors salivate for (speaking about myself here). These article will be part of my paid subscription. It’s only $8/month or $80/year, a reasonable ask IMO, for feeling like you’re part of a community of people that are interested in the mysteries of the human body. With a subscription you get all my articles plus my archive, access to video interviews with movement experts (also known as my colleagues), exclusive discount codes to classes and continuing education, as well as access to a community chat feature where we can chat about all things nerdy.

No pressure to get the subscription. Pressure is not really my jam. But I’d love it if you did. This little stuff is how I am able to continue to do what I do, cause, y’all, teaching Pilates is not the type of career that gives you a 401k unless you do it yourself.

I deeply love what I do. I am constantly fascinated by human movement, behavior, communication…and I truly believe with every fiber of my body that it is my job, and the job of all movement professionals, to help people find the joy in movement that keeps them connected to their body for the rest of their lives.

Because, my god, aren’t we absolutely amazing creatures?

AOP News & Happenings

What’s happening in the AOP world? So glad you asked ;)

New movement class starting May 3rd, Sundays at 12 weekly thereafter. Class will be live virtual on zoom. This is not really a class to get a workout but rather, a time to explore anatomy, biomechanics, and exercise science concepts as they apply to real bodies in the studio. It’s a chance to ask questions, get creative, and explore. This is a safe space to learn! Which means it’s okay to be wrong. No one is going to put you in jail. Classes are $20 drop in, $60 for a monthly plan. Classes are recorded so if you sign up but can’t make it, all good. If you have access to Pilates equipment that is preferred but not required. Monthly plans will get access to class archives and additional content like anatomy videos to support learning. Honestly, this is a steal and I’m so excited about starting this class. Sign up for the May 3rd class below. Monthly plan options will be available starting next month.

Sign up for class

I wrote an Ebook! Well, it’s a 50 page guide on using biomechanics to build strength in Pilates. So maybe I’m exaggerating when I say book. In any case, I worked hard on it. I wish it was something I had when I was going through my teacher training and early career. This ebook is a little bit theory with lots of emphasis on how to connect that to real teaching. I introduce the AOP Strength Framework for the first time, something I’ve been refining for the last few years. It’s a super basic way to understand what’s happening in a movement by asking 4 questions. It works. I wouldn’t tell you it did if I didn’t believe in it. It’s only $17 and will be available for purchase starting in May.

what else…

1:1 Mentoring is always available. Get clarity on the questions that come up everyday in your teaching, gain confidence in understanding anatomy, biomechanics, and exercise science, bring client case studies you’re having trouble progressing in the right direction…Sign up below

Book your 1:1 Mentoring session

I have open spots in my schedule for in person sessions. If you’re a current client, know someone who wants to start Pilates, and are in the Santa Cruz area reach out for private a small group availability by responding to this email. I also teach a weekly mat class at CrossFit Santa Cruz every Saturday at 10:15am. This class is open to everyone! Free to members of the gym and $20 for non members. We have a real good time. Come for the Pilates, stay for the profanity and laughs. Sign up below by scrolling to the appropriate date on the CFSC schedule. Just look for the class titles “Pilates with Cody”

Sign up for the CFSC mat class

I recently put up a question on my instagram stories that asked people whether they thought muscles did both pushing and pulling actions or whether they only did one and if only one, which one. Over 300 people answered and 70% answered incorrectly stating that muscles did both pushing and pulling when in reality muscles only do one thing: Pull. Maybe the way I worded the question was confusing or maybe the people that answered weren’t movement professionals (although I assume that most of the people that follow me are movement people of some type or another) but I have to say I was a little shocked by the result of my very unscientific experiment. How can movement professionals be competent at delivering movement-based solutions when they don’t understand basic muscle function and physiology? Shook. But, honestly, it’s not their fault. We just need a rehaul of the Pilates education.

Muscle function

So, let’s lay it out: How do muscles actually even work?

Think of your muscles like tiny teams of helpers that can only pull on ropes inside your body.

The basic idea:

• Your brain sends a message: “Hey! Move!”

• The muscle gets that message and shortens (squeezes).

• When it squeezes, it pulls on your bones, like tugging on a rope.

• That pull is what makes your arm bend, your leg move, or your body lift.

Muscles can’t push, they only pull. So your body uses pairs of muscles:

• One pulls to bend your arm

• Another pulls the opposite way to straighten it

What’s happening inside:

Inside each muscle are tiny threads that slide past each other.

• These threads are called actin and myosin

• Myosin grabs actin and pulls it inward (like tiny hands pulling a rope)

• When lots of these tiny pulls happen together, the whole muscle shortens

This is called the Sliding Filament Theory.

What do muscles need to work?

They need three things:

1. A signal from your nervous system

2. Energy (from food → turned into ATP)

3. Calcium (helps the tiny threads grab and pull)

Why this matters:

• Movement = muscles pulling on bones

• Strength = how much pull they can create

• Control = how well your brain coordinates that pull

Additional reading if you’re interested in Sliding Filament Theory or actin myosin cross bridge cycling, both of which have been consistently reinforced as a core mechanism of human movement.

Cool story, but how does this impact my ability to deliver a killer class or session for my clients?

Great question! I’m so glad you asked. Could you deliver the best class ever and give your clients everything they want from Pilates without knowing muscle function and physiology? Yes, I believe you can! But at some point a client will ask a question about what muscle is working or where they “should’ be feeling it, or will need a modification for an uncomfortable movement, or will come in just having finished physical therapy and they will trust that you understand what they can and can’t do based on their pathology. And while I’m not suggesting you have to know everything, or anything really, I do think you need to be curious about what you don’t know. And as movement professionals our clients see us as experts when we stand in front of a class and direct their movement. When we’re not curious about how that movement happens our clients might feel like we’re not really invested in them and that starts to deteriorate the therapeutic alliance, which has been identified as one of the most impactful things we can cultivate to help our clients reach their goals.

Maybe you’re reading this thinking “I got into teaching Pilates because I just love to move my body, I’m not trying to study physiology!” or “my teacher training was hard enough learning the repertoire, i don’t need to know in depth muscle anatomy”. I totally get it! Learning the repertoire is super hard. It’s like learning another language. And we get some basic clinical anatomy in there as well but honestly, from what I can tell, it’s not made particularly relevant to moving bodies. Not to mention the 16 hours of anatomy that most teacher training programs mandate is only enough to make you realize you are pretty confused by most of what’s being presented. It is good for a basic introduction…this muscle attaches here and here and mostly does this action, but not good enough to carry us through a career as a movement professional. But because Pilates is fully unregulated, no one is telling us we need to understand kinesiology better to be able to fully step into this profession.

Somehow, Pilates teacher training missed the point

I know not all teacher training is created equal. There are some small trainings out there that are doing amazing things to educate future instructors in exercise science and biomechanics. But I have yet to see that this is happening on a larger scale. Major training hubs are still pushing irrelevant and outdated narratives about posture analysis, pain, and the role of the Pilates instructor in post-rehab and NONE (as far as I know, and correct me if I’m wrong) are teaching foundational exercise science and biomechanics. This is wild to me! We are the only exercise profession whose training doesn’t require a basic understanding of exercise science to get certified. And what’s even crazier to me is that there is this thread of superiority that runs deep in the Pilates community. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard Pilates instructors say Pilates is all you need. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for giving yourself props, cause we all deserve a pat on the back especially from ourselves, but the over self hyping of Pilates just makes us sound ignorant as a profession especially to other movement professionals.

You must be tired of hearing me say this now, but I will die on this hill: Pilates teacher training and continuing education needs to give new Pilates professionals a better foundation for understanding the importance of foundational concepts in exercise science and biomechanics. We aren’t setting our instructors up for success when we deliver clinical anatomy in teacher training rather than concepts that are actually more relevant to the moving human body.

My hill

The goal of what I do at AOP is to help Pilates instructors get more comfortable with the concepts I’ve highlighted above. F*$$ clinical anatomy (not really, but that sounds badass). We’re better served spending our time getting curious about concepts like

• How do muscles actually get strong?

• How does load affect joint mechanics?

• How does joint angle change muscle action?

• How does pain change movement?

• How do we actually learn movement?

• How do we effectively communicate to help people learn movement?

• How do we get bones stronger?

• How do we help clients meet their goals?

And yes, we do need to know that hamstrings attach to the sitz bones (I’m being intentionally colloquial) and also below the knee, but do we need to memorize origin and insertion? Or is it more relevant to practice a deeper understanding of “if the hamstrings attach to the sitz bones and below the knee, what happens when those muscles contract?” and “if they cross two joints, what makes their action different from muscles that only cross one joint?”. We can look up insertion/origin, but we have to develop critical thinking skills to know that a two joint muscle behaves differently than a single joint muscle.

So, while I don’t want to be buried on a hill (I’d rather be pushed out to sea on a burning pyre like a fucking viking) I’d love it if you came and hung out on my hill. We can keep each other company and discuss the merits of anatomy and Pilates.

Main takeaways:

• Any rep scheme taken to near failure (actual failure not necessary) will help build strength

• Both light weights and heavy weights work equally well for building strength and hypertrophy as long as they are taken to near failure.

• Things like time under tension (the amount of time you’re holding the weight or the length of time you take to do the exercise) matters much less than previously thought.

• Specific programming like periodization, drop sets, and variability matter less than previously thought.

Biggest takeaway:

Doing anything, even just a little bit, is better than doing nothing.

And I absolutely agree with that. But there is nuance. There’s always nuance.

This position statement comes at an interesting moment. The Pilates industry is seeing a rise in participation while the benefits of strength training are being centered in popular conversation with much of the messaging being directed at women approaching their 40s and beyond. Pilates marketing has followed the trend and is very busy trying to convince people that Pilates is absolutely, unquestionably strength training. And, while it hasn’t happened yet, I could see the Pilates industry taking these headlines from the ACSM and using them to endorse the idea that Pilates is sufficient load for building muscle. And it is. Kinda.

We build muscle through the application of mechanical tension applied to muscle fibers. The heavier the load the more fibers are recruited. The more volume the more fibers are recruited. The goal for building strength is to recruit the most fibers in the targeted muscle. We can do that by lifting a very heavy for us weight or we can do it by working larger volumes or weight i.e. more repetitions at a lighter load. As long as we match intensity and go near failure we have the ability to get stronger. That’s what the new position statement says in a nutshell.

But here’s the nuance: Most of the research used in the ACSM statement was done on untrained people. So what the research really shows is that people who have done nothing or very little for a long time will get stronger if they lift heavy for them weights or lift lighter weights many many times. But they must take either approach to near failure to get the benefit of increased strength or hypertrophy. Specificity is likely much more relevant for trained individuals. In other words, if you’re already pretty strong it’s harder to get stronger with the broad recommendation of just lift anything with intensity.

So when 80% of the general population doesn’t meet basic exercise guidelines this recommendation is excellent! The message is to just get moving. All resistance training is good resistance training. Agree agree agree (said in Rocky’s voice).

But what happens when the untrained get stronger? And what are we leaving on the table if we decide that we don’t want to lift heavy and we just want to lift light weights to near failure? Because I think this is where the “Pilates is enough load for strength building” conversation misses the mark.

Yes, Pilates, for the untrained and undertrained, is enough resistance to build initial strength. But Pilates, with its fixed spring system, will eventually plateau strength progression. At that moment people will have to add additional external load, like weights, or will have to incorporate weight training outside of Pilates. And no, walking with a weight vest is not enough load either. When a client transitions from Pilates to strength training, Pilates becomes something different for them. It no longer serves the purpose of building strength. It can become something that it’s more suited for, IMO: Developing interoception, motor control, moving in multiple directions and stressing soft tissue and joints in ways that are difficult to accomplish outside of pilates, and building a better framework and foundation for making shapes and introducing variability while feeling supported by the equipment. Pilates is good at a lot and fills in some major gaps between everyday activities and capacity. But for the majority of people Pilates is a good entry point for resistance training because it allows us to unload people who aren’t used to moving under load and it is a novel movement modality for the very trained athlete who might be missing some capacity building nuance in their training. BUt once we become stronger, Pilates will cease to be enough to continue to build strength. That’s what the ACSM position statement doesn’t say.

If we don’t lift heavy, we leave bone building on the table. To my knowledge, lifting light weight to near failure won’t help us build bone. And this is a major puzzle piece in the strength building conversation for women entering perimenopause. You still need heavy weight to stimulate osteogenesis. Light weight won’t do that. Besides, who has the time to sit in the gym for hours, lifting light weights till near failure? Not me.

So yes, doing a little bit is always better than doing nothing. ANd I will always anchorage people to just do something. Don’t be intimidated by the need to be specific right away. Just start and you will see benefits. But that doesn’t mean a little bit is going to check all the boxes that you want it to. So, no, all movement is not enough movement. Walking with a weight vest won’t build bone, walking alone isn’t enough cardio to see the benefits for cardio respiratory health, and doing Pilates isn’t enough to see continued benefits of either strength training or cardio respiratory health. So after you get started and you have a good routine, revisit your goals. Do you want to improve bone health? Do you want to improve muscle size? (lots of metabolic benefits there) Do you want to improve heart and lung health? Flexibility? Strength? Nervous system regulation? Defining your goal will help you get more specific and continue to reap the benefits of movement.

I do Pilates to move my spine in every direction, to move into long and controlled ranges of motion, to move my body in directions that traditional weightlifting and cardio work don’t easily incorporate. But I don’t do Pilates for strength building or heart and lung health, even when I add strength and cardio elements into a session. My job, as a movement teacher, is ultimately to help people find joy in the journey. Because movement isn’t something we get to do until we reach our goal. It’s something we have to find joy in for the literal rest of our lives. That means doing something we enjoy, knowing it might change over time as we change, knowing we will lack consistency sometimes but getting back into a routine of movement is imperative and non negotiable. My job is to help my clients find and maintain that joy and connection to their bodies, whatever way they choose to move it.

When I first started doing Pilates I thought it was magical. I had just had my daughter, my body had changed from fit and muscular to small and…unknown. Pilates helped me feel like I was able to rebuild my body from the inside out. It helped me find parts of myself that I had previously not known. Deep shit, right? In retrospect, it was the first movement method that primarily identified as exercise I had encountered and participated in. I danced, did gymnastics, rode horses…did gymnastics on horses…all of those modalities were performance based and had an aesthetic outcome. Dance? Do this with your body to make this shape. Barrel racing? Go as fast as possible but it doesn’t matter what your body looks like it just matters that you are the fastest. But Pilates? Pilates was exercise. The goal and the outcome are the physiological benefits of moving against resistance. So why did my Pilates education not teach me the fundamentals, or first principles, of exercise science?

What are First Principles?

First principles in exercise science mean stripping down movement to it’s most fundamental physical and biological knowns. Things that are well established and repeated tested and observed outcomes from exercise, specifically resistance training. The non controversial stuff. Does this means we know everything? Hard no. Does the fact that we don’t know everything mean that we don’t know anything? Also hard no.

So what are the first principles of exercise science grounded in physiology, biomechanics, and motor learning research?

The SAID Principle

The SAID (Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands) basically translates to the body will adapt to the demands you place on it. If you only lift 2lb weights you’ll be less likely to be able to meet the demands of lifting 10lb weights and much more likely to sustain an injury when your try to lift the 10lb weights. Does it mean that 10lb weights are inherently too heavy for you? No. It just means you didn’t train your body to meet the demands of 10lb weights. You didn’t impose the demands of 10lb weights.

The SAID principles says that different adaptations have different demands. Strength has a different demand than endurance because it has a different adaptation. We’re not going to train for a marathon by only lifting heavy weights. Tendons, muscle, and bone adapt in response to type, direction, and intensity of load.

Evidence here is strong reflecting decades of research across exercise modalities.

Progressive overload drives adaptation

Progressive overload simply means doing more this week than you did last week. This doesn’t mean adding more resistance every time you workout. Progressive loading can mean adding more repetitions, doing something slower or faster (control/power), changing complexity (coordination), or ROM. It’s more about increasing the demands on the targeted tissue to continue to make it challenging. As long as the stimulus is met with appropriate intensity (2-3 reps before failure) we will continue to create adaptation. But without progression to drive intensity? We will plateau. Stop stimulating the specific tissue? We will regress. Use it or loose it. But also you can always get it back with progressive stimulus.

Read the linked 2026 ACSM position statement here reflecting the last 17 years of research in resistance training.

Mechanical tension is the primary driver of strength and hypertrophy.

Want your muscles to be able to move more load? Want your muscles to increase in size? Mechanical tension, otherwise know as load, is the thing that does that. What doesn’t do that? The burn, DOMS, breathlessness (unless you’re talking about your heart and lungs).

Higher mechanical tension recruits more motor units. This can be done with both heavy loads or light loads (in untrained or undertrained movers) where it seems that intensity matters more than exercise selection or heavy resistance or light resistance.

Does this mean Pilates, with it’s low load can build muscle like heavy loads on the barbell? Not really. People who engage in any light load resistance training like Pilates will see initial benefits if they don’t engage in resistance training otherwise. However, those gains will quickly plateau once light resistance is uncoupled from intensity. This throws “Pilates is strength training” under the bus a bit.

The Principle of Specificity

Kinda like it sounds. If you want to train something specific, you need to train it specifically. If you want to train for a marathon, you need to train the oxidative energy system (another way to say this is you need to practice long slow workouts that challenge you to meet the demands of the pace of a marathon). If you want to do the splits you need to train the splits. If you want to run fast short distances you need to train the phosphagen energy system and train short explosive efforts.

Movement emerges from constraints

Movement is not set against an ideal. Movement emerges from the constraints set by the task, the movers anatomy, and the environment. Movement is a solution to a problem, not a performance. There is no single perfect form, only solutions to a task given the environmental and anatomical constraints.

Research in motor learning is still asking lots of questions about how we learn best but emerging evidence suggests that variability, or the ability to perform a task in multiple ways based on the environment, enhances adaptability. Small variations in movement may also help us reduce overuse injuries.

The individual response to exercise varies

There is no universal “best exercise” or “best modality”. Sorry Pilates. I thought you had something special at first too, but turns out it that ANY movement has that magic in it. Research consistently shows that genetics, tissue quality, injury history, training history, and psychosocial factors like familial support and access to safe spaces to exercise in and access to nutritious food and quality sleep will all affect our ability to adapt to stimulus.

There is no universally better or more optimal program. Consistency > intensity or specificity alone. What’s the “best” exercise? the one that you will do the most consistently. And most people will see tremendous benefit from simply doing something.

What does this mean for Pilates instructors and for Pilates education?

For me as an instructor, this means that Pilates can be resistance training for the untrained and undertrained…until they get stronger and more trained. This means that Pilates can make people stronger but those people will quickly plateau in the strength department and they will need to continue to apply increasing mechanical tension to their bodies to continue to adapt.

But the biggest changes we see is in going from doing nothing to doing a little bit of something and when 80% of people aren’t meeting basic resistance training guidelines, just getting started is the most important part. Once you get started then you can hone in on what your client’s specific goals are. Do they want to build bone density? Gotta build up to heavy (80% of their 1RM or 8 reps of 10max) for them loads and some impact training. Want to build muscle for the metabolic benefits of increased muscle mass and strength? Gotta build muscle with a focus on volume (10 or more sets per muscle group per week). Want to get better at the splits? progress your clients to front splits or Russian splits. Want to get better at long, slow, efforts? tell your clients to practice long slow efforts that consistently challenge them (walk, to fast walk, to slow jog, to slow sustained run, or something like that).

What does this mean for me as a Pilates educator? It means we need to:

1. Recognize that Pilates is exercise. That means it is still governed by First Principles.

2. We should be thinking of the method as simply that. A method. Not the gospel of correct movement vs incorrect movement.

3. Advocate for understanding applied anatomy and biomechanics as the foundation for teaching movement rather than regurgitating clinical anatomy and origin and insertion facts into teacher training. We should have a general understanding of where a muscle is in the body and the action it performs but we should have a deeper understanding of how load affects the body, how muscle physiology works, and foundational exercise science principles that are very non controversial for the rest of the training world.

IMO Pilates has a little bit of an ego that is misplaced. As an industry we have a pretty poor understanding of the role Pilates plays in the average person’s movement journey and an even poorer understanding of how to help clients meet their goals without telling them their posture is pathological. If we understood how Pilates can be a fantastic compliment to other exercise modalities we can do what Pilates is really good at doing: Helping people develop a deeper connection to interoception and doing a thing with your body on purpose.

I know, that’s a pretty woo woo way to end this post, but hey.

In the Pilates world, we’re often taught to be cautious: move mindfully, avoid “pushing,” protect the client at all costs. And while safety is absolutely essential, being overly conservative with load can quietly undermine a client’s health far more than the occasional, well-managed overload ever will.

Underloading doesn’t just slow progress, it contributes to muscle loss, instability, and the long-term consequences of a sedentary lifestyle. If we want to help clients get stronger, move better, and age resiliently, we must understand the science of progressive loading.

If you’re interested in applying the principles of progressive load to the studio and want to understand how to actually build strength check out the linked workshops at the end of the article

Sedentary Lifestyles Are the Real Risk

Modern life has engineered movement out of daily routines. Sedentariness is now considered an independent risk factor for chronic disease. Research links low physical activity to increased all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, metabolic dysfunction, and musculoskeletal decline.

• Sedentary behavior is associated with higher risk of early death and chronic illness, even when adults meet minimum exercise guidelines (Ekelund et al., 2016).

• Prolonged inactivity results in rapid loss of muscle mass, strength, and bone density-beginning in as little as 1–2 weeks (Dirks et al., 2016).

• Low levels of mechanical loading contribute to osteopenia and osteoporosis (Turner, 1998).

• Bone density and tendon health also require regular mechanical stimulation to maintain integrity (Turner, 1998; Kjaer, 2004).

In other words: insufficient load is dangerous. Many Pilates clients arrive with years of under-stimulation. Protecting them from “too much” load often inadvertently prolongs weakness and fragility.

Why Underloading Creates More Long-Term Harm

1. Clients Don’t Stimulate Strength or Tissue Adaptation

Tissues adapt based on the imposed demands- this is the SAID Principle (Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands).
If the load is too light, the nervous system and musculoskeletal system simply don’t respond.

• Muscles need mechanical tension beyond normal daily activity to grow stronger (Schoenfeld, 2010).

• Connective tissues require progressive stress to remodel and increase resilience (Kjaer, 2004).
  

  If the load is consistently too light, the body never receives a signal to adapt. Clients essentially “train” their tissues to remain weak.

2. Underloaded Clients Plateau and Lose Motivation

When clients see little change in strength, coordination, or posture, they may feel their efforts are wasted. The problem isn’t the method, it’s the insufficient load. Over time, this can erode adherence and reduce long-term health benefits.

3. Underloading Contributes to Injury Risk

Weakness, not load, is the bigger predictor of injury. Ironically, avoiding load to prevent injury often creates conditions that increase injury risk:

• Weak muscles, underdeveloped tendons, and poor coordination are strong predictors of falls and musculoskeletal injuries (Lauersen et al., 2014).

• Strengthening tissues through progressive load improves resilience, joint stability, and functional capacity.

• Low muscle strength is strongly associated with falls and mobility loss as adults age.

Underloading may feel safe in the short term, but it often leads to cumulative vulnerability. If we avoid loading clients because we fear injury, we ironically create the very fragility we were trying to prevent.

Occasional overload, safely applied, drives progress

We’re not advocating reckless pushing. Excessive or poorly planned overload carries risk. But occasional, intentional overload is essential for adaptation.

Progressive overload can involve gradual increases in:

• Resistance (springs, body weight)

• Repetitions or sets

• Time under tension

• Range of motion

• Speed or tempo

• Complexity of coordination

Even small, controlled increases in load can trigger significant tissue adaptation, without causing harm.

Research consistently shows:

• Gradual load progression improves muscle strength, joint stability, and bone density (ACSM, 2022; Kohrt et al., 2004)

• Strength training is protective against age-related functional decline (Fragala et al., 2019)

• Exposure to controlled overload improves tissue tolerance and reduces injury risk over time (Kjaer, 2004; Schoenfeld, 2010)

In short: occasional overload isn’t dangerous when programmed intelligently, it’s what drives the positive changes clients need.

Applying Progressive Loading in Pilates

Pilates is uniquely suited for safe, incremental load progression. Here’s how you can apply it:

1. Adjust spring resistance gradually – slightly increase tension or resistance as strength improves.

2. Modify body leverage – move closer or farther from the spring anchor to change demand.

3. Increase range of motion – larger arcs challenge muscles and connective tissues more.

4. Alter tempo – slow down eccentric phases or pause at peak contraction.

5. Add complexity – incorporate asymmetry, balance challenges, or combined movements.

6. Increase volume – add reps, sets, or sequence length progressively.

7. Progress toward functional load – include weight-bearing or multi-joint variations to enhance real-world strength.

By integrating these strategies, you can move a client from deconditioned to strong, coordinated, and resilient, without ever needing to “risk” unsafe overload.

Reframing Your Role as a Pilates Professional

Healthy load is not the enemy. Fragility and under-stimulation are. When you apply progressive loading wisely, you help clients:

• Build strength and bone density

• Improve joint stability and coordination

• Enhance metabolic and cardiovascular health

• Reduce long-term injury risk

• Gain confidence and autonomy in movement

Our goal is not to keep clients comfortable, it’s to make them capable.

Key Takeaway

Underloading may feel safe, but it contributes to long-term weakness, fragility, and the negative consequences of a sedentary lifestyle. Occasional, intentional overload, delivered through a structured, progressive approach, is not only safe, it is essential for tissue adaptation, functional strength, and long-term health.

By embracing progressive loading, Pilates instructors empower clients to build stronger, more resilient bodies—so they can move through life safely, confidently, and with strength that lasts.

*If you’re interested in exploring how to apply the ideas around progressive loading to real bodies in the studio I have a workshop all about building strength and progressive load through Pilates. We don’t have to overcomplicate it, we just have to have a foundational understanding of some basic principles.

Learn to apply progressive load

Learn how to build strength

References:

• ACSM. (2022). ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription.

• Dirks, M. L., et al. (2016). Short-term muscle disuse induces fiber atrophy and reduces protein synthesis. J Appl Physiol, 121(2), 215–224.

• Ekelund, U., et al. (2016). Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? Lancet, 388(10051), 1302–1310.

• Fragala, M. S., et al. (2019). Resistance training for older adults: Position statement from the National Strength and Conditioning Association. J Strength Cond Res, 33(8), 2019–2052.

• Kjaer, M. (2004). Role of extracellular matrix in adaptation of tendon and skeletal muscle to mechanical loading. Physiol Rev, 84(2), 649–698.

• Kohrt, W. M., et al. (2004). Effects of exercise involving impact or resistance on bone health in older adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 36(11), 1985–1996.

• Lauersen, J. B., et al. (2014). The effectiveness of exercise interventions to prevent sports injuries: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Sports Med, 48(11), 871–877.

• Owen, N., et al. (2010). Too much sitting: The population-health science of sedentary behavior. Exerc Sport Sci Rev, 38(3), 105–113.

• Schoenfeld, B. J. (2010). The mechanisms of muscle hypertrophy and their application to resistance training. J Strength Cond Res, 24(10), 2857–2872.

• Turner, C. H. (1998). Three rules for bone adaptation to mechanical stimuli. Bone, 23(5), 399–407.

A large not-to-be-named Pilates industry regulation body has been trying to bolster the efficacy of “therapeutic Pilates” by highlighting research that illustrates the benefits of Pilates for common painful conditions from chronic low back pain to rotator related shoulder pain. I 100% applaud this well meaning effort to connect Pilates to how consistent movement can help with many painful conditions. But as I read the interpretations of the highlighted studies, which seem to be used to prop up this idea that Pilates is “magic” or somehow better at delivering people from their persistent painful conditions, I wonder if these folks are reading the studies? And if they are, I wonder how the heck they are concluding that Pilates is better than other forms of exercise.

I’ll come out and say it immediately. I don’t think Pilates is any better than any other form of exercise in addressing long term persistent pain in people. And I believe the research reflects this as well. But sometimes it feels like the Pilates industry is stuck on this idea that Pilates is somehow apart from general exercise. That it is somehow magic. That the way the springs and the straps and the exercise order and the breathing interact makes Pilates better for bridging the gap between physical therapy and returning to the normal activities of daily living, whatever those might be. But Pilates is just exercise. It is low load resistance training governed by the laws of physics and biology. And I fully understand that intersection does sometimes seem like magic but I think it’s important none-the-less to be careful with our interpretations of results from our own personal and professional Pilates experiences. Because when we zoom out, it’s probably less about magic than it is about simple, basic, boring explanations.

So let’s look at a recent study, break down what it’s actually saying, and then go through some boring explanations why Pilates specifically is unlikely to have been the explanation for a reduction in perceived pain.

Paper: Impact of 8-Week Pilates Program on Lumbar Flexion–Relaxation Dynamics and Functional Outcomes in Women with Chronic Low Back Pain. Ferri-Caruana et al. 2026

Study design and methods (what the paper actually tested)

Design

• Controlled trial with two groups:

  • Pilates exercise program (PEP)

  • Control group

• Duration: 8 weeks

Participants

• Women with chronic low back pain (CLBP)

Main outcome measures

1. Pain

2. Functional capacity (LBOS)

3. Flexion–relaxation ratio (FRR) using surface EMG

FRR reflects the reduction in lumbar extensor muscle activity during full trunk flexion.

Lower relaxation (or asymmetry) is often interpreted as altered neuromuscular control in CLBP populations.

Analysis

Pre–post comparisons between groups.

Key results reported in the paper

The article reports:

• Pain reduction: ~30% improvement in Pilates group vs control

• Functional improvement: ~13.4% increase in LBOS

• FRR:

  • No restoration of normal lumbar extensor relaxation

  • Increased FRR asymmetry

The authors conclude:

Pilates improves pain and function but does not normalize lumbar extensor relaxation.
Increased asymmetry may represent compensatory or maladaptive redistribution.

Do the results match the data?

Pain and function

The conclusions here do match the reported data.

Reason:

• The study reports statistically significant changes in pain and LBOS relative to controls.

• The conclusion only claims improvement, not causality beyond the intervention.

This part is consistent with the dataset.

However:

• Without reporting effect size relative to minimal clinically important difference, the real clinical relevance is uncertain.

FRR findings

The authors conclude:

• Pilates did not restore FRR

• FRR asymmetry increased

This also appears to match the presented results, because the paper explicitly states:

• No normalization of lumbar extensor relaxation

• Increased asymmetry.

However, the interpretation is where issues arise.

The claim that asymmetry represents “compensatory or maladaptive redistribution” is speculative, because:

• No biomechanical or kinematic data were collected to support redistribution.

• EMG amplitude alone cannot identify compensation patterns.

So the results match the measurements, but the mechanistic interpretation exceeds the data.

EMG methodological limitations

Several issues affect interpretation of FRR findings.

1. Surface EMG cannot isolate deep lumbar muscles

Surface electrodes over lumbar extensors mainly detect:

• erector spinae

• multifidus (superficial portions)

But cannot isolate individual muscle contributions.

Cross-talk from adjacent muscles is common.

Implication:

Changes in FRR may reflect global extensor activity, not specific spinal stabilizer behavior.

2. FRR reliability is highly protocol dependent

Flexion-relaxation measures are sensitive to:

• trunk flexion speed

• pelvic motion

• electrode placement

• normalization procedures

If these variables are not tightly standardized, results may vary substantially.

The article does not appear to provide strong justification for signal normalization procedures, which are critical for comparing EMG across sessions.

3. EMG amplitude ≠ muscle force

EMG reflects electrical activity, not mechanical output.

Amplitude can change due to:

• electrode position

• skin impedance

• fatigue

• motor unit synchronization

Therefore increased asymmetry in EMG does not necessarily equal altered mechanical load distribution.

4. FRR interpretation in pain populations is controversial

FRR abnormalities are often observed in CLBP, but:

• They do not consistently normalize after symptom improvement.

• Pain reduction does not always correlate with EMG changes.

Thus the lack of FRR normalization does not contradict improvement in pain.

**Control group limitations**

The control group design significantly affects interpretation.

Passive control rather than active comparison

The study appears to use a non-exercise control condition.

This introduces several issues:

1. Placebo and expectation effects

2. Attention bias (intervention group receives instructor contact)

3. General exercise effect not controlled

Therefore the results show:

Pilates vs doing nothing

not

Pilates vs other exercise

So the study cannot determine whether improvements were due to:

• Pilates specifically

• Any physical activity

• Time or attention effects.

No blinding

Typical exercise trials cannot blind participants.

However:

• Outcome assessors ideally should be blinded.

• It is unclear whether EMG analysis was blinded.

This introduces risk of measurement bias.

Sample and statistical limitations

Although exact numbers vary depending on subgroup analyses, the study has typical small-sample issues:

Small sample size

Small samples increase:

• variance

• risk of Type I and II error

• instability of EMG measures

Short intervention

8 weeks is relatively short for neuromuscular adaptation.

Neural changes in motor control often require longer training exposure.

Overall methodological appraisal

Strengths

• Controlled trial

• Objective measurement (EMG)

• Clear pre/post comparison

Major limitations

1. Surface EMG limitations

2. Passive control group

3. Small sample size

4. Speculative interpretation of EMG changes

5. Short intervention duration

Bottom line

The study supports a modest conclusion: An 8-week Pilates program may reduce pain and improve function in women with chronic low back pain.

But the paper overinterprets the EMG findings, because:

• FRR changes cannot demonstrate compensation.

• Surface EMG cannot identify specific lumbar stabilization mechanisms.

Therefore:

Results ≠ mechanism claimed.

✅ Short verdict

• Pain/function findings: reasonable

• EMG interpretation: weak and speculative

• Control group design: limits causal conclusions

I totally get it. Reading papers and sifting through whether the methodology matches the conclusions is not everyone’s cup of tea. You have to either have the background knowledge about different methodological approaches and tools or be willing to learn, and honestly, we’re all pretty busy with the daily tasks of running a business. But if we’re gonna make the argument that Pilates is better than other forms of exercise we probably need the evidence to back up that claim.

**Of note ⬇️

Claim: Pilates reduces pain in people with persistent low back pain.

Result: Pain improved in the group that did Pilates

Nuance: The control group did nothing. So what the results actually imply is that exercise/movement reduced pain but we can’t really parse out whether it was specifically Pilates or just the general effect of exercise or something else entirely. To claim that it was Pilates specifically is a leap.

So let’s look at all of the boring reasons why it could have been something else entirely that helped these folks with pain reduction

Consistent exercise for 8 weeks

There is a lot to be said for doing something consistently over time. The most broadly applicable solutions to the most vexing problems often come down to doing un sexy stuff really well.

Power of expectation

The power of belief is quite real, as woo woo as it may sound. When we expect something will help, the intervention often shows better results than other interventions. And how many of your clients are referred to you because a friend or their doctor told them “Pilates cured my back pain” or “my Pilates instructor is magic” you have to see them. People expect Pilates will help and so it does

General effect of exercise

Low back pain has been researched more than any other painful condition and conclusions across the board generally find that one form of exercise is no better than another for pain relief and that reductions in pain when paired with movement are better than rest.

Low load (re-)entry to movement

Pilates is a great environment to start movement in a low load environment and add small amounts of resistance over time. This can be a very non threatening way to begin to move again after a painful episode. The equipment allows the body to be supported in ways that are difficult to manufacture outside of Pilates, which is maybe why so many Physical Therapists have introduced a reformer, cadillac, or other studio equipment into their practice. However, this doesn’t mean Pilates is the reason for success, it means that the environment we create through communication, knowledge about loading progressions, and sensitivity to client preference is the salient factor in client’s perception of pain.

I honestly do think the equipment is kinda magic

Like I said, I’m not here to yuk your yum. I think Pilates is pretty amazing. I think there are some things that Pilates does really well…nervous system down regulation, body awareness, movement exploration, working the body against resistance in ways that are difficult to replicate elsewhere… but Pilates is no better than any other form of exercise when we’re looking at a broad population with different preferences and goals. Pilates might be the thing that helps someone re-integrate a movement practice into their lifestyle but it is not enough to build bone density or challenge cardiorespiratory fitness in meaningful ways that reduce all cause mortality.

What really matters? What people will do consistently over time, what will make people fall in love with the power of movement so they will do it consistently FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE, and what will help them reach their goals. None of those things sit solely in the domain of Pilates.

Even writing that headline gives me the ick a little bit. The idea that certain people get to gatekeep words doesn’t sit particularly well with me. However, there is some nuance here that I go back and forth on, seemingly changing my thoughts on the subject every day. I may even have a different opinion than the one on paper here by the time I finish writing this. So how’s that for a non-committal introduction to an opinion piece.

My most recent musing on the subject came after taking a class at a new studio that opened in the downtown area where I live. I am always interested in scoping out new studios in town so I have a place to send people who contact me but aren’t in the market for privates. I like to get to know the product I am recommending. So there I went. And I kinda knew what I was getting into.The studio advertised itself as

Pilates in overdrive

Fusing classical practice with cardio and resistance training

Uses light weights and loud music

Okay. Cool. I was expecting a loose interpretation of Pilates with louder music. And honestly, that’s pretty much what I got. Class was programmed in what I interpreted as “blocks” where one sequence of 2-4 exercises were repeated 3x. Not really Pilates exercises. Not really strength training. Not really cardio either. The instructor was fine but seemed to be a more general “fitness” instructor and not one who went through a Pilates program outside of maybe a weekend course. She was fine. Pretty mediocre cues (mostly about posture and if you didn’t do it right you’d hurt yourself) around how to “keep pushing through the burn”. Nothing amazing. We did feet in straps (thank the lord) and standing side splits and a nice stretch that I gave all my clients the following week and I walked away with a sore butt the next day. So worth $20 but I likely won’t go back or recommend that as a good Pilates studio for clients looking for Pilates.

I just kept thinking to myself “why would I choose to come here and do this class”

It didn’t do anything very well. It wasn’t really Pilates. Wasn’t really strength training. Wasn’t really cardio. It was like the color khaki. Or like sticking your hand in luke warm water. Or like listening to smooth jazz. It was just…meh.

And if you know what Pilates is you would walk out of that class thinking that it wasn’t a good representation of Pilates. And if you didn’t know what Pilates was you might walk out of that class loving it and then go to a different Pilates studio (more traditional) and thinking that the more traditional studio wasn’t a good representation of Pilates. From a consumer perspective, it’s fucking confusing.

And so this is where I waver: No one should get to decide who gets to use the word Pilates but if we walk into a class that we’ve paid for thinking it’s going to be one thing and then it’s something very different, it’s not a good look for Pilates. Like, Kleenex is a brand name but we also use it to refer to general tissue paper. If I bought an off brand Kleenex and it was too thin to blow my nose with I’d be bummed and think Kleenex was not something I could use to blow my nose. Next time I’d opt for a paper towel or toilet paper. Maybe I’ve lost the plot, but my point is when a name is attached to something you also expect certain things from it. And so, yeah, I think if Pilates is in the studio name it should represent Pilates more than just exercise on a reformer.

And here is where I start to argue with myself about the inevitable conversation about industry regulation that comes from debating what gets to be called Pilates and what should be called something else. Because who gets to decide what Pilates is? Even within more traditional style studios (and I’m including Club Pilates in traditional style studios) there is considerable debate about what exactly Pilates is.

Is it the exercises?

Is it the equipment?

Is it the principles?

Is it the movement order?

None of those give me a satisfactory answer. I lean towards the equipment being the defining factor, but my last class kinda proved me wrong. It was on a reformer. A balanced body allegro II. But this was not what I would consider Pilates.

And the industry as a whole seems to be equally confused. I recently posted a video about a movement where I highlighted someone doing what I thought was a great highlighting why a movement was challenging in one way on heavy springs and challenging in a different way on light springs. It was an excellent example of how to use biomechanics to explain muscle demand. It deserved kudos. But there were lots of comments on my post asking why I wasn’t remarking on the movers “unstable pelvis” and “alignment issues” and that if we’re calling this Pilates then we might as well crawl in a hole and hide. Because, clearly, THIS wasn’t Pilates. I get curious when people make comments like that and with all sincerity ask them what they consider makes Pilates Pilates. Crickets. Or “if I need to tell you what Pilates is then you’re not really a Pilates teacher”, which always makes me laugh and is just a massive cop out. I really just want to have an interesting and thought provoking conversation! Why is that so hard??

And predictably, by the end of this article, we are no closer to making any kind of judgment about who gets to use the word Pilates.

I just want to be able to walk into a studio that has the word Pilates in the name and know what I’m about to walk into. *within reason

This seems to be the topic of conversation lately. Pilates is having a moment and so is the importance of strength training, specifically for women in the 35-65 range. Language is moving away from “don’t get too bulky” (even though Pilates marketing is still firmly entrenched in Pilates Body language) to “build muscle for bone health” and “exercise to increase your healthspan, not just your lifespan”. While we know Pilates is resistance training (we are working against the load of the springs) there has been considerable debate as to whether Pilates is legit strength training, as in, does Pilates help us build muscle for bone health, increase strength, and increase muscle endurance? There’s a good amount of nuance here.

In the last 6 years Pilates has seen an industry wide growth of nearly 40% according to the most recent SFIA report. While the report doesn’t specify the difference between growth in specific sectors of Pilates (boutique vs larger membership style studios) it means that more people are being exposed to a movement modality done on on reformers and mats and the general public is less likely to equate Pilates with stretching or Yoga. In my opinion, this is a win for the industry as a whole regardless of what style of Pilates you practice. *We can have a conversation about how the rise in Pilates (a fully unregulated industry with no copyright to the word) affects liability insurance across the board, which is the biggest concern I see emerging from this rapid fire growth* Overall, the focus on moving more is beneficial for us all, especially when over 75% of Americans don’t meet the ACSM exercise guidelines. Quibbling about whether people are doing the “right” kind of Pilates is wholly missing the point, frankly.

Why is Pilates seeing such an exponential increase in participation? It could be that both boutique and franchise model studios are benefitting from large “fitness reformer” classes, generally the class model that’s in franchise studios. Fitness reformer classes have made Pilates accessible for way more people than the boutique style studios have historically. Bigger classes = cheaper classes = more accessible for more people = more people doing Pilates. I see this as a win regardless of what type of Pilates you teach.

*just a note: no one should be teaching unsafe classes and there does, IMO, need to be a distinction between a weekend certification and a 500+ hour certification. What we agree is “safe” vs “unsafe” is another conversation.

The thing that fitness reformer classes (and classical pilates) do really well is bridge the gap between strength training and Pilates. Pilates, in its most original iteration as Contrology, was resistance exercise more than anything else. But, knowing what we know now about how much load or volume it takes to build muscle that is significant enough to impact bone health, metabolic health, and strength, the question becomes: is Pilates the best place to do that? Beyond initial adaptation for the very novice mover, the amount of load offered by the springs alone and the practical application of enough volume in a class setting makes anything beyond initial gains unlikely. As in, clients will progress their strength initially and then they will likely hit a plateau if they don’t incorporate other modalities outside of Pilates or you as their Pilates instructor add weights to their studio time. And I’m not talking about doing loaded squats and thrusters on a moving reformer, not from a safety stand point but from a strength and stability have a positive relationship and a reformer is an unstable surface stand point. I’m talking about a deviation from Pilates in the Pilates studio, or maybe picking up a weight during Eve’s lunge or side overs. And to understand how to add weights effectively we need to understand something about progressive load, muscle, bone, and soft tissue adaptation, biomechanics, and pain. We need some basic foundational knowledge that goes beyond the repertoire.

We likely don’t need another Pilates workshop, we need basic exercise science taught with the Pilates instructor in mind.

There’s a difference between understanding and knowing. Knowing anatomy, in my opinion, means we’ve learned a bunch of names, insertions and origins, and a bunch of actions based on humans standing in the anatomical position (upright, palms forward). But learning this way always left me feeling confused. It was like, okay, then what? Like, how is this relevant to a moving body and how do I apply this information to situations and environments that more closely match real world scenarios? In my experience, we start to learn the basics of anatomy but we never progress to the point where we apply the information in a meaningful way to moving bodies in the studio. In other words we seems to be stuck in this model of learning clinical anatomy but never progress it to biomechanics (the study of forces acting on and generated within the body), kinesiology (the study of movement), and exercise science. Anatomy is just the first step.

Instead of saying we do or don’t need to know anatomy to be a good instructor (i kinda still think we don’t need to learn anatomy to deliver a great class, we need to be great communicators and great class programmers) we should reframe this question as how much anatomy do we need to understand and at what point in our career are we ready to absorb anatomy, biomechanics, kinesiology, and exercise science fundamentals to be able to leverage them to meet our clients goals. Learning the repertoire in the certification process is like learning a new language. Learning anatomy is like learning a new language. Learning them together is kinda like trying to learn Greek and Spanish at the same time and maybe we’re just confusing the hell out of new instructors with information overload. It’s no wonder we come out of teacher training without being able to apply basic anatomy concepts to moving bodies, not to mention a lot of what we’re being taught in teacher trainings is outdated, but that’s another post.

So, it’s not that I don’t think we should learn anatomy, it’s that I think we need to rethink the way we teach it with the goal of understanding how anatomy applies to the moving body. This means the end point isn’t learning the body map (muscle names, origins, insertions, and actions) it means learning the map of the human body is the foundation and learning biomechanics, kinetics, kinematics, and basic exercise science principles is the end goal. This is how we truly apply anatomy to the work we do every day. When we understand how anatomy applies to the moving body and when we can apply exercise science principles to movement we can confidently deliver classes and sessions that are both effective and fulfilling for our clients and we can stop wondering if what we’re doing will deliver the intended results or if what we’re asking of our clients will unintentionally hurt them.

Understanding movement > memorizing facts

Science > guessing