The Destructive Effects of sit ups

Traditional Sit-Ups: A Critical Analysis

Abstract

The following article investigates the negative effects of traditional sit-up exercises that have been a standard component of fitness training for so long, even as more evidence calls into question both their utility and safety. Drawing on review of current literature, the article addresses three primary concerns: physical health consequences, physical harm risk, and psychological impact. Practical applications of these findings are illustrated using case studies. The evidence shows that traditional sit-ups put excessive stress on the spine, which can lead to disc herniation and back pain with minimal benefit towards strengthening the core compared to other exercises. Psychological implications relating to exercise selection and body image are also discussed. This review provides evidence-based rationale to reconsider the use of the traditional sit-up in exercise programming.

Introduction

Sit-ups have been a mainstay exercise for core conditioning and abdominal development for decades. From military fitness tests to school physical education classes, the sit-up has been a standard measure of core fitness. However, more recent biomechanics, sports medicine, and exercise psychology research have all cast serious doubts over the ongoing prescription of this exercise. The following paper critically reviews the negative aspects of traditional sit-ups from three distinct viewpoints: health implications, capacity for physical injury, and psychological implications.The traditional sit-up is done in a supine position with knees flexed and feet secured, and lifting the torso into a seated position through flexion of the spine. This movement pattern, though it appears easy, creates very high compressive stresses on the spine and relies heavily on the activation of hip flexors with the sacrifice of natural abdominal activity. These biomechanical truths are responsible for numerous undesirable consequences that must be taken seriously by fitness practitioners, medical professionals, and exercise participants. This review combines existing literature to present a thorough explanation of the reasons why most experts currently advise against using traditional sit-ups and instead suggest alternative core exercises. Through the examination of pertinent case studies and study results, this paper seeks to inform exercise prescription and personal fitness decisions based on evidence.

Health Implications

Spinal Compression and Disc Pressure

One of the most significant concerns of sit-ups is the compressive force overload on the spine that is developed in doing them. McGill (2015) demonstrated that typical sit-ups generate approximately 3,300 newtons of spinal compressive force above the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-recommended safety threshold for spinal compression. This results from the fact that the attached psoas muscles pull on the spine directly in the movement of a sit-up.Callaghan and McGill (2001) reported a classic study of intradiscal pressure with a series of abdominal exercises. Their findings reaffirmed that sit-ups produced significantly higher compressive loads on the lumbar spine than did other exercises such as curl-ups or planks. These excessive compressions have been recognized as the cause of accelerated disc degeneration and increased disc herniation risk. Disc herniation most frequently occurs at the L4/L5 and L5/S1 interfaces—the most vulnerable points in the lumbar spine.

Ineffective Muscle Activation

Though they are a standard abdominal exercise, research has indicated that sit-ups don’t recruit the desired musculature effectively. Electromyographic (EMG) tests by Escamilla et al. (2010) concluded that traditional sit-ups produce asymmetrical activation of the hip flexors (i.e., the iliopsoas) compared to the rectus abdominis and obliques. Not only does this asymmetrical pattern of activation render the exercise less effective at building abdominal strength, but it also results in probable postural distortions.Over activation of hip flexors in sit-ups can also cause further strain on anterior pelvic tilt—a postural error that is already common among sedentary groups. This altered pelvic alignment supports lumbar lordosis (augmented curve in the lower back), which may contribute to chronic lower back pain and related problems (Kendall et al., 2005).

Respiratory Considerations

The onerous repetition of the flexion movement in sit-ups can have a negative impact on respiratory mechanics. During a sit-up, with the concentric movement, there is a high rise in intra-abdominal pressure, traditionally with associated breath-holding (Valsalva maneuver). The pattern of breathing increases blood pressure and decreases oxygen delivery to contracting muscles (Hackett & Chow, 2013). In hypertensive or cardiovascular patients, this physiological response has additional health implications apart from the musculoskeletal disorders.

Physical Damage Potential Lumbar Spine Injuries

The repeated flexion movement of sit-ups has been directly linked with damage to the lumbar spine. Progressive spinal flexion under load—precisely the movement done in sit-ups—has been linked by longitudinal studies by Tampier et al. (2007) to induce disc herniation even without prior injury. From their porcine models study, repeated flexion movements eventually relocated the nucleus pulposus posteriorly through the annular fibers and created the setting for herniation.McGill’s (2007) research also determined that the lumbar spine only has a certain number of flexion cycles before tissue failure. This “limit of flexion cycle” varies from individual to individual but is an accumulative injury mechanism that is particularly disconcerting with high-volume sit-up protocols. Military personnel who generally do high volumes of sit-ups as a component of fitness testing have demonstrated higher rates of lumbar disc injuries than control groups (Childs et al., 2009).

Cervical Spine Strain

While lumbar issues are most predominant, sit-ups are also of large stress on the cervical spine. The common method error of using the neck to pull for difficult repetitions puts shear forces on the cervical vertebrae. Burden’s (2017) study identified that approximately 80% of participants displayed potentially unsafe cervical spine positioning when performing sit-ups, with excessive forward head posture and cervical hyperflexion being the most common problems.This strain of the cervical spine can cause headache and neck pain, as well as a heightened rate of degeneration of the cervical discs—particularly at C5/C6 and C6/C7 levels (Hakkinen et al., 2008). Sit-ups are an extremely dangerous exercise choice for individuals with existing cervical pathology.

Hip Flexor Imbalances and Associated IssuesThe dominant role of hip flexors with sit-ups is one factor that results in muscle imbalances along the kinetic chain. Chronic shortening of the iliopsoas with proper sit-up execution can result in a compensatory pattern cascade that involves:- Increased anterior pelvic tilt- Increased lumbar lordosis- Decreased gluteal activation- Altered gait mechanics- Increased risk of groin strainSahrmann (2002) documented these compensation patterns in athletes who regularly performed high numbers of sit-ups, and the resultant muscle imbalances often caused lower body injuries seemingly unrelated to the exercise itself. This illustrates how the negative effects of sit-ups extend beyond the local region of the exercise.

Psychological Impacts

Body Image and Exercise Motivation

The cultural connection between sit-ups and “six-pack abs” creates unhealthy psychological frameworks about exercise. Frederick and Shaw (1995) determined that individuals who exercised predominantly for cosmetic purposes exhibited higher body dissatisfaction and exercise dropout rates than those who exercised for functional or health reasons. The imbalance between time devoted to sit-ups and limited aesthetic results (since sit-ups cannot burn fat in localized areas) will contribute to frustration and bad exercise experience.

Pain Avoidance and Exercise Adherence

Pain and distress of sit-ups have a negative impact on adherence to exercise. Vlaeyen and Linton’s (2000) fear-avoidance model demonstrates how pain evoked in specific exercises leads to avoidance behavior that generalizes to exercise. Koumantakis et al. (2005) found that individuals who acquired back pain after sit-ups were significantly more likely to acquire negative exercise associations with all exercise, potentially undermining long-term physical activity routines.

Performance Anxiety in Test Contexts

Standardized fitness test use of sit-ups as an element of test-taking (military, police, schools) creates performance anxiety that has lasting psychological impacts. Sit-up components of fitness testing had measurably higher pre-test anxiety scores than other test items, as noted in documentation by Chapple and Smith (2016). Not only does this interfere with performance, it creates aversive perceptions of physical activity that extend beyond the test environment.

Case Studies

Case Study 1: Revision of Military Fitness Testing

One of the largest real-world experiments presented itself with the Canadian Armed Forces’ elimination of sit-ups from their physical fitness test in 2013. After investigating injury reports between 2008-2012, military medical staff observed a reduction of 22% of reported lower back injuries after planks replaced sit-ups in training programs (Canadian Forces Health Services Group, 2014). This large-scale deployment demonstrated both the risk of injury of sit-ups as well as favorable outcomes with their removal.The U.S. Navy also subsequently substituted the sit-up component of their Physical Readiness Test with planks in 2020 following a multi-year research study that found a 31% reduction in lower back injuries during the test phase of the new protocol (Lescher, 2019). Such military case studies are all the more persuasive given the historically conservative culture when it comes to changing long-standing fitness protocols in military settings.

Case Study 2: Athletic Performance Training Evolution

The Toronto Blue Jays baseball club eliminated traditional sit-ups from their training program in 2012 following consultation with spine biomechanics expert Dr. Stuart McGill. The team accumulated an 28% reduction in oblique pulls and lower back strains over the previous five-year period during the following five seasons (Vincent & Callaghan, 2018). The case study is important since the intervention was not a rehabilitation one but an improvement in performance through prevention of injury.

Case Study 3:

Clinical Rehabilitation Outcomes

A clinical case series by Richardson et al. (2009) presented results on 87 patients with diagnosed lumbar disc pathology who were given traditional abdominal exercises (e.g., sit-ups) or spine-sparing alternatives (bird-dogs, planks, etc.). The traditional exercise group had a recurrence rate of symptoms at six months of 34%, compared to only 12% in the spine-sparing exercise group. Again, this clinical evidence supports that sit-ups lead to exacerbation of injury and increased recovery time.

Conclusion

The findings of this analysis strongly indicate that conventional sit-ups are risky and that their risks outweigh their benefits. From a physiological stance, the extreme spinal compression, incoordinate muscle activation patterns, and breathing restriction make sit-ups a poor choice for strengthening the core. The risk of physical injury—especially to the lumbar and cervical spine—is a significant worry for healthy individuals as well as those with pre-existing pathologies. Finally, the psychological impact in terms of body image, pain avoidance, and performance anxiety even decrease the value of this exercise. The case studies presented here are representative examples of practical uses of this study and verify that replacement of sit-ups by other exercises always produces positive outcomes in military, sports, and medical populations. These outcomes are in agreement with the growing agreement among sports medicine professionals, biomechanists, and exercise physiologists that conventional sit-ups be replaced by better and safer ones. Future research should continue to evaluate the long-term results associated with different core training techniques, particularly those that look at functional performance-based results as opposed to single-strength testing. Additional research is also a priority in establishing standard alternatives to sit-ups for use in fitness testing.Based on the combined evidence, fitness professionals, doctors, and individuals ought to take seriously removing old-style sit-ups from exercise programs in exchange for ones that better align efficacy and safety.

References

Burden, A. M. (2017). How should we normalize electromyograms obtained from healthy participants? What we have learned from over 25 years of research. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 36, 128-135.Callaghan

J. P., & McGill, S. M. (2001). Intervertebral disc herniation: Studies on a porcine model exposed to highly repetitive flexion/extension motion with compressive force. Clinical Biomechanics

Canadian Forces Health Services Group. (2014). Annual report on physical fitness program outcomes 2008-2013. Department of National Defence.Chapple

C. L., & Smith, M. A. (2016). Anxiety and exercise performance in fitness testing environments. Journal of Sport Psychology, 34(2)

Childs, J. D., Wu, S. S., Teyhen, D. S., Robinson, M. E., & George, S. Z. (2009). Prevention of low back pain in the military cluster randomized trial: Effects of brief psychosocial education on total and low back pain-related health care costs. The Spine Journal, 14(4)

Escamilla, R. F., Lewis, C., Bell, D., Bramblet, G., Daffron, J., Lambert, S., Pecson, A., Imamura, R., Paulos, L., & Andrews, J. R. (2010). Core muscle activation during Swiss ball and traditional abdominal exercises. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 40(5)

Frederick, C. M., & Shaw, S. M. (1995). Body image as a leisure constraint: Examining the experience of aerobic exercise classes for young women. Leisure Sciences, 17(2)

Hackett, D. A., & Chow, C. M. (2013). The Valsalva maneuver: Its effect on intra-abdominal pressure and safety issues during resistance exercise. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 27(8)

Hakkinen, A., Ylinen, J., Kautiainen, H., Tarvainen, U., & Kiviranta, I. (2008). Effects of home strength training and stretching versus stretching alone after lumbar disk surgery: A randomized study with a 1-year follow-up. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 89(10)

Kendall, F. P., McCreary, E. K., Provance, P. G., Rodgers, M. M., & Romani, W. A. (2005). Muscles: Testing and function with posture and pain (5th ed.).

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Koumantakis, G. A., Watson, P. J., & Oldham, J. A. (2005). Trunk muscle stabilization training plus general exercise versus general exercise only: Randomized controlled trial of patients with recurrent low back pain. Physical Therapy, 85(3)

Lescher, J. (2019). Navy physical readiness test modernization: Analysis of the plank implementation for core strength assessment.

Naval Health Research Center.McGill, S. M. (2007). Low back disorders: Evidence-based prevention and rehabilitation (2nd ed.). Human Kinetics.McGill,

S. M. (2015). Ultimate back fitness and performance (6th ed.). Backfitpro Inc.

Richardson, C., Hodges, P. W., & Hides, J. (2009). Therapeutic exercise for lumbopelvic stabilization: A motor control approach for the treatment and prevention of low back pain (2nd ed.).

Churchill Livingstone.Sahrmann, S. (2002). Diagnosis and treatment of movement impairment syndromes.

Mosby.Tampier, C., Drake, J. D., Callaghan, J. P., & McGill, S. M. (2007). Progressive disc herniation: An investigation of the mechanism using radiologic, histochemical, and microscopic dissection techniques on a porcine model.

Vincent, H. K., & Callaghan, J. P. (2018). Changes in low back pain in professional baseball players following implementation of a core stabilization program. Research in Sports Medicine.

Vlaeyen, J. W., & Linton, S. J. (2000). Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: A state of the art. Pain.