The man who wants to kill crunches

A Canadian professor of spine biomechanics rails about the dangers of the ubiquitous sit-up

by Patricia Treble on Tuesday, January 19, 2010 9:00am - 78 Comments

The man who wants to kill crunches

After three decades of figuring how out the spine works, Stuart McGill has come to loathe sit-ups. It doesn’t matter whether they are the full sit-ups beloved by military trainers or the crunch versions so ubiquitous in gyms. “What happens when you perform a sit-up?” he asks. “The spine is flexed into the position at which it damages sooner.”

The professor of spine biomechanics at the University of Waterloo knows a thing or two about snapping spines. In his lab, McGill proudly shows off a machine that’s probably created more disc herniations than any other in the world. “We get real [pig] spines from the butcher and we compress them, shear them and bend them to simulate activities such as golf swings and sit-ups, and watch as unique patterns of injury emerge.” A disc has a ring around it, and the middle, the nucleus, is filled with a mucus-like liquid. Do a sit-up and the spine’s compression will squeeze the nucleus. On his computer, McGill shows how the nucleus can work its way out of the disc, hit a nerve root and cause that oh-so-familiar back pain. “From observing the way your total gym routine is performed, we can predict the type of disc damage you’re eventually going to have.”

While there are lots of ways to injure a back, the sit-up is an easily preventable one. According to his research, a crunch or traditional sit-up generates at least 3,350 newtons (the equivalent of 340 kg) of compressive force on the spine. The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health states that anything above 3,300 newtons is unsafe.

So McGill suggests replacing sit-ups with exercises to strengthen the core while not bending the spine: bridges, planks, leg extensions, bird dogs, and “stir the pot.” The bird dog, for instance, simply involves getting on all fours and, while keeping the core muscles tight, extending the opposite arm and leg, then switching limbs. “Stir the pot” is a more complex movement: moving shoulders in a small circle while in a prone push-up position with forearms balanced on an exercise ball.

The results of McGill’s decades of spine research is slowly being accepted outside the worlds of academia and elite athletics. Ian Crosby of the Calgary Fire Department saw the shift first-hand. He’s on a committee of the International Association of Fire Fighters that establishes criteria for the make-or-break fitness test. A few years ago, they reviewed the annual sit-up test, which involved doing steady crunches in time to a metronome. The problem, for Crosby, is that anyone being assessed “will train to get better. And that involves repeated bouts of sit-ups.” So last year, after talking to Stuart McGill and other experts, the IAFF dropped the sit-up in favour of the prone plank—basically a static push-up that will leave the unfit trembling with fatigue.

For those who believe sit-ups are the only key to strong abdominals, Crosby points to research that shows the new movements can be just as effective in improving core strength. A study of U.S. soldiers published earlier this year in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise compared sit-ups with back-friendly core stabilization exercises, including bird dogs, and found there was no difference in overall fitness between the two groups. In fact, those who did core exercises showed significant improvement in the army’s sit-up test.

The decline of the crunch can also be seen at ordinary sweat-filled gyms. Anthony Ierulli, manager of fitness programming for the YMCA in Brampton, Ont., says that while in the past all anyone “did were crunches, now they’re doing some Pilates and yoga that engage the abdomen in different ways.” But Ierulli emphasizes that changing routines isn’t enough if the technique isn’t there. And that requires finding a teacher who can fine-tune those unfamiliar exercises.

As for McGill, he keeps spreading his message. Recently, Asia Nelson, a local Waterloo-based trainer of yoga instructors, invited the expert to talk to her class of student teachers about his philosophy. She knows that not all traditional yoga postures are back-friendly. One example Nelson gives is the sun salutation’s forward fold—basically a standing crunch with the added hanging weight of the body. Now, after the professor’s lecture, she’s figuring out ways to modify that and other movements. While Nelson and the Y’s Ierulli recommend people find a balance between old and new techniques, McGill’s message is more blunt: “There are only so many bends in your spine until the discs eventually herniate.”

Bookmark and Share
  • http://www.sunandmoonyoga.ca Marianne

    This is all very interesting – being a yogini and including a fairly vigorous posture (asana) practice to my yogic life style. This article addresses spinal flexion but what about spinal (hyper)extension in such postures as cobra, upward-facing bow, scorpion etc? The nucleus of the disc must then be pressed the opposite direction (from the flexion of the spine), with the same result?

    In hatha yoga, we truly believe in backbends as being beneficial on many levels; increasing the immune system by stimulating the thymus gland in the chest, tone the nervous system, stretch the energy channels to ensure a healthy flow of 'prana' (life force) bringing vitality and healing etc etc. From this point of view, core strengthening exercises are not enough as this only strengthens the core but do not incorporate the more subtle layers vital to over-all health – the value of inner body vitality and proper function included in yogic anathomy.

    Would love to read more comments related to hatha yoga!

    I guess moderation is key as always…

    • http://www.rehabchiropractor.com JBrownDC

      In the case you describe the nucleus would migrate in the opposite direction and with enough repetition problems could occur. However, the significant differences are that 1) the spinal cord and nerve roots lie behind the disc, not in front of them… making flexion much more problematic than extension. 2) very few people repeat extension movements to the degree that it can become problematic. Extension also loads the facet joints of the spine limiting load on the disc. In addition to the sit-up/crunch, think of all the other repeated flexion movements we do… slouched sitting, bending and lifting…

    • DrLJC

      Hi Marianne. The physiology of the disc is flawed by design. It is thicker in the anterior aspect and thinner in the posterior. Therefore, the posterior herniation is the most common. In the event there is an anterior herniation or disc bulge, there is little consequence as the cord and nerve roots are posterior structures. The only concern I have is the overload of the facets with such "hyper-extension" that I have seen with serious yoga instructors. Facet syndromes can mimic disc pain and referall pain syndromes. My philosophy is always to never load any one structure. Just my $.02

      • Melanie, RYT

        As a registered yoga teacher, I was taught that forward bends and backbends should always be conducted with a neutral kumbar spine. Backbends of bends of the thoracic spine only, the stretch the front of the body (chest, shoulders), with the lumbar spine in its neutral lorditic curve. To prevent the lumbar spine from going into hyperextension, there must be adequate flexibility in the hip flexors. Forward bends are also to be conducted with a completely neurtal spine. You are essentially hinging at the hips, or flexing the hips, with the natural curves of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine remaining. You must tilt pelvis forward while doing this to keep the lumbar spine from going into flexion. The chest remains lifted and scapula retracted to keep the thoracic spine from going into excessive kyphosis. If the lumbar spine comes out of alignment, it means you have gone too far into the bend for your flexability level.

    • Melanie, RYT

      As a Registered Yoga Teacher, I was taught the forward bends and back bends should be done with a neutral lumbar spine. Backbends are bends of the thoracic spine only (opening of the chest and shoulders), not the lumbar spine. If the lumbar spine goes into hyperextension, it is do to a lack of flexibility in the hip flexors, and one moved too far into the pose for their flexibility level. Forward bends should be done with a completely neutral spine, with the natural curves of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine remaining. In a forward bend, you are simply hinging at the hips, or flexing the hips to open the hamstrings, with no change in the shape of the spine. If the lumbar spine goes into a flexion or a crunch during a forward bend, it means that one moved too far into the pose for their flexibility level. A spinal twist of some sort should be conducted after both forward and back bends to neutralize the spine.

  • http://carnagepro.com PenGun

    I do crunches with a 10 lb weight on top of my head. I bore easily. I also do squats and deadlifts at about my weight.

    I can see where a lot of crunches/sits and little else would be a strain on your back. As part of a weight program they are appropriate as you strengthen the whole body in an ongoing manner.

    • http://www.rehabchiropractor.com JBrownDC

      It is this mentality that keeps crunches around. The research does not support this. There are many ways to strengthen the abdominals without doing situps/crunches. The rationale for getting rid of them is clearly documented in McGill's book. Consider giving it a read. Try the plank, bird dog, or McGill's version of the curl-up… a great workout without the disc being loaded repeatedly.

  • http://www.victoriawellness.com Narina P, RN CPT

    As owner of a fitness training studio, thank you Stuart McGill! I have been fighting the crunch/sit up battle for a few years now. At our facility no crunches or sit ups are ever done, and we have amazing clients that are strong, fit and back healthy. Even for esthetics crunches and sit ups serve no purpose. Planks and side planks will build a six pack – it is just most people have too much body fat to see them. It surprises me still, with all the research out there now, that there are still some trainers advocating crunches and sit ups for their clients. What about the military, police etc? They need to look at their fitness testing regimes as well.

    It is not about moderation with situps; it is about elimination.

    • http://www.brownintegratedchiropractic.com J Brown Chiropractor

      Well said. There are many organizations police, fire, military reconsidering their testing. It is a slow adaptation, but I have recently seen back extensor endurance or planking being adopted in favor of the traditional # of sit ups in 60 seconds.

      Keep up the good work and the change will happen (eventually).

  • Tammy

    I am a personal training and group fitness instruct. Since reading this article, I stopped teaching crunches. I have been finding abdominal strength has INCREASED already in the last few weeks and I have been fit all my life and doing crunches on a regular and consistent basis every week for the past 12 years… It's amazing the gains from this change! And the variety of new exercises that do not involve crunching are endless! I teach a whole core class (60 minutes) and always have different material to use. Plus this weeds out all the complicated teaching of the technical crunch. In the last 8 years of personal training, very few people actually do the crunch properly and I always had to help them form proper habits. It's not easy…often mistakes are leading with the chin (I call it chicken neck), tucking chin into the chest, using momentum to lift from other muscles, releasing the abs on the way down, improper breathing, and bringing the elbows too far forward. There are so many errors I now can eliminate and I am thankful for this study.

  • jude

    If you disagree with Dr. McGill, I ask you this. What type of research have you done on the subject? Probably little to none. I realize there are those of you out there who view this as just plain sacrilegious. Yes, abdominals are capable of flexion and extension, however, the main job of the abs is stabilization and participating in the many aspects of rotation. These movements are the ones that mimic what you encounter in the real world, not crunches. ____Someone asked " I wonder how his midsection looks". I don't know, but I guarantee he's got a healthy back. Which is way more important than your cute little six pack.

  • Melanie, RYT

    As a Registered Yoga Teacher, I was taught the forward bends and back bends should be done with a neutral lumbar spine. Backbends are bends of the thoracic spine only (opening of the chest and shoulders), not the lumbar spine. If the lumbar spine goes into hyperextension, it is do to a lack of flexibility in the hip flexors, and one moved too far into the pose for their flexibility level. Forward bends should be done with a completely neutral spine, with the natural curves of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine remaining. In a forward bend, you are simply hinging at the hips, or flexing the hips to open the hamstrings, with no change in the shape of the spine. If the lumbar spine goes into a flexion or a crunch during a forward bend, it means that one moved too far into the pose for their flexibility level. A spinal twist of some sort should be conducted after both forward and back bends to neutralize the spine.

  • http://www.BoddickerPerformance.com Carson Boddicker

    I find the argument that "I have been doing crunches for 10 years, and I have never had problems" to be one that is severely limited. If you are training yourself, fine, but if you are working with others you are entirely irresponsible if you program lumbar flexion based exercise. The spine simply does not handle it well. If you see enough clients, you will end up hurting one.

    The biggest problem with the "it hasn't hurt me yet" theory is two fold. One, disk injury is frequently the result of repetitive strain under low load conditions. The way that Dr. McGill is rupturing disks in his experiments is with repetitive flexion and extension (sit up type actions). The second problem is that it is an issue with research. You see, research could tell you what will happen, statistically, to a herd of 100 elephants on the way to a watering hole. Maybe it tells you that three will get separated from the herd, one will break his leg, and another will be eaten by a predator. Time and time again, it can be right. The problem is that the resarch won't be able to tell you what three will get lost, what one of 100 will break his let, and which elephant is going to be eaten.

    Nonetheless, if you are seeing enough clients or doing enough sit ups, the research shows us that there is a high statistical likelihood of disk injury with flexion based exercise. There is no way around it. Is it worth the risk? Not to me.

  • TimEN

    What's to refute here guys. It is clear to me there are better exercises to develop core stability (not just torso flexion strength) that don't create as much compressive stress on the spine as does the crunch. Why risk what research is telling us is a bad idea, and do it anyway. Also, if you're on a forum arguing the merits of a crunch as an appropriate way to strengthen "your" whole body, you might want to double check the static posture you are currently afixed in while sitting at your computer. Just a guess, but doing a bunch of crunches probably isn't going to help your cause.

    Also, if you've read Ultimate back performance or seen McGill lecture, you'd know that he does advocate the use of hanging leg raises as a suitable abdominal exercise (re: external oblique recruitment) because of the unloading of the spine during the exercise. Additionally, the turkish get up is included as a great exercise for "steering core strength", which will develop a aesthetically midsection for those interested in bodybuilding endeavours.

  • FMXto

    Sitting down is bad for your back so are you going to advocate never sitting down? Also running is supposedly bad for your back. So do people stop running marathons or use tread mills? I find people often look for excuses to justify their laziness. I’ve been doing a variety of ab exercises including crunches with weights and my back is stronger than it has ever been. I had a 36” waist down to 33”. I had no abs what so ever. Now I have some real definition. It took the past 2 ½” years to get this far. If this McGill guy found out what Lee Priest, Ron Coleman or Mariusz Pudzianowski do for ab work outs, he would freak out. Hard work, diet, good night sleep, sufficient rest and lots of determination. Plain and simple. No one said it was easy. I’m going to stick to what’s proven by the real pros in the game not some out of shape numb nuts.

  • Damien

    The responses here are mostly amusing. The previous poster is at best an armchair trainer.Your abs and relation to back being stronger has no meaning. Useless drivel. Most of the response here do not even understand the function of the abs. The do not understand the association with posture. The abs flex the spine not the hip joint. The abs also try to stabilize the pelvic bones during hip flexion. Hanging leg raises the way the majority of people execute them are utilizing hip flexors as the primary movers and the abs end up burning due to the contraction of trying to counter the anterior rotation from the leverage or forces from the legs being raised in front of the body. Excessive abdominal work utilizing crunches tends to promote a poor posture. The many spinal flexions without corresponding training of the back extensors can lead to an excessively kyphotic position which is poor posture and then that can lead to shoulder and neck issues. . Lee preist and ron coleman are bodybuilders who pretty much could care less about health and function, however they both train the the backside of their bodies…unlike most peoplpe who just want abs. Pudzianowski is a strongman competitor who has to have …as much as I hate the word..functional strength due to the demands of his sport. This type of training trains his core.., another misused and misunderstood word, The difference is that his whole body is used as opposed to just focusing on his abs. BTW I have over 26,000 hours of hands on research with clients .

  • http://www.seslishe.com/dunyasesim-com-bestekar16-amcamin-selami-var-dunyasesim.html dunyasesim

    thenk yoy very much very nice share

  • http://curemylowbackpain.com/Cure/?p=304 Douglas

    Any exercise is better than no exercise. As with all concepts, there is no one size fits all approach to exercise, injury prevention, function enhance and pain avoidance/management.

  • http://www.ISTOPLAPUCK.ca Richard

    Priest and Coleman are very obvious (or have been) users of steroids. Their midsection is clearly expanded due to this overgrowth and the tremendous loads they put on their bodies when weight training. I'm not advocating not to lift iron, I train myself, but there are clearly no IFBB members that can be used in all honesty as an example in this case. This argument could grow and lead to more quotes, research anecdotes and counter points in terms of proper routines and high volumes vs low volume, etc…but I won't go there.

    Not all new findings out there are the "end all" of things, so it is always best to verify supportive findings by other experts and to use common sense and logic.

  • Dr Dave

    As a Kinesiologist and Strength coach and a follower of Dr. McGill's for a short time I have a couple things to say. Repetitive movements especially in an awkward posture can be quite damaging but this is all individual. Some people can run everyday while others have or get sore knees and need to take breaks. Dr. McGill first became famous because he had a goniometer system (measures angles) hooked-up to a olympic weight lifter and actually caught the lifters disc slip out and then back into place during the lift. Remarkable but also lucky for the experimenter; leading into more an more research.

    As a strength coach and a teacher of exercise I stay away from the original sit-up and crunch – even on the ball. There are a couple other exercises that are so much better you will never do a crunch again. The Stir-the-pot is a favorite of mine but I can't advocate it to people with back problems like this article seems to suggest. I have a client with an enigmatic bulge at about L4/5 and this exercise has aggravated the bulge. If you would like descriptions of these progressive crunches let me know.

  • melissa

    everything in moderation. many professional athletes (picture downhill skiier, a sprint start, dancers, etc…) use the "forward flexed" position in their sports regularly. if one never trains their muscles in these positions, they will not gain the necessary strength because your strength is only as good as your available range of motion. i do agree that any motion done in excess is bad; however, we must make sure we are training our bodies to fit the motions and activities we want to continue to do. simple as that.

  • Zahar

    Wow this is revolutionary…some slum realizes that its almost summer and wants ripped abs. The answer? A CRAPLOAD of crunches/sit ups (400/day as stated by one comment). Neck strains and pains as stated by another. As a scientist myself and an avid athlete the following come to mind:
    1. To address the neck strains – I have known for the past 20 years to NOT put your arms/hands behind your head or neck while doing sit ups..never once had any neck pains. Guess who does? Those Who hold their neck while doing them.
    2. Crunch vs. Sit Up – Anyone that has visited a gym or has any muscle knowledge knows that range of motion is important. We have all seen the big tough guys move a ridiculous amount of weight 2 inches back and forth…give them half the weight and ask them to do a full curl and they cant budge it. Apply this logic to sit ups, lower number of reps with slow controlled movement and you have an EFFECTIVE and SAFE exercise.
    3. Overall fitness level – those of you who have had back pains or problems for whatever reason…how often did you do lower back exercises? Im guessing slim to none as this would a) strengthen your back extensors and core overall and b) PREVENT MUSCLE IMBALANCE (another critical concept for those with anatomy knowledge – can be applied to people doing too many chest exercises and not enough back…same thing). I have also been a personal trainer and have rid people of back pains by doing rehab like back strengthening exercises to the point where they were able to do exercises that would previously almost paralyze them with pain and agony.
    4. Take a look at the statistics of WHO actually gets these back and neck problems – athletes or people who simply want to lose weight/look good and walk into a gym and begin to mirror the exercises without knowing the big picture or proper form.

    I am NOT arguing the numbers that this professor is seeing but he is isolating a system AND its a computer model…these things are NOT directly translational to an in vivo system. Its a good insight into improving technique but not enough evidence to get rid of an exercise.

  • http://www.spartanmoving.com/ San Jose Movers

    That was great .I have tried this and the crunches too. I don't find any difficulty in doing both these.

  • FitBrian

    I have been doing 1000 to 2000 situp/crunches per day. Part of the reason is that I am an American refugee living in Canada. My profession of American
    Chemical Engineering has been deemed to be criminal by two Appellate Courts and now I am in the US Supreme Court. Anyway, I was confined in the American Prison system (sometimes maximum security) for nearly two years. The only exercise in a small cell where you are confined for 24 horus is situps and pushups. It is great for the abs. The key is to do them with a cushoning behind you. SInce I am free in Canada (I do not live in the USA where there is no trial, no Law and Order and no US Constitution and indefinite incarceration), I go to the gym and do 1500 situps with the assistance of a Bosa Ball (half sphere).

    My waist is very narrow and I do not have problems with my spine. My body
    fat is very low.

  • http://www.askscooby.com/index.php Michael

    Comparing a pigs spine to a humans?! Is the pig a primate? Is the pig bipedal? Can the pig squat-feed? Can the pig carry things with its limbs? Can the pig climb? No, no, and once again no!

    I mean this is a joke. The pigs spine is designed for completely different tasks than human spines! Using pigs to see the damage a weapon can make to human tissue, pigs hearts, yes. Pigs have similarities with humans, no doubt about it. But comparing a dead pigs spine to an alive humans?! Come on…

    Situps are bad for you, yes, and they work your hip flexors more than your abs. Crunches however, are a safe isolation for your abs.

    Planks are awesome, and everyone should do them. Hanging leg raises are also good. So there are loads of alternatives to crunches. But don't come and tell me crunches aren't safe because of your findings on a dead pigs spine. What's next, biceps curls aren't safe because the pigs limbs can't bend that way?

    I put the askscooby forum under website, so all who want free advice with no ads, noone telling you to buy a book and waste your money, can ask any question they like and get friendly answers with the science to back it up. Articles like these contradict eachother, often have horrible advice, and are always trying to sell you something. Getting fit should be FREE.

  • http://www.craftkammer.com/ Danny

    This is nothing more than a well-disguised Editorial in my opinion. There are millions people on the world doing sit-ups, crunches and other ab exercises successfully and without any complaint. The ones who get injured are usually the ones who don't know anything about exercising in the first place or have a really bad condition beforehand (back problems, etc.)

    Comparing a pig's anatomy to the human anatomy one to one is a problematic starting point in itself. It doesn't help to conduct such studies on dead organs/bones/spines/whatever either. Finally the random value of 340 kg, which is completely out of context with no comparisons (how much force would a deadlift, a full squat, ANY task produce on the spine) renders the findings of this scientist absolutely useless.

    Human bodies are not made to be doing any kind of sit-ups or crunches? You do sit-ups every day right after waking up ("sitting up in the bed").

    Just look at this guy. He's selling workshops, books and other controversy stuff, just to earn money. Humans have been doing ab exercises for centuries and spinal injuries are very uncommon.

    Just look for free advice from respectable fitness lovers, who know what they are doing.

  • Lucas

    This makes no sense. Pigs aren't made to bent. You can't just pretend it is the exact same as a human spine. Sure, some organs of a pig are very similar to that of a human. But the spine isn't one of them.

    Oh and if you do 400 crunches aday, you should start doin' something else. Some harder exercises.

  • Danielle

    I am a personal trainer and I've had the benefit of attending one of Dr. McGill's workshops. I have also had many bouts of severe back pain throughout my life – disk related. Once I began taking his research to heart and really working it into my life and my workouts, I instantly improved. I had been to endless chiros, physios, etc, and had no relief. Since I began following McGill's premise about 4 years ago, I have had NO back pain of any kind (and it was not unusual for me to be immobile for weeks at a time in the past). As a result, I am a huge advocate of this work and incorporate it into all of my clients' programs as well as my group classes. We should all be following his protocols – they just make sense.

  • http://www.harrogatepersonaltrainer.com nathan

    I think Mcgill has progressed understanding of the core and spinal support immeasurably, however I also believe that there are never innapropriate exercises just innapropriate clients for that exercise. There are compressive forces in the seated position that are much higher than standing yet offices are not creating a standing environment for employees and yet theres no outrage like there is with people performing crunches? Also we all "crunch" when we get out of bed on a morning its a natural movement, its just that we can get obsessed with hundreds of repetitions in a vain atempt to get "abs" whilst you would never do this for another body part…400 lateral raises a day and your shoulder would soon tell you about it right?

  • Robert King

    Does the same concern apply to use of an abdominal machine that works the abs, but from a sitting position and bending forward, using either weights or some system to adjust resistance levels?

From Macleans