Hypothesis growth plate, isolated events

[northka]

there exist dual plates on the joints of the hand, a system in which tendons are pulled and flexed to close and hold. it is true that normal repetition has no real affect on the growth plates closing prematurely. the argument against this states "...repeated rubbing of the ligaments and tendons across the growth plate will add trauma and prevent them from working correctly (in growth and the ability to message other part of the body)." this is also the same line of reasoning that states exercising will make you taller (indirectly), which is a contradiction. repetition is an exaggeration for normal hand use which would atrophy the hand (unideal) if you didn't use you hand regularly. your growth plates need repetition to signal that there is a need for growth to occur there.
why would it be argued that exercise will indirectly make you taller and yet working out your hand will close the growth plates?
-it can be vaguely defended by the differences between leg and hand, which is the type of exercise (weight bearing, non) and how receptive they are to hormones. in change the percentage follows as such: femur more receptive to exercise as a growth plate benefit than hand, because of their composition (moreso the relation to other anatomy next to it). their argument is fatally irregular
-they are right in which the femur's growth is receptive to exercise, but dismay this affect for the hand because "They grow mostly via systemic chemical signals (Growth Hormone/IGF-1 circulating in the blood) rather than direct impact compression,". their line of reasoning is completely separate from their argument of repetition trauma in their thesis.
- hands describably "Have a much smaller "growth budget." Because they require far less total linear length, their cell division limit (chondrocyte senescence) is reached much earlier, leading to fusion earlier in puberty,". this argument falls under age limiting which should have been introduced in the argument earlier, but leave it vague. the opposite STILL stands even if it is for a period of 10 years.

 

[Deleted Member 125690]

random nonsense yapping +rep

 

[northka]

random nonsense yapping +rep

js say its your thesis bro

 

[Deleted Member 125690]

js say its your thesis bro

uh you caught me

 

[northka]

View attachment 418211
there exist dual plates on the joints of the hand, a system in which tendons are pulled and flexed to close and hold. it is true that normal repetition has no real affect on the growth plates closing prematurely. the argument against this states "...repeated rubbing of the ligaments and tendons across the growth plate will add trauma and prevent them from working correctly (in growth and the ability to message other part of the body)." this is also the same line of reasoning that states exercising will make you taller (indirectly), which is a contradiction. repetition is an exaggeration for normal hand use which would atrophy the hand (unideal) if you didn't use you hand regularly. your growth plates need repetition to signal that there is a need for growth to occur there.
why would it be argued that exercise will indirectly make you taller and yet working out your hand will close the growth plates?
-it can be vaguely defended by the differences between leg and hand, which is the type of exercise (weight bearing, non) and how receptive they are to hormones. in change the percentage follows as such: femur more receptive to exercise as a growth plate benefit than hand, because of their composition (moreso the relation to other anatomy next to it). their argument is fatally irregular
-they are right in which the femur's growth is receptive to exercise, but dismay this affect for the hand because "They grow mostly via systemic chemical signals (Growth Hormone/IGF-1 circulating in the blood) rather than direct impact compression,". their line of reasoning is completely separate from their argument of repetition trauma in their thesis.
- hands describably "Have a much smaller "growth budget." Because they require far less total linear length, their cell division limit (chondrocyte senescence) is reached much earlier, leading to fusion earlier in puberty,". this argument falls under age limiting which should have been introduced in the argument earlier, but leave it vague. the opposite STILL stands even if it is for a period of 10 years.

updated LOR

 

[northka]

View attachment 418211
there exist dual plates on the joints of the hand, a system in which tendons are pulled and flexed to close and hold. it is true that normal repetition has no real affect on the growth plates closing prematurely. the argument against this states "...repeated rubbing of the ligaments and tendons across the growth plate will add trauma and prevent them from working correctly (in growth and the ability to message other part of the body)." this is also the same line of reasoning that states exercising will make you taller (indirectly), which is a contradiction. repetition is an exaggeration for normal hand use which would atrophy the hand (unideal) if you didn't use you hand regularly. your growth plates need repetition to signal that there is a need for growth to occur there.
why would it be argued that exercise will indirectly make you taller and yet working out your hand will close the growth plates?
-it can be vaguely defended by the differences between leg and hand, which is the type of exercise (weight bearing, non) and how receptive they are to hormones. in change the percentage follows as such: femur more receptive to exercise as a growth plate benefit than hand, because of their composition (moreso the relation to other anatomy next to it). their argument is fatally irregular
-they are right in which the femur's growth is receptive to exercise, but dismay this affect for the hand because "They grow mostly via systemic chemical signals (Growth Hormone/IGF-1 circulating in the blood) rather than direct impact compression,". their line of reasoning is completely separate from their argument of repetition trauma in their thesis.
- hands describably "Have a much smaller "growth budget." Because they require far less total linear length, their cell division limit (chondrocyte senescence) is reached much earlier, leading to fusion earlier in puberty,". this argument falls under age limiting which should have been introduced in the argument earlier, but leave it vague. the opposite STILL stands even if it is for a period of 10 years.

"Systemic Impact: Exercise causes your pituitary gland to release Human Growth Hormone (HGH) into your bloodstream. This elevated HGH and IGF-1 travels to all open growth plates—including both the hands and legs." redundant jfl