UKC

Im sure we have all been injured at some point which usually involves inflammation of the affected part of the body, Ive certainly had my fair share of knocks, sprains, breaks, illnesses etc.

A lot of treatments and therapies seem to focus on reducing inflammation - ice, rest, anti-inflammatory meds, compression. I know a fair bit about the physiology and process of inflammation having studied it at uni, but im still not clear on whether we should be trying so suppress the process or allow it to continue as it is part of the healing process.

My most recent injury is a badly sprained wrist which is still sore wrist 10 days after falling off the bike (not broken), and getting annoyed as its stopping me training. Iced it, wear wrist support, still slow.

In reply to Pesda potato:

It's an interesting question. I bruised my ribs at the beginning of the year. It was extremely painful to climb with even climbing 6 grades below my normal level. One time I took paracetamol and ibuprofen and could climb almost as well as normal. But I worried that I might be making it worse so I only did it the once. After that I continued climbing unmedicated at a low level and to my surprise it was pretty much healed after only 3 weeks.

I suppose the test is if you climb with anti inflammatories whether the injury feels worse later when they've worn off. Immediately after it might well feel worse but maybe 6 -12 hours how does it feel? Or a few days, will it be still getting better or have you re-injured it by climbing? Certainly for the first session or so take it easy to test it out.

I'd take it as a positive thing that injury was not caused by climbing. To me that suggests that it won't necessarily be made worse by climbing.

Sprain's can vary from mild to severe. I sprained my ankle months ago and its still not right yet. Fortunately its not affecting my climbing, aside from jumping onto hard landings.

In reply to Pesda potato:

There was mention of this in Rock and Ice a while ago by Julian Saunders - the gist of what he said seemed to be that inflammation happens for a reason and we shouldn't try to stop it. He didn't really go into detail, though, so it probably doesn't help much. But you might be reassured to know you're not the only one wondering about established convention

In reply to stp:

think it depends if the swelling is there to protect the injury, or just as a result. If its there to protect, then I would be in the category of letting the body look after itself.

In reply to Pesda potato:

Inflammation is the body's way of healing injury (or dealing with infection, though that's not what you're referring to) and it's a natural reaction so we must assume it evolved for being 'good' compared to the alternative of not healing, but in the absence of modern medicine, it would be a case of the stronger the inflammatory response, the better. Especially in critical life-threatening events. So it's not a surprise that generally inflammation is an overreaction to the insult, and there is no harm in calming it down. The body needs time and rest to heal, and I don't think using anti-inflammatories makes any difference to how long it takes, or how effective. Only how much it hurts.

In reply to Pesda potato: Id definatly say rest is the king to recovery along with the right type of phsyio at the right time.I injured my sternum doing weighted dips,simply going to low with too much weight,i stopped training for three months.Now im back to full training,i just avoid doing dips as advised by my physio.

In reply to Pesda potato:

Ligamentous injuries are often slower than fractures to heal, and if you're still training on it you could have that for a while.
Initial reduction of inflammation is necessary to maintain joint mobility and thus not lose your joint range, and to reduce pain. There's good evidence for reducing acute inflammation.

In reply to Pesda potato:


And Honestly, ten days is not a long time for healing. Most soft tissue injuries involving ligaments take about six weeks, longer than uncomplicated fractures.

Time.

In reply to Just Another Dave:



And then some, especially with hand injuries.

In reply to Pesda potato:

good and bad...

In reply to Roadrunner5:

You trying to be inflammatory?

In reply to Pesda potato:

Inflammation encourages immobility (both from pain and from swelling). Whilst rest is good, in some cases maintaining good mobility is important - the main example being back injury. For muscular back injury, taking anti-inflammatories and maintaining as much mobility as possible gives the best long-term outcome.

Taking ani-inflammatories to mask pain and then continue doing things above and beyond mobility maintenance is asking for additional damage. Your "well below normal grade" for a bit of muscular and ligament damage sounds about right to me.

Moderation innit.

In reply to Pesda potato:

Guess it depends. Both times I've been prescribed anti-inflammatories it was for a back or near back injury. Last year I injured a lot of muscles around my hip and my glutes which then affected my back - I basically couldn't dress or put on shoes without great difficulty and pain so having the anti-inflammatories meant I could walk, sit comfortably and just be able to do normal stuff, it turned out that the half of my pelvis had rotated slightly forward of the other half because while I'm not hypermobile I'm more flexible than most people and that had been a contributing factor. There was no way I was working out while I was recovering but in time I had to just get it healing.