The study is an version of the following logic: An average person bends so often and so much as they live so if you take an ADR device and put it into a bend fixture and flex it to x degrees y times it simulates z period of time in a real person's back. You can see all of the assumptions that go into it, not to mention the degree to which the fixture simulates real movement greatly affects the quality of the test. As I mentioned in a different thread, these studies are great indicators but you'd be foolish to look at one device tested in one study for 25.684739372027 equivalent years and a second tested in a different study for 36.5743923173 equivalent years and decide one is really better than the other.
__________________
Laura - L5S1 Charitee
C5/6 and 6/7 Prodisc C
Facet problems L4-S1
General joint hypermobility
Jim - C4/5, C5/6, L4/5 disk bulges and facet damage, L4/5 disk tears, currently using regenerative medicine to address
"There are many Annapurnas in the lives of men" Maurice Herzog
|