Level 7 Valued Member
You suggested he is an academic researcher who lacks practical rehab expertise or experience. You suggested he is someone who relies on theory that has not been validated in practice. You compared him to clinicians who overrely on imaging to diagnose.How is this not a fair representation of Stuart McGill?
In fact, he has a lot of experience working with patients, including high level athletes in a variety of sports. As Brian Carroll's experience illustrates, his method begins with an extensive in-person, individualized, hands-on functional assessment, he identifies specific individual pain triggers, evaluates individual anatomy (through observation and examination, not just imaging), takes into account lifestyle, habits, and athletic goals, and then designs a customized treatment protocol accordingly. From what I know of him, although he does research and follows general principles, he assesses and treats patients in a very individualized way.
Somehow he has become known as the "stir the pot guy." I know you didn't say this in so many words, but I think it is inaccurate to characterize him as someone who makes one-size-fits-all exercise prescriptions based solely on academic research.
By the way, I think there are some significant limitations to McGill's approach, in that it is very mechnically focused and tends not to address the role of the nervous system in pain. There is a whole fascinating field of pain science that, to my knowledge, he doesn't particularly address. But, to me, that's not a weakness of McGill as much as just not where his interest, experience and expertise lie.