Originally Posted by
cjurakpt
I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting here - that because the COG is located in front of S2 that people have more pain at L5/S1 & S1/S2 than other areas of the low back, or that they have the root of their dysfunction at L5/S1 & S1/S2 more so than in other areas when they complain of LBP?
first off, I wouldn't agree that the "chief complaint" for LBP is at LSJ or lower - sacroiliac pain is one common form of LBP, but I see just as many people c/o pain in mid/lower lumbar region (L3-5)
second, I would suggest that the "root" of much LBP has more to do with hip joint and pelvic floor restrictions than S2, although they do reflect up into that area often (to wit, the counterstrain technique for releasing S2 basically puts pelvic floor on slack); which certainly relates to ideas about usage of the kwa, specifically the degree of lymphatic congestion most people have at inguinal crease (due to lack of suppleness in the pelvis in general), leading to a congested hip joint and all the undesirable sequelae that follow; in fact, in your example, you mention that to deal with pain at L5 to S2 you treat L2 - which makes sense, because many people are hypomobile at L2, and tend to be hypermobile at LSJ (bearing in mind, the things that don't move are not the ones that hurt, it's the areas that move too much...)
however, fundamentally, I don't really see why the location of the COG at the level of S2 (and that is a very approximate location, because it's also anterior to it) has any direct impact per se on how, why or where specifically people get LBP, with the exception that when we were quadrupeds, our COG was much different, and being in quadruped removes a large number of biomechanical and physiological stresses that contribute to LBP...meaning that one could argue the very fact that we are bipeds is a precipitating factor for LB dysfunction...