Talk:Lordosis

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lordosis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1

Biology Low‑importance

	Biology portal Lordosis is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chiropractic Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chiropractic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chiropractic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChiropracticWikipedia:WikiProject ChiropracticTemplate:WikiProject ChiropracticChiropractic articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Lordosis.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

information needed for what is anatomical and what is a pathological condition[edit]

Terms needs to be clarified. Loss of lumbar lordosis is a term that needs to be added. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 05:18, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I edited it today to try to improve this. -Gnuish (talk) 22:18, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hyperlordosis is not the same as sway-back[edit]

A sway-back posture is characterised by the posterior displacement of the rib cage in comparison to the pelvis. It looks like the person has a hyperextension of the natural lordosis, however it is not necessarily the case. Most sway-back exhibit a posteriorly tilted pelvis and their lumbar is usually flat (too flexed) and not hyper lordotic (too extended). The point is, these are too different things. For references see "Muscles, testing and function, 4th edition, by Florence Peterson Kendall. ed. John Butler) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.50.243.52 (talk) 07:55, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK; deleted sway-back in the list of synonyms. Klbrain (talk) 08:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at this further, I've also removed the redirect from swayback and commenced a new page there discussing this condition. Klbrain (talk) 08:53, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are we human, or are we dancer ?[edit]

Why are the paragraphs about hyperlordoses using 'Dancer' instead of 'Patient' or 'Individual' ? Seems like a literal copy from some book about sport-injuries. This is generally a confusing writing style, and possible copyright violation. Can somebody rework this. --79.225.125.105 (talk) 13:58, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. --Gnuish (talk) 22:26, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree, additionally it's repeated throughout the article, specifying poor dance floor as being the culprit for the condition. Azotochtli (talk) 14:31, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that caught me up too, as if the primary demographic for these conditions is the dancer. Probably the typical patient is rather the Western office worker. Eyleron (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lordosis and Hyperlordosis might need to be separate articles?[edit]

the article seems to have information that could go in to two article...IMO--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:52, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[1]?--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to improve this today. --Gnuish (talk) 22:26, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep united. An introduction to lordosis is useful in explaining hyperlordosis, and the physiology of lordosis is better udnerstood in relation to hyperlordosis. I don't think we should split them. Mikael Häggström (talk) 12:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hypolordosis[edit]

Why is this all about hyperlordosis? The back isn't always excessively curved. It can be normally curved, or insufficiently curved. Where's the advice to increase one's curve? Correctrix (talk) 05:57, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kyphosis Description Contradictory[edit]

the wikipedia page on "Lordosis” the first paragraph describes "kyphosis" as: “The normal outward (convex) curvature in the thoracic and sacral regions”. yet the the hyperlink in that paragraph to “kyphosis”, the first sentence describes "kyphosis": “is an abnormally excessive convex curvature of the spine as it occurs in the thoracic and sacral regions”. these descriptions of "kyphosis" are directly contradictory and cannot coexist. Waywardtom (talk) 19:35, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't exactly contradictory. The words lordosis and kyphosis sometimes simply refer to directions of curvature (e.g. "Maintaining normal lordosis is important for healthy posture"), while other times the same words are used to indicate problems (e.g. "You have lordosis, something needs to be done about it"). I do agree that this inconsistency is a problem; it's legitimately confusing because the context is often not very helpful. I don't know a good way to fix the problem, other than interrupting with "Wait! What do you mean?" any time someone uses these words. I could easily decree a change of vocabulary myself, but unless every teacher and every text in every field suddenly agreed with me (including doctors, trainers in multiple unrelated sports, physiotherapists, dance instructors, veterinarians, and horse trainers), I'd just be making the confusion worse. TooManyFingers (talk) 16:02, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]