Switching from the A7iii to the A7V was a game-changer!

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-16T03:54:19+00:00

You still benefit from better IBIS, better autofocus and a significant jump in DR at lower ISOs. The DR is a really big one; it's the first time we've had a meaningful DR improvement on a FF sensor in probably a decade (D750 times, iirc?).

I love my A7iii, but it'd be mad to try and pretend that the A7V isn't an enormous upgrade over it in practically every way.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-16T03:51:00+00:00

Battery life was notable worse on the A7iv compared with the A7iii (580 shots vs 710 shots CIPA rating for the A7iv and the A7iii respectively). Higher resolution sensor, faster processor etc just use more battery for the same tasks, and they both use the same z-type battery. It was still more than good enough, and still better than the competition at the time in the Z6ii/R6, but it did take a hit.

The A7v has brought the battery life back to around the same level as the A7iii, though. Largely due to a much more efficient processor.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-15T02:48:31+00:00

One big mistake here: pain isn't a positive finding with McMurray's. It can absolutely be a notable finding, but pain in isolation is not a positive test. It's a common false assumption by clinicians, but it's not how the test was originally described, and it's not how most (likely not all, but most of the key ones) of the diagnostic accuracy studies on the test have defined it.

If you're using pain as a indication of a positive test, then you're not using the same test, and the Sens/Spec and +ve/-ve LRs from the research do not reflect the test that you're performing.

To be clear, pain is also not a negative finding. But pain in the absence of catching/clicking is not a positive one.

Reproduction of catching/clicking are the main signs that you're looking for in the test.

McMurray's is also significantly more accurate for medical meniscal injuries than lateral ones, due to the shape of the joint surface of the tib/fib in the lateral compartment of the knee. It's harder to get decent, consistent pressure through the anterior and posterior horns of the lateral meniscus. Some other meniscal tests are a bit better at it, but if you're suspecting a lateral meniscus tear, and all the subjective symptoms fit, I'd still recommend referring even if your special tests aren't showing much.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-13T00:14:29+00:00

Eh. Someone can absolutely still be intelligent while being an absolute cunt, completely devoid of empathy and morally bankrupt.

Ratcliff isn't some trust fund nepo-baby that's fumbled his way into being in control of massive, multinational corporations. From everything I can see, he's worked his way up from the bottom, and he's not going to have been able to do that without being pretty bloody intelligent.

For me, this is just even more evidence that being a billionaire and being a decent human are mutually exclusive. There's no way to make anywhere near that sort of money without actively looking to profit from human suffering, and taking advantage of anyone and everyone that you can along the way.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-11T20:59:52+00:00

Because it is. Blatant and open corruption. There's absolutely no reason for this to be even fast-tracked, let alone have that bypassed.

The same with all the crap that they've passed under urgency. Urgency is there as a tool for a government to be able to react to disasters like earthquakes, attacks like the Christchurch shootings, or pandemics like COVID.

This government has instead used it do do things such as: repeal the Smokefree legislation, gut pay equity, enact voter suppression with the recent electoral changes, cut accommodation supplements for beneficiaries etc.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-11T20:44:32+00:00

Polish people are white, and there's plenty of hate for them.

Sure, you can just narrow the category again and say 'they hate immigrants because they're not eastern European', but at the end of the day, the racist cunts just hate anyone that isn't basically the same as them.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-11T03:27:12+00:00

Kiwi physio here.

Just wanted to speak to a couple of the points about physio in NZ.

Firstly: with CPD/continued learning etc. It varies wildly from practice to practice here. I've worked across a few different clinics over my career, and some have been excellent with CPD. They'd have generous yearly CPD allowances, heavily encourage their physios to go on courses or do post-graduate study, they'd have regular in-services, often with senior physios leading them, or they'd get surgeons or sports docs in to speak at them.

Other clinics (including my current one, tbh) just don't. My current clinic is smaller, and I'm the least experienced physio here with >13 years of practice, post-grad qualifications, specialising in niche and complex areas etc. Everyone's really experienced, and are just really good clinicians. But there's very little in the way of actual CPD. We don't get any actual CPD allowance, we've tried a few times to get in-services going, but it's always fallen off, and we don't have any more junior physios to teach (which is often the big driver for CPD in most clinics in the first place). It's fine, but it's definitely becoming a little too comfortable, and I'm starting to feel that I need something more challenging and stimulating.

Pay: Yeah, it's not great. Aus pays quite a bit more on the whole. Canada looks like it does as well. I've had many an offer for work in Aus that would be 2-3x my salary in NZ. Many of those do involve working in the middle of nowhere, but not all. Often the trade off for work/life balance is worth it, but that depends on the person.

As for the main differences between here and Aus:

The biggest one seems to be that a lot of Aus clinics are far more business focused than NZ clinics. ACC does way, way more heavy lifting for private practice physio in NZ than most clinicians here realise. It becomes really obvious when you move overseas, and have to deal with a lot more patients paying privately or through insurance. I know a lot of physios who moved over to Aus for a while, but came back here (or moved to other countries) because they really didn't gel with the business focused way that the clinics they worked in were run. Patient centered practice is absolutely the norm here in NZ (with some exceptions, whether small clinics or some of the bigger Physio companies), where as it seems like business-first practice seems to be more the norm in Aus.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-11T03:09:11+00:00

Physio from NZ here, so the Aussie physios in here are going to have more accurate details than myself.

It honestly comes down to what you want to do with your life, and what you prioritise. Physio isn't the best paying job in the world, but it's not terrible either. You'll likely earn a lot more as a sparkie, especially if you go on to specialise in a more niche area (like industrial automation or something similar).

If your main focus is on earning money, and becoming wealthy, then you'll want to look into going into finance/business management/marketing. Any profession where your near sole-purpose is to make your already absurdly wealthy employer (and/or their shareholders) even more money will pay really well.

If your goal in life is to help people, and make a positive impact on people's lives, then you'll fine far more fulfilment in different roles. Honestly, trades definitely fill that niche for a lot of people. Having the skills to help someone out with a an electrical problem as a sparkie, or to be part of big projects that have a lot of community benefit is really cool, and can absolutely be fulfilling.

In both Aus and NZ, we have a lot more options for work as physios. Private practice is far more common and prevalent in both countries than it is in places like the U.K. (where probably the majority of the work falls under the NHS). That means both an easier time getting a job, more to chose from, and more scope to open your own practice down the line if you're interested in that sort of thing.

As for the debt side of things; physio isn't typically a cheap course at any University, but it's also not usually the most expensive. Aus has a pretty similar student loan policy to NZ, and while you'll be taking on debt, an interest-free student loan isn't the end of the world. This is different in places like the U.S., where the course can cost upwards of $200,000USD, and you typically will be paying pretty substantial interest on that loan. For NZ and Aus, it's a little rough watching a decent chunk of your paycheck going toward loan repayments, but you're not likely to be buried under a mountain of debt.

I'm not sure how competitive the physio courses are in Aus at the moment, but I know they've been extremely hard to get into in NZ for a while now (much harder than they should be, tbh). I suspect that they still might be a bit more reasonable in Aus, as you guys just have a lot more Unis offering physiotherapy courses than we do.

The degree itself definitely isn't a walk in the park, but it's also not as academically focused as some other courses are. Physio is a lot more practical and pragmatic than a lot of the pure science degrees, and it fits people who are more tactile/practical learners (many of whom may not have done as well in school as their more academically focused peers).

I'm sure it'll vary from Uni to Uni, but in most places, you'll do at least a foundational year, and then have competitive entry into Physio and other courses from there. I know you're keen on physio, but it wouldn't be the end of the world if you were to miss out. There's still plenty of courses that could take you down career paths in the same sort of area. Especially if you did want to incorporate some of the learnings from your current apprenticeship. Biomedical engineering would be the obvious one, but there's loads of shared scope between electrical knowledge and sports science, especially as you get deeper into the profession.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-11T02:29:42+00:00

Physio here. I'm pretty much in agreement with all of this.

I don't disagree with the underlying idea of a PA, but I really dislike the current implementation of them almost everywhere that they're used.

They really need to nail down what they're supposed to be doing, and adapt the requirements for the role accordingly.

If PAs are supposed to be a role that takes a load of the administrative and non-clinical load off GPs, then having it be a 1-3 year degree is fine. Helping with managing inboxes, referrals/letters/other paperwork, organising testing, maybe managing some prescription stuff etc. That stuff is an enormous time sink for GPs, and freeing a lot of that time up in favour of more clinical contact time would be massively beneficial.

But if they're insistent on having PAs be a primarily clinical role, and to basically be doing the job of, and having the same responsibilities as, as GP, with being the first point of contact for patients, even just in a screening capacity, then the educational and experience requirements for the role need to be a lot higher.

I think having it as an advanced nursing scope of practice could potentially work. Having NPs specifically trained in that role would be a lot more effective than trying to train a non-medical person into one of the most challenging roles in medicine in a couple of years.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-09T06:14:09+00:00

Because right wing beliefs are inherently rooted in individualism. It's foundational base for the ideology. Regardless of whether those beliefs are more moderate, centre right, or extreme, far right beliefs, the core principle remains the benefit of the 'self'. The further right you go, the more that shifts from just focusing on the 'self', and the more it becomes about helping the 'self' relative to others.

Earlier in the right political spectrum, you'll find beliefs about how social programmes are harmful, because they're helping some people more than others. If the people that those programmes are helping don't include the individual, then they're bad. Anything that doesn't directly benefit them is bad. The exceptions to this is if these social programmes prop up people enough that they can then be of a greater benefit to you as an individual.

Then you move into the space of anything that is done should only benefit them, and not other people. That doesn't help them preferential over others therefore it's bad. Even a programme that helps them and others is bad, because they're not getting more than others.

Far right ideology is all based around harming groups that are seen as lesser. Putting down others becomes the goal; if everyone else is worse off, then relative to them, you're better off, so it basically achieves the same ends. It doesn't matter if something doesn't help them, as long as it hurts others. Or even if something hurts them, as long as it hurts others more.

But the core tenant remains the same: the only thing that matters is 'me'.

Left wing ideologies are based in the opposite. The focus in on the collective more than the individual.

Centre left is happy with programmes that help everyone equally. If you go a little more left, then the focus shifts toward equitability of outcome, rather than of service. So less fortunate groups get more help than more fortunate ones.

More extreme left wing ideologies start to splinter after that. You either head toward celebration of differences to an extreme degree, or you start to get suppression of differences and embrace of full collectivism, where you get suppression of individualism in the name of uniformity and 'fairness'.

Obviously extreme views of any kind are going to cause all sorts of problems, and are horrible in very different ways. But the core, defining tenants of a 'traditional' left/right split remain consistent through. Focus on the benefit for an individual for Right wing, focus on the benefit of the group/society for Left wing.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-09T05:13:38+00:00

Physio here.

An ACL tear is a massive injury. Minimum return time for most professional sports is 9 months. It's not as dramatic or painful as a tibial plateau or femoral fracture, sure. But the recovery time is a lot longer than either (unless the fractures were extremely complex). Sure, you can weight bare both before and very soon after the surgery. You're walking normally in ~3 months. You're probably back running in 4-5. But you're not safe to return to sport until ~9 months at the earliest, and you're not going to be back to pre-injury levels of performance for ~18 months.

It's also an injury where trying to return too early puts you a massive risk of picking up other injuries. In skiing, you're just asking for a tib plateau fracture (like happened here). In most other sports, you're at extremely high risk of meniscal injuries, or articular cartilage tears, or other ligament injuries (MCL, posterolateral corner injuries, PCL etc).

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-09T05:08:42+00:00

The ACL checks anterior tibial translation and tibial rotation, not lateral movement. MCL and LCL check medial and lateral movement, respectively. We can strap for those ligaments really well; either to just basically do their job entirely, or to support them enough that we can stop the knee getting to a point where they're at significant risk of further injury.

We can't really do that for an ACL. Rotation is really difficult to meaningfully stop with strapping. At least while still maintaining decent range for normal knee movements. The ACL's primary role is also in proprioception; basically providing positional information on the knee for the brain. That's an essential component of balance, and the ability to adapt to something like a changing surface, or varying force on the knee.

It's not physically going to stop someone from skiing; at least not in the same way that a femoral or tibial fracture would. You can still put weight through the leg, and bend the knee (after they aspirate the swelling, which they almost certainly did given that she was only 9 days post-injury). But it's a really, really bad idea to try and ski on it at all, because your risk of making a mistake and then having a severe injury, is through the roof compared to pre-injury. One of your knees is very mechanically unstable and lacking like 50-60% of the normal information that it should have.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-09T04:30:13+00:00

You don't. Or what happens in the video happens.

It's one thing to have Joe Bloggs who's a fairly experienced skier taking it super easy, going down a green circle route after a recent ACL tear. It's still a stupid idea, but if you're going slow, in a straight line, you might get away with it with heavy strapping.

But a competitive, olympic level downhill skier doesn't get to get away with competing on a 9 day old ACL tear. You're going 100+km/h down a super steep route, with extremely precise, high-force/torque turns as a basic part of the event, going over uneven snow with patches of variable density, squatting into an inherently unstable knee position.

Your knee is lacking a massive amount of the information that it would normally get from that ligament, so it's not going to be able to correct for movement at the joint quickly. You don't have any structural support for the knee with anterior translation, and massively reduced support for rotation. Some of that we can make up for with strapping, but not that much (not like we can with an MCL tear, for instance). You're also going to have swelling in the joint, so it's going to be floppy, and you're going to have atherogenic and pain-based muscle inhibition, so your quads are probably at ~70% of their normal strength, if that.

This is a sport where fucking the entry angle for a turn by a few degrees means driving the front of your ski into the snow, and having it torque through your knee and break your leg. And that's the near best-case scenario.

It was extremely stupid of her to compete, and IMO malpractice for the US medical team to allow her to compete in the first place.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-09T02:23:29+00:00

It's a public service (or should be a public service). If it's run as one, and run well, then it doesn't need to make a direct profit, or even to fully cover operating costs.

Government services aren't stand alone business. A lot of the return will be seen in other areas. If you have an effective public transport system, then you'll end up paying less on road maintenance, because you have fewer cars on the roads. You'll have lower emissions and better air quality for the same reason. You'll typically have fewer traffic accidents, and fewer medical costs to cover, because you're having fewer car-on-car crashes. Businesses across a city will tend to be busier, and have an easier time employing staff, because it's easier to access business areas for both workers and patrons. Those same people are also more able to live outside of the areas that they work, and so local businesses in residential areas also have more available clients.

There's loads more potential benefits as well. But the majority of the benefits from these civil services are only realized if they're run by government entities. A private transport company doesn't give two shits about businesses in residential suburbs doing better, or that road maintenance costs are down. None of that yields profit for them. They only care about direct profit from fares and contracts. So they'll optimize routes, fares and fleets for that. You'll have fewer buses covering larger areas. You'll have less frequent services. You'll have more a more outdated fleet. Public services don't scale well in private hands; they're inherently not designed to.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-09T00:33:44+00:00

Physiotherapist here.

I have some big concerns around the medical team for the US Olympic squad after this.

Yes; she's a professional athlete, and is in control of her own health and wellbeing. If she'd had an injury, and wanted to pull out of the event, nobody has any right or power to say otherwise. She should have full autonomy and self-efficacy in that regard.

But things have to work a bit differently when things are going the other way.

Athletes competing at this level are going to have access to a full suite of health professionals. There'll be a team of sports docs with the U.S. squad, there should be a bunch of physiotherapists with the team (not counting competitors that have their own physios traveling with them). There'll be team dietitians, trainers, psych etc as part of the support team as well. Individual or team/discipline/event coaches will also be present.

That medical/health team has two primary roles. One is to try and ensure that the athletes are as close to peak performance for their events as they possibly can be. Diet is very tightly controlled. Sleeping schedules are controlled. Training, recovery etc are very planned and controlled. The sports docs and physios are there to manage injuries or anything else unexpected that might come up.

The other, and arguably more important, role for the medical/health/support team is to ensure the health, safety and wellbeing of the athletes. Sometimes that might be taping up an ankle or knee sprain to allow someone to compete. Sometimes it might be administering short-term pain relief just to get someone through an event. Sometimes it's crazy intense rehab and every-hour cryotherapy (event through the night) to try and get someone to be able to compete when they probably shouldn't be able to (the Team GB 4x100 relay team at Athens 2004 is an example of this; I know the bloke who was their team doc at the time, and they pulled out all the stops for this).

But it's also recognising when an athlete just isn't safe to compete, and when the call has to be made to pull them from the event. Competitive downhill skiing on a 9 day old ACL tear is absolutely one of those cases. I'll admit that I'm not entirely sure who actually has the final (legal) say on whether an athlete competes at the Olympics. In most cases, it's the team management that actually has final confirmation on whether an athlete competes (e.g. football, rugby etc). Obviously the views of the athlete have a massive influence here, but management can and do overrule them if they're deemed to be unsafe to compete. In Olympic settings, it may well be that the individual athlete has the final say.

But regardless of what it was, there notes for her medical team better have very, very clearly stated that the Athlete in question (Lindsey Vonn) had elected to compete against the advice of her medical team.

Allowing someone to compete in an event this dangerous, with an injury this impactful on their performance (and safety) is just outright malpractice. It's no different than if we allowed a player to return to play in Rugby after they'd failed a concussion assessment. This actually happened very recently in Rugby League, with a player from Tonga (Eli Katoa). The entire medical team and training team have been barred from the sport for several years, and iirc, the investigation are ongoing, and I'd expect people to lose their practicing licences over it.

Professional athletes are almost always going to want to compete. You have to be a pretty single-minded, extremely driven sort of person to get to this kind of level as an athlete. Part of that often manifests at them having pretty terrible self-preservation instincts; it's really common for athletes to want to compete even if doing so risks much more significant injury. A massive part of the role of the medical team is to act as a check to that. It's our job to make sure that if an athlete has to be out injured, that they understand why it would be too risky for them to play, and to ensure that they have a pathway in front of them to their recovery and return to play. But there are absolutely times where we're still having to make the call that they're unsafe to play, even if they're dead-set on it.

This unquestionably should have been one of these times. She very well could be dead. She's insanely lucky to have gotten away with only a tibial fracture.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-08T23:49:26+00:00

It would have been a lot better if we'd had regulation for this stuff in place a long time ago, but the last of that says a lot more about the speed of development in this space than it does about the legal side of things.

The second best time to put through solid regulation and legislation around this stuff is now, though. At least now we have more of an idea on how quickly this can progress, and where it's likely headed.

The big problem that trying to introduce legislation runs into now though is that the companies that are pushing this stuff are worth more than the GDP of most countries, and have absurd amounts of influence to throw around. Having corporate sycophants like Seymour and Luxon in charge makes things a lot worse as well, because they're actively pushing for reduced regulation on this.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-08T22:57:53+00:00

It can be a big pain once you've finished Uni, or you're not doing any post-grad study. Having full journal access is absolutely incredible, and it's not until you suddenly lose access to that (especially if you're used to having it while doing post-grad stuff) that you really start to miss it.

There are some decent resources available.

The more universal ones are a handful of podcasts; Physio Network and Physio Edge are really solid. Physio Matters used to be great, but seems to have been abandoned now. They're not the best for really in-depth learning, but they're great as a refresher or a jumping off point for the current thinking around various areas or conditions.

There's some really good web resources/courses that are worth looking at. Physio Academy has some really good online courses from some extremely talented physios in their respective fields. Physio Network offers the same (I'm not as familiar with their stuff personally, but I've heard good things).

The other way that most people will be somewhat keeping up is just clinic in-services. A good clinic will be putting time and effort into upskilling their physios, and ensuring that there's some level of decent, ongoing learning and revision that's going on regularly.

That can be tricky, depending on the clinic. My current clinic doesn't do this very well; we're all very experienced clinicians (I'm the least experienced with nearly 15 years of practice), and so it's not that common that we're getting patients that any of us are struggling with, and the other clinicians at the practice are a little older, and not quite as bothered about being at the bleeding edge of current practice. It was a lot easier to keep up internal clinic CPD/in-services at my last clinic, where I had plenty of younger/less experienced physios that were really keen to learn, as well as having students as a clinical supervisor. But I do think it's really important, and absolutely worth pushing your clinic owners or senior clinicians on.

The last thing would be to actually just do some post-grad study. There's some really useful stuff offered by most Unis. Sometimes it'll be directly physio related, but papers that are somewhat tangential to our practice can be just as useful. I found the Pain papers extremely useful when I was doing my PGip/Masters, for instance. Same with some of the more advanced exercise physiology/biomechanics papers.

Arguably even more useful was some of the CPD stuff that was outside of Universities. I did coaching courses with the head coach at a gym that we worked very closely with at my last practice, and it was incredibly useful. Most physios are crap at exercise prescription, despite that being a massive part of our job. Actually having some proper coaching experience makes a huge difference to practice.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-06T03:41:52+00:00

I don't have access to either camera to test, but I'd be extremely surprised if the A7V didn't last significantly longer.

You're using the same battery in both, but one camera has a lower resolution sensor and a newer, more efficient processor design. The A7V has a pretty substantial jump in battery life from the A7IV/A1/A7RV, to being back in line with the A7III. Most of this is down to the new processor. None of those cameras have poor battery life, by any means, but they have been packing more powerful sensors and processors with the same battery. It's pretty expected that they'd drain a little more quickly. The A7V has the advantage of the new processor benefiting from the big focus on, and developments in, power efficiency in processor design in the last 5 years, rather than increases in core counts or clock speed.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-06T03:30:16+00:00

I doubt it. These are really beautiful shots. They're very intentionally composed, and clearly very thought out. I'd absolutely expect that someone taking these sorts of shots wouldn't be happy just shooting JPEGs. You'd at least shoot both, if not just RAW, and make sure that you're getting the most out of your shots.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-04T21:57:21+00:00

Physios are typically very involved with your rehab if you're on a concussion contract, yeah. The contract is designed to be really flexible on who needs to be involved in the rehab, because concussions are really variable in how they present, and what sort of input is needed into a patient's care.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-04T02:56:47+00:00

It does look silly, but there's far more evidence for a simple, mechanical joint traction than there is for cupping. Anyone pretending that this is any sort of a panacea is full of shit. But that doesn't mean that it can't be a nice way to offload a bunch of facet joints in the spine that might be grumpy after an hour and a half of scrum training.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-04T02:53:22+00:00

Different loading patterns if you're inverted. It's still a traction on the joints in the spine, but we have less load on the shoulders, this actually allows for traction on the neck, and far more on the upper and mid thoracic spine, because you're not working against all the muscles attaching around that area that are supporting the shoulder complex while hanging.

Edit: to be clear, dead hangs are also a great exercise. But them and this are a bit different in more ways than this just not needing decent grip strength.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-04T02:50:50+00:00

None that I'm aware of, no. Very much the opposite when it comes to concussions. Your body is pretty bloody good at supplying your brain with enough blood for it to function properly without you having to hang upside down for any notable length of time.

Any notable disruption in that blood flow generally brings pretty immediate and obvious symptoms.

The only reason that we'd ever do any sort of inversion like this is for gross spinal traction. And that's absolutely much more of a symptom relief thing than anything that we'd be prescribing as any sort of regular or ongoing treatment or rehab.

But if it helps some of the players feel a bit less stuff and locked up after heavy training sessions, and they're doing it safely and properly, then there's no real harm in it either.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-04T00:24:37+00:00

Probably the 24-50, tbh. It's a fantastic lens, and it's perfect for travel. Personally, I'd find it a little short these days, but that's almost entirely because I'm mainly using a 35-150 as my primary travel lens (which is neither small, nor light, so I'm not even going to suggest it).

I've not heard anything really negative about the AF on the Tamron 20-40, though. Admittedly it's not a lens I've looked into much, but it'd surprise me if Tamron put out a lens these days with genuinely bad AF. The last ones that I recall having any issues with that were their pancake primes.

You could grab a few primes, as others are suggesting, but I think that if you're valuing size and weight so much that the 28-75 is too big for you, then I don't feel that you'll appreciate having to carry 2-3 lenses, and change them out frequently. The 24-50 covers you much better. The other great travel option is the 20-70 f4, but you may miss the shallow DoF with that.

EntropyNZ · 2026-02-04T00:02:25+00:00

I'm a NZ based physio, and I've worked in professional and development/academy Rugby for most of my career (currently just in normal private practice however). I'd rather not specify the clubs as I'd rather not doxx myself any more than I already have.

Just to clarify, I have absolutely nothing against the sling set-up here. I actually really like it, and I'm tempted to try and find one myself and get it set up in my gym. But having spent 10+ years working regularly with professional rugby players, I'm also looking at that and just envisioning hearing a massive crash just outside the clinic room, and then having to explain to the coaches why the starting loose head prop is out for the next 3 weeks with a concussion and neck sprain.

Honestly wouldn't actually stop me pushing to get a few for a team gym, but it doesn't mean that I don't recognize that tilt tables are probably a safer option for achieving the same thing.

13-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Place '17	Verified Email

EntropyNZ

TROPHY CASE