Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Massage vs ART
Quote | Reply
As I start to ramp up training for IM WI, I have been giving some thought to getting regular massages and/or ART during training to keep me healthy. I have recently found a great sports massage therapist who is a runner herself and has tons of experience with athletes. Plus as sponsor of my running club and her pricing ($45 for a massage that usually lasts between 1:15 and 1:30) will allow me to indulge 2 times a month or so. But I keep hearing great things about ART. I have an ART therapist near me that comes highly recommended by his session start at $95 which would limit the amount of times I could see him. Can anyone compare/contrast a good sports massage with ART? Does anyone use both? How frequent do you see either? Any advice really would help.

Thanks!
Deanna
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I use ART twice a month or so. My ART practicioner is also a chiropractor, and since I use them for that stuff too, then the ART is only $25 per session - my health insurance covers the chiro part 100%. It has kept me injury free, and has healed up my injuries faster than without. I really like the therapy and won't give it up. Without insurance the fee is $65, which would probably limit me to 1x per mo.
I can't really speak on massage as it's $60+ per hour around here and I haven't used it much.
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I like both and my ART is also at the chiro, so it's the $25 insurance co-pay. I like the ART for specific things when they crop up--hip issue mostly, and massage for general maintenance.

clm

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm a fan of ART as well, but I probably wouldn't be for $95! That sounds like a huuuuuuuuuuuge rip off. The most I paid for a session was $30. I used both, but am now just using massage because the issues I went to ART for have worked themselves out (at least for the time being). Man, I would be suspicious of a practitioner charging so much for a service.


______________________________________
I know I'm promiscuous, but in a classy way
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [cuds] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Most of the ART practitioners I have found in my area (west burbs of Chicago) are also Chiropractors which I guess is why the fee is $95.00. I would assume I get normal chiro care and ART in the same session. My insurance has a super high deductible that I have to meet before its starts paying for chiro visits so using insurance isn't really an option at this point. Maybe I will stick with massage and add ART later if I end up with some pain, etc.
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Same as the others for me. My insurance pays for ART, as it is my chiro, $15 copay. Massage much more $$. ART is effective for me for many things, but not everything, and it bums me out when I get ART and it doesn't help, but for a day or two, that's when I know I have to take a few days rest, or it blows out of control. I always give it a try for any problem I have. During really hard weeks, I prefer a massage if I don't have a specific injury, but rather just muscle soreness/fatigue. I seem to be injury prone as I get older, never anything serious, just lots of niggles every now and then. I don't understand how one day I can run and have this niggle in my achilles (or anywhere, I have travelling niggles from my feet up to my neck, no body part is safe for me!), and worry about it constantly during the run and the next 24 hours, and go for a run the next day, and its completely fine. I have a massage therapist who does work on a lot of runners, and she has helped me as much as my ART guy, but I visit ART more often.
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
All the ART's around here are Chiro's too. It's too bad you're getting gouged so badly on chiro's. At least you can get some awesome massage time in for cheap! :)


______________________________________
I know I'm promiscuous, but in a classy way
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I use both ART and massage. I have ART done every 2 weeks. It keeps me injury free. It costs me 90 bucks/session. When my insurance paid for treatments it was 65.oo, but I changed insurance companies. damn. My ART practioner is also a chiro. He does more than just ART when I see him gastron/accupunture and tens. He works on my "problem area" at that time, but he also gives me the once over. I find it more effective than massage. I use massage less frequently now maybe once a month which costs 80.00 with tip.
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have used ART more for specific parts of my body. I use it with my chiro and he works on specific, problem areas using a combo of Chiropractic and ART work. The frequency has been dictated by issues I'm having. I've used massage for a more general type of relaxation, and loosening of muscles. While I have the massage therapist focus on certain tight areas, they usually do a complete pass over my body. I can't really imagine going to the ART without a specific complaint, but maybe I'm wrong?


----
Suffering on the the bike is always more fun than suffering on the run.
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sorry for the naivete, What is ART?



When it's good, it's good. When it's bad, you suffer.
Dan
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [WryMouth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Active Release Technique. I have never actually had it done so I don't know if I can explain it well. But according to their website it is a state of the art soft tissue system/movement based massage technique that treats problems with muscles, tendons, ligaments, fascia and nerves. I have just heard great successes about using ART to treat muscle strains/etc.

http://www.activerelease.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'd agree with what others have said from my experience of doing both. I use(d) ART for more specific areas, injuries, tightnesses, problems. I use(d) massage for general loosening.

The best way I can describe ART is deep, specific, assisted stretching of a muscle. The practitioner will evaluate your issue and with his/her knowledge of the interconnection of muscles will apply pressure in an appropriate direction (make a pass) a few times over each related muscle to your issue in a certain area. Not sure if that makes sense.

I know one ART practitioner on here could give a much better description...Marisol, where are you? :)
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [instigator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I use both. I go see my ART/chiropractor every 2 weeks when I have the normal aches and pains, and weekly (or more) when I have a specific injury. I also get a DEEP tissue massage once a month, although I should probably go more often. I don't know what I'd do without ART, though. I go in with what I think is an injury that will keep me sidelined for months, and usually end up feeling great by the end of the week.
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [mrybaytri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When I was training for IMCDA in 03 I had weekly massages and did ART usually 2x a month. I agree with the others in that I used the massage as a form to loosen my body up and ART for the areas that were causing me grief.

If you aren't injury prone then ART isn't something you necessarily need but it is always something to keep on the back burner once issues start rearing their ugly heads.

____________________________
Life is Short...Run Long
Quote Reply
Re: Massage vs ART [wolffpack] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
From my point of view Massage is the way to go.. Most Sports massage therapist know the "when " where" and "why" to use different tech. Myo fascial release is the same as ART.


Mike
http://www.sohmar.com
outside Chicago
southwestern Suburbs
Quote Reply