{"id":8285,"date":"2026-09-22T23:33:18","date_gmt":"2026-09-22T21:33:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blueportance.com\/2026\/09\/22\/back-pain-and-biotensegrity-what-if-your-spine-isnt-a-stack-of-vertebrae\/"},"modified":"2026-10-25T22:44:32","modified_gmt":"2026-10-25T21:44:32","slug":"back-pain-biotensegrity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blueportance.com\/en\/2026\/09\/22\/back-pain-biotensegrity\/","title":{"rendered":"Back Pain and Biotensegrity: What If Your Spine Isn\u2019t a Stack of Vertebrae?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n
\n\n

\nBy Gil Ayache, PhD<\/strong> \u2014 Mines Paris \u2013 PSL\n

\n

\n We often picture the back as a stack of vertebrae separated by discs.\n Biotensegrity offers another view: bones, muscles, ligaments, and fascia work\n together as a coupled system that can transmit and redistribute mechanical loads.\n Recent studies now make it possible to measure some of these remote mechanical\n interactions in living humans.\n <\/p>\n<\/section>\n

\n

\nA note before reading.<\/strong>\n Biotensegrity is a biomechanical model. It does not mean that fascia alone\n explains back pain, nor that tension located at a distance automatically\n identifies where pain comes from. The data presented here are meant to help\n you better understand how the system works mechanically.\n <\/p>\n<\/section>\n

The Dinosaur Skeleton That Changed How We See the Body<\/h2>\n

\n In the mid-1970s, American orthopedic surgeon\n Stephen Levin<\/strong> was looking for a model that could explain the stability\n and movement of the skeleton as something more than a simple assembly of levers.\n Levin recalls that he regularly visited the Smithsonian National Museum\n of Natural History<\/strong> to study dinosaur skeletons, yet could not make their\n architecture fit the classical mechanical model he knew.\n [1]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n On the National Mall in Washington, another structure caught his attention:\n Kenneth Snelson\u2019s Needle Tower<\/strong>, installed at the Hirshhorn Museum,\n part of the Smithsonian. In this sculpture, the rigid elements do not rest\n on one another: they are held in place by a continuous network of cables\n under tension. [1]<\/a><\/sup>\n[2]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n Snelson had developed this principle of \u201cfloating compression\u201d after working\n with architect R. Buckminster Fuller<\/strong>. It was Fuller who coined the\n term tensegrity<\/strong>, a contraction of tensional integrity<\/em>, to\n describe this combination of continuous tension and discontinuous compression.\n [2]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n The bars don\u2019t stack. And yet, the whole structure stands.\n <\/strong><\/p>\n

\n\"Dinosaur\n
Figure 1<\/strong> \u2014 From the dinosaur to the Needle Tower: rigid elements that do not stack, held in place by a continuous network of tension (Needle Tower, Kenneth Snelson, 1968).<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n

\n Levin saw in this architecture a different way of thinking about living systems. He would\n go on to develop the concept of biotensegrity<\/strong>: the application of\n tensegrity principles to biological organization, particularly to the spine.\n [3]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

A Spine Is Not a Tower of Blocks<\/h2>\n

\n We tend to imagine our skeleton as the frame of a building.\n The vertebrae would be stacked on top of one another, the discs would act\n as shock absorbers, and the muscles would pull on the whole structure to produce\n movement.\n <\/p>\n

\n This picture is useful.\n <\/p>\n

\n However, it is incomplete.\n <\/p>\n

\n In the biotensegrity model proposed by Levin, biological structures\n are viewed as systems in which elements under compression\n are integrated into a network of distributed tension. Applied to the spine,\n this model leads us to consider bones, muscles, ligaments, fascia,\n and joints together rather than isolating each part.\n [3]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n A vertebra never works alone. A muscle never pulls into empty space.\n <\/strong><\/p>\n

The Spine: A Spider\u2019s Web, Not a Tower of Blocks<\/h2>\n

\n This is therefore where fascia becomes particularly interesting.\n <\/p>\n

\n Fascia is connective tissue organized in networks and layers,\n associated with muscles and many other structures. The current\n literature describes its role in transmitting mechanical loads\n and in interactions between anatomically connected regions.\n [4]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n However, this does not mean that \u201ceverything comes from fascia.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n It means something more interesting:\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nA mechanical load is not necessarily confined\n to the place where it appears.<\/strong>\n Some interactions can be transmitted through connected\n musculofascial structures. [4]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n For a long time, this idea relied mainly on anatomy, biomechanical\n models, and indirect experiments.\n <\/p>\n

\n Now, it is becoming possible to observe some of these interactions\n in a living human being.\n <\/p>\n

Why It Changes Everything: Proof Through Measurement<\/h2>\n

\n In 2024, Eleftherios Kellis, Afxentios Kekelekis, and Eleni Drakonaki<\/strong>\n published a particularly interesting study in the Journal of Anatomy<\/em>.\n <\/p>\n

\n The researchers examined 14 young, healthy men<\/strong>.\n They used shear-wave ultrasound \u2014 an elastography technique\n that estimates the mechanical properties of a tissue \u2014\n and simultaneously measured the thoracolumbar fascia and the fascia\n of the semitendinosus and semimembranosus muscles.\n [5]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n The protocol is simple: the knee is placed at 0\u00b0, 45\u00b0, and 90\u00b0, first\n passively, then during submaximal isometric contractions\n of the knee flexors. [5]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

So What Happens?<\/h3>\n

\n When the knee moves passively from 90\u00b0 of flexion to extension,\n the shear modulus of the thoracolumbar fascia increases significantly.\n A significant increase is also observed during active contraction\n of the knee flexors. [5]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n In other words, you act at the level of the thigh, and a mechanical change becomes measurable\n in the tissues of the lower back.\n <\/p>\n

\n The authors conclude that hamstring exercise may\n remotely influence the stiffness of the fascia surrounding the lumbar region<\/strong>.\n [5]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n However, this study does not show that hamstring tension causes\n low back pain. It shows something more precise:\n a remote mechanical interaction can be measured in vivo<\/strong>\n under the conditions studied. [5]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n\"Knee\n
Figure 2<\/strong> \u2014 Action at a distance: changing the mechanical state of the hamstrings is accompanied by a measurable change in the thoracolumbar fascia (based on Kellis et al., 2024).<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n

An Old Thigh Injury\u2026 and Different Lower-Back Mechanics<\/h2>\n

\n In addition, the same team took the observation a step further in a second study\n published in 2024.\n <\/p>\n

\n It compared 11 soccer players with a history of hamstring\n injury<\/strong> with 13 players without a comparable history<\/strong>.\n The properties of the thoracolumbar fascia, the erector spinae, and the multifidus\n were measured using the same elastography technique.\n [6]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n The modulus of the thoracolumbar fascia was significantly higher\n in the group with a history of injury. The authors also observed\n higher values for some lumbar muscles.\n [6]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n Still, we should be careful not to jump to conclusions: this cross-sectional study does not show\n that the thigh injury caused this difference in the lower back.\n It highlights an association<\/strong> between a history\n of distal injury and different mechanical properties in the\n thoracolumbar region. [6]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n

\nThe nuance is essential:<\/strong>\n a remote mechanical relationship can be measured without\n turning that relationship into a diagnosis of causality.\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

So, Can Tension in the Leg Cause Back Pain?<\/h2>\n

\n This is where we need to resist an appealing but overly simple conclusion.\n <\/p>\n

\n The studies above do not allow us to claim:\n \u201cyour low back pain comes from your hamstring.\u201d<\/strong>\n<\/p>\n

\n Likewise, they do not show that tension in the foot or calf\n automatically travels up to the lower back.\n <\/p>\n

\n On the other hand, they show that remote mechanical interactions\n exist and can be objectively measured.\n <\/p>\n

\n A systematic review published in 2025 identified\n 19 studies meeting its inclusion criteria<\/strong> on\n remote myofascial interventions. The included studies report\n effects on range of motion, pain, or function, among others,\n but the results are heterogeneous and the authors emphasize how difficult it is\n to isolate a single mechanism. [4]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n The review discusses several possible explanations, including mechanical\n transmission through tissues and neurophysiological mechanisms.\n Their respective contributions have not been definitively settled.\n [4]<\/a><\/sup>\n<\/p>\n

\n And that is precisely what makes a living body more interesting than an assembly of parts.\n <\/strong><\/p>\n

So Where Does Back Pain Fit In?<\/h2>\n

\n This is where biotensegrity becomes truly useful.\n <\/p>\n

\n Not because it provides a new structure to blame.\n <\/p>\n

\n But above all because it changes the question.\n <\/p>\n

\n The classic question is:\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cWhich part is damaged?\u201d\n <\/strong><\/p>\n

\n The disc? A vertebra? A joint? A muscle?\n <\/p>\n

\n These questions remain important. However, a systems-based reading\n lets us add others:\n <\/p>\n