Stretching and Hypermobility: What the Evidence Actually Says

You stretch, it feels lovely for about twenty minutes, and then you’re tight again. If you’re hypermobile, that loop is probably so familiar it’s stopped registering as a thing that happens, and the advice you get almost never goes past it. Stretch more. Stretch properly. Hold it for longer. Do it every morning and it’ll stick eventually. None of which does anything about the twenty minutes, and after a few years of that most people quietly decide they must be doing it wrong.

You’re not doing it wrong. Stretching is doing more or less exactly what stretching does, which is a very different thing from what you were told it does, and once you can see which bit is actually moving, the twenty minutes makes complete sense.

Now, this matters more for those with hypermobility than it does for anybody else, as the entire stretching industry is built on selling more range, and range is the one thing you already have in abundance. Everyone else is being sold something they’re short of. You’re being sold more of your actual problem, in a lovely calm voice, usually by somebody who has never had to think about what a joint does at the far end of its travel.

So, this is the long version. What stretching genuinely changes, why you feel tight when you measurably aren’t short of anything, what the fascia industry can and can’t back up, and what to do instead. It’s not a short read, and there’s a reason for that, as the sixty second version of this is what got everybody into trouble in the first place.

Lax and tight at the same time isn’t a contradiction

Hypermobility and flexibility get used as though they’re the same word, and they really aren’t.

Flexibility is how far a joint will travel when something moves it. It’s a measurement, and it’s trainable. Hypermobility is a structural trait, where joints have more available range than average, usually across a good few of them at once, and it tends to run in families ^[1]. Being hypermobile is a trait rather than a diagnosis, and plenty of hypermobile people go through life with no trouble at all. The clinical labels, hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and hypermobility spectrum disorder, are for when the hypermobility arrives packaged with pain, instability, fatigue, gut symptoms and the rest of the list ^[1][2].

One thing worth knowing before anybody explains your body to you. hEDS is still the only type of Ehlers-Danlos with no genetic test to confirm it, so it’s diagnosed by a clinician working through criteria rather than by a blood sample, and what’s actually different in the tissue at a molecular level genuinely isn’t known yet ^[3][4]. Which means anybody telling you confidently that your tightness is your collagen is running well ahead of the evidence, and quite a lot of those people have letters after their name.

So, feeling tight doesn’t contradict your diagnosis. Feeling tight and having too much range are entirely compatible, as one of them is a measurement and the other is a sensation, and they’re produced by completely different things. That gap, between what a goniometer says about your hamstring and what your hamstring is telling you, is basically what the rest of this article is about.

What stretching is actually doing

Start with the part nobody argues about. Stretch regularly and your range goes up ^[5][6]. That’s about as well established as anything in this field, and it holds across pretty much every muscle group anybody has bothered to test ^[7]. The argument is entirely about what changed to allow it.

There are three candidates. The muscle got longer. The tissue got less stiff. Or nothing much happened in the tissue and you simply became willing to travel further before your body said no.

That third one has a name, stretch tolerance, and it’s doing most of the heavy lifting. Pull the mechanism work together and the thing that reliably moves is how much passive force somebody will put up with at the end of the range, alongside a modest drop in stiffness, and the range gain tracks both of those ^[8]. Run a stretching programme for six weeks, then go and measure the muscle itself, and you can get a real increase in ankle range with no measurable change in the length of the muscle fibres, the angle they sit at, the stiffness of the muscle or the stiffness of the tendon ^[9]. Measure how sensitive somebody is to pain and how hard the tester pushed when taking the reading, and those two things predict the range change better than whether the person had been stretching at all ^[10].

Read that last one again, as it’s the one that reframes everything. A chunk of what we call flexibility is a negotiation between you and the person holding your leg.

The muscle length question is genuinely unsettled though, and we’d be overselling it if we told you otherwise. One pooled look at muscle architecture finds a trivial increase in resting fibre length overall, larger where the stretching was high volume and properly intense ^[11]. A bigger one finds no meaningful long term change in fibre length at all, and puts the range gains down to reduced stiffness and increased tolerance instead ^[8]. Two careful reads of overlapping evidence, two different answers, which usually means the effect is small enough to get pushed around by how you measure it and how much stretching people actually did. The broader reviews of muscle and tendon mechanics land in much the same place, which is that the changes are real but modest and depend heavily on the protocol ^[12][13].

So, the honest version. Stretching reliably buys you range, mostly by changing how much travel your nervous system is prepared to allow, with a bit of genuine stiffness change alongside it, and possibly a small amount of structural lengthening if you do an awful lot of it at high intensity. What it is not, in any population anybody has measured properly, is the lengthening of a short muscle back to its correct size.

If the range gain is mostly your nervous system agreeing to allow more travel, then in a joint that already travels too far, you have just spent twenty minutes talking it into allowing more of the thing that was causing you bother.

Where the shortened muscle story came from

Everybody’s heard it. You sit at a desk, your hip flexors shorten, your hamstrings shorten, and stretching is how you get the length back. It’s such a tidy story that it’s survived decades of almost nobody asking where it came from.

It came from casts.

A muscle really does lose sarcomeres, the little contractile units lined up in series along a muscle fibre, when it’s held immobilised in a shortened position, and it loses range along with them. That was shown in animals, in plaster, and half an hour a day of intermittent stretch turned out to be enough to prevent most of it ^[14][15]. More recent animal work found the same pattern and added an age twist, with older muscle building up a great deal more passive stiffness after immobilisation and getting its sarcomere number back considerably more slowly ^[16].

All of that is real and it’s useful, as long as you’ve been in a cast. Your office chair isn’t a cast though. You get up, you walk to the kettle, you go to the loo, you reach for something on a high shelf, you roll over eight times in the night. The muscle spends a decent chunk of its day at or near full length, and there’s essentially no evidence that ordinary sitting produces the structural shortening you see in a limb that’s been immobilised for a fortnight.

Which is not the same as saying nothing mechanical is ever going on, and that’s a jump the internet makes far too casually. Muscle stiffness, extensibility, and how force gets transmitted through the tissue wrapped around a muscle are all real, all variable, and all capable of changing with how you live ^[17]. The animal immobilisation work doesn’t license ruling any of that out in somebody who has never been near a plaster cast ^[16]. And in hypermobility specifically, the attempts to measure tissue mechanics precisely enough to tell hypermobile people apart from everybody else haven’t landed on one clean difference you could hang a treatment on ^[18].

So, the safe read is this: your desk job isn’t shortening your muscles in the way the poster in the physio room suggested, and that still leaves room for your tissue behaving somewhat differently from the next person’s. Both of those can be true at once, and most of the loud opinions online pick one and pretend the other doesn’t exist.

Why this advice is so hard to shift

The shortened muscle model has three enormous advantages over the correct one, and not one of them is that it’s true.

It’s intuitive. A muscle is a rope, the rope is short, you pull the rope. Everybody can picture that. Nobody can picture a brain making a prediction from a noisy signal, and if we’re competing on how easy something is to draw, we lose every time.

It’s easy to measure. Range of motion takes ten seconds and a plastic protractor, and it moves, so a clinician can show you a number that changed and you both leave the room pleased. Measuring whether your nervous system has become more confident about your knee is slow, awkward and has no protractor attached to it.

And it works immediately, for about twenty minutes. In a world where most of what you’ve tried has done precisely nothing, twenty minutes of relief feels like the best result you’ve had in years.

Put those three together and you’ve got a piece of advice that’s easy to explain, easy to demonstrate and produces an instant result, which is very nearly a perfect product. Whether it’s changed anything by March isn’t a question the room is set up to ask though. That’s not a conspiracy and it isn’t anybody being dishonest. It’s just what happens when the thing that’s easy to measure and the thing that matters aren’t the same thing (happens a fair bit actually).

The consequence lands on you though. A decade of stretching behind you, a body exactly as tight as it was, and a quiet suspicion that you’re the one getting it wrong.

So why does it feel tight

Right, this is the question that actually matters, and it’s the one that always gets skipped, as the answer takes longer than a reel.

Tightness is a sensation. Your brain produces it, out of whatever information it has available, and it no more requires a short muscle than hunger requires an empty stomach. In hypermobility there are at least three main things feeding into that sensation, and in our experience most hypermobile people have all three running at once, which is also why single answers never work.

The signal coming back from the joint isn’t very good

Your brain hasn’t got a camera. Everything it knows about where your knee is, how fast it’s moving and how much load is going through it arrives as a stream of information from receptors in the joint capsule, the muscle, the tendon and the skin. In more compliant tissue, that stream is noisier. And a brain making movement decisions on a noisy signal makes worse ones, which is a very different problem from a weak muscle and needs a very different answer.

This shows up over and over. Hypermobile people are less precise at knowing where their own hand is when they can’t see it, with the scatter in their estimates roughly double that of everyone else ^[19]. Joint position sense at the elbow and the knee comes out worse in generalised hypermobility too, although in that particular group grip strength and functional performance were no different, so compensation is clearly possible for some ^[20]. Children with hypermobility syndrome show the same pattern at the knee, alongside lower muscle torque ^[21]. Lumbar position sense is poorer, and it sits in between the hypermobility and the balance problems rather than off to one side of them ^[22]. Take vision away and postural sway gets noticeably worse, and giving the feet better sensory information improves it a bit ^[23]. Pull the balance and falls work together and the same picture keeps turning up, more sway, altered muscle activity, more falls and more fear of falling, on evidence that is honestly thin and inconsistently defined ^[24].

One caution, as this is the exact spot where this field overclaims and where we’ve seen the claim repeated in places that should know better. Poorer precision does not mean the size of the deficit tracks how hypermobile you are, and it does not mean the size of that deficit tracks how much pain you’re in. In the hand work it did neither of those things ^[19]. It’s a real finding about the quality of the signal, and it is not a dial that explains your symptoms. Anyone telling you that your Beighton score predicts how good your body awareness is has got that from an introduction rather than from a result, and that’s worth knowing before somebody counts your hypermobile joints and tells you what the number means about your symptoms.

What a poor signal does do is make your brain hedge, and that brings us to the second thing.

Your muscles are covering for the ligaments

A joint is held together by passive structures, so ligament, capsule and the shape of the bones, and by active ones, meaning muscle. If the passive side is more compliant, the active side picks up the slack, and it does that by co contracting, which is muscles on both sides of a joint switching on together to splint the thing in place.

It’s a sensible strategy, and it’s genuinely expensive. It costs energy all day long, it’s part of why hypermobile people are so often shattered by three in the afternoon, and it leaves muscle sitting in a state that feels, from the inside, exactly like tightness. If you want the longer version of that we’ve written about muscles that feel tight and weak at the same time separately, as it’s a whole subject on its own.

Be careful with this one though, as it’s a mechanism that makes an enormous amount of sense and has not actually been demonstrated to be the main driver of the tightness people report. That’s our read of why the sensation is so consistent across thousands of hypermobile people, and in our opinion it’s the best explanation going, but it’s an inference rather than a measured fact. What is measured is that muscle strength matters for what hypermobile people can do, and that proprioception muddies that relationship rather than sitting quietly alongside it ^[25].

Now, the obvious consequence of that. Stretch a muscle that’s guarding a joint your brain isn’t confident about, and you get relief for as long as the stretch is novel, then the brain reinstates the guard, because absolutely nothing has changed about its reason for guarding. Twenty minutes, in other words. Your hamstring isn’t being stubborn, it’s being employed.

The pain system has the volume turned up

In symptomatic hypermobility, a good proportion of people show signs that the pain system itself has become more sensitive, so ordinary input produces a larger response than it should ^[26]. That isn’t unique to hypermobile people, it’s a pattern seen across a lot of long standing pain conditions and it’s one of the busier areas of pain research at the moment ^[27]. It’s also not universal. It varies a great deal between individuals, including in teenagers, where the signs are clearly present in some and absent in others ^[28].

When that’s in play, a muscle at a perfectly ordinary length can produce a sensation of strain, and pulling on it harder is not an obviously clever response.

One thing to keep in mind through all of this, as it gets mangled constantly: the signal coming from a joint is not pain. They’re different phenomena, and you can’t read one off the other. Which cuts both ways. It doesn’t mean the pain is imaginary, and it doesn’t mean your brain is making a mistake. It means the sensation you get is built out of more inputs than the state of one muscle.

And for some, the small nerves in the skin

There’s a fourth strand worth naming, as it explains a particular flavour of tightness that never responds to anything.

Among those with hypermobility people referred into a specialist pain centre (because somebody suspected a nerve problem), most turned out to have measurable trouble with the small nerve fibres, either in how they were working or in how many of them there were ^[29]. Those fibres carry temperature, light touch and a lot of the odd sensations people find hard to describe. Burning. Crawling. A tight band that doesn’t sit where a muscle sits.

Take the setting as seriously as the finding though. That was a group already referred because a nerve problem was suspected, so it tells you what’s common in that room rather than what’s common in every hypermobile person, and the same research group has since gone on to look at how these symptoms overlap with other neurological signs ^[29][30]. If your tightness has a burning or electrical quality to it, or it moves about in ways that don’t match any muscle, it’s worth raising with somebody, as it’s a different problem with different management and stretching does nothing for it at all.

What your tightness actually feels like, and why that’s useful

This bit isn’t in the research, it’s from years of asking people the question, so treat it as our pattern recognition rather than as evidence. It’s still the most useful triage question we know.

A deep ache that eases with movement and comes back at rest, usually across the neck, the upper back, or the hips, is the one that behaves most like guarding. It tends to be worse on bad sleep, worse in a flare, and better on days when you feel steady on your feet.

A stiffness that’s worst in the first twenty minutes of the morning and then goes is much more about how a system behaves after hours of not moving than about muscle length, and it’s the one that responds best to just getting up and moving gently rather than to anything clever.

A pulling sensation at the end of a range, in one specific place, that’s the same every single time, is the one most likely to have something genuinely mechanical behind it, and it’s the one where targeted stretching is actually a reasonable idea.

And burning, buzzing, crawling, or a tight band that doesn’t follow a muscle, is the one to stop stretching and go and get looked at.

Four different sensations, four different explanations, all of them called tightness by the person feeling them and all of them treated with the same hamstring stretch by the internet.

What if you genuinely are tight somewhere

Being hypermobile doesn’t make you immune to having one properly restricted bit, and that needs saying plainly, as “hypermobile people shouldn’t stretch” gets taken a lot further than the evidence supports.

Plenty of hypermobile people have calves that won’t let the knee travel forward over the toe, or a hip that won’t extend, or one shoulder that stopped going overhead after a bad subluxation and never quite came back. Sometimes that’s a joint that’s been guarded and avoided for so long that the tissue around it has adapted to the position it’s been held in, which is a much milder relative of the cast situation and is a genuine thing rather than a made up one ^[17][16]. Sometimes it’s one specific structure. And occasionally it’s just that you’ve not taken that joint into that position at any point in your adult life.

In those cases, stretching that one thing, on purpose, for a stated reason, is completely reasonable, and the broader advice about not adding range to already lax joints was never meant to cover it ^[31]. What makes it sensible is that it’s specific. What makes the usual version unhelpful is that it’s the opposite of specific.

The test is easy enough. Can you name the joint, the direction and the reason. If you can, crack on. If the answer is “because I feel tight all over”, then stretching isn’t the tool that’s going to sort it.

Fascia, and the industry built on top of it

Now, fascia. This is where the money is, so this is where the claims get loudest and the evidence gets very, very quiet.

What fascia actually is

Fascia is the connective tissue that wraps and separates everything else. Muscle, nerve, vessel, organ, the lot. It’s real, it’s continuous, it’s richly supplied with nerve endings, and it does considerably more than hold things in place ^[32]. At a molecular level it’s an active tissue that responds to mechanical load, with hyaluronan sitting between the layers and letting them slide over one another ^[33][34]. None of that is fringe science. If somebody tells you fascia is unimportant packing material, they’re about twenty years out of date.

So, the argument isn’t about whether fascia matters. It’s about what a pair of hands, a foam roller or a lump of plastic can actually do to it.

Can you release it

Put the mechanics through a model and the forces needed to produce even a one per cent change in the shape of dense fascia, the sort in the iliotibial band or the sole of your foot, come out far beyond anything a human being can generate with their hands ^[35]. That same modelling work is clear that looser tissue may well deform more readily, so this isn’t a blanket verdict on touch. Dense fascia, though, does not appear to be something you can remodel by leaning on it, no matter how determined the elbow.

Measure it instead of modelling it and you get the same answer from the other direction. Deep soft tissue massage on healthy calves produced no change in the passive mechanical properties of the muscle and no change in ankle range at all ^[36]. A six week block of scraping with a metal tool increased range and increased how much passive force people would tolerate, while changing neither muscle stiffness nor tendon stiffness ^[37]. Range up, tissue unchanged. Exactly the same story as stretching, arriving by a completely different route, which should tell you something about what these treatments have in common.

Foam rolling sits in the same place. The people who study rolling for a living read their own literature as showing effects that are more plausibly neural than any mechanical release of anything ^[38], and the argument that manual work on fascia acts through the nervous system rather than by plastic deformation has been made from inside the fascia field itself for over twenty years ^[39]. This is not sceptics shouting from outside. It’s the field’s own explanation.

Then why does it feel so good

Because something real happened. It just wasn’t the thing written on the invoice.

You’ve put a large, novel, entirely non threatening sensory input into an area your nervous system has been treating with suspicion. You get an immediate change in how that area feels and how much range it’ll allow, and for a while the guarding backs off. That’s a genuine effect with a genuine mechanism, and it’s worth having.

It’s also temporary by its nature, as you changed the sensation rather than the reason for the sensation. Which is precisely why the appointment has to be repeated every fortnight, forever, and why the person you see is never quite able to discharge you.

What the treatment research actually shows, which is messier than either side admits

This is the point where we part company with the more confident sceptics, mind.

Pull the clinical work on myofascial release together and you don’t get a clean refutation, you get a mess. The pooled reads land on mixed, inconsistent, or not enough decent evidence to say either way, which is a genuinely different verdict from doesn’t work ^[40][41]. Ask specifically whether these techniques change internal biomechanics in a way that carries over into sport and the answer is much the same, in that the mechanistic claims run well ahead of what anybody has shown ^[42].

The diagnostic end of it is weaker still. Agreement between two practitioners feeling for the same trigger point doesn’t hold up well, with only a handful of specific findings reproducing between examiners ^[43]. Which is awkward for a treatment that starts by locating something.

So, the fair summary, as best we can put it. The explanation on the poster is almost certainly wrong. The short term symptom change is often real. The strong structural claims, releasing adhesions, breaking up scar tissue, remodelling fascia, restoring glide, are not supported by anything you’d want to spend money on. And the honest mechanistic models the fascia researchers themselves are working on, fluid dynamics, sliding between layers, how the tissue responds to load, are mostly theoretical or built from modelling rather than from treatment trials ^[44][45].

None of which makes a massage a bad thing to want. If it helps you sleep and it makes you feel less like a clenched fist for a day, that’s a reasonable way to spend an hour. Buy it for what it is though, rather than for what the leaflet says, and don’t build a plan around it. We’ve gone into all of this in much more depth in our piece on fascia and hypermobility if you want the full version.

The one clear downside of static stretching

There is one place where static stretching has a measurable cost, and it’s right before you do something that needs force.

Hold a long static stretch and your maximum force production drops for a while. On average the effect is small, and it gets considerably larger once the holds get long, at around a minute per muscle and above, whereas short holds carry very little cost ^[46][47][48]. It’s also mostly an effect on isolated strength testing rather than something that ruins your afternoon, and jumping actually came out slightly better in adults, which nobody expected ^[46].

For a hypermobile person there’s a second cost that matters rather more. The whole point of a warm up is to leave you better prepared to control load. A long static stretch works against that, as it temporarily reduces the force you can produce in a body whose central problem is that the active system is already carrying more than its fair share of the job.

Worth knowing as well: stretching isn’t actually better than any other warm up activity for short term flexibility or stiffness, and neither is foam rolling ^[49]. Lots of things warm you up, and the ritual matters less than anybody selling you a ritual would like. The formal consensus position, from the people who run these studies for a living, is that stretching is well supported for flexibility itself and much less so for preventing injury or soreness ^[31][50][51].

Dynamic work, meaning moving through range under your own control rather than hanging about at the end of it, is a much better fit for a warm up and doesn’t carry the same force cost ^[52][53]. It’s a warm up though, not a programme, and it won’t build anything on its own.

The bit nobody selling stretching mentions

If range is what you’re after, you don’t need stretching to get it.

Resistance training, done through a full range, produces range gains of its own, and pooled together those gains come out comparable to what stretching gives you ^[54]. Squat properly to depth and your ankles and hips get more mobile. Do a full range row and your shoulders do too.

Which changes the entire calculation, once you sit with it. If lifting buys you range and buys you the strength and control to manage that range, and stretching buys you range on its own, then for a hypermobile body there isn’t really a contest. You already have the range. What you’re short of is the capacity to own it.

Where yoga and Pilates fit

We get asked this constantly, usually by somebody who’s been told that yoga is either the answer to everything or completely off limits, and both of those are daft.

A general class, taught to a general room, is built around getting people into more range. That’s the premise of most of it, and it’s a perfectly good premise for most of the people in the room. If you’re hypermobile, you’ll be the best in that class at nearly every shape on day one, you’ll get praised for it, and you’ll spend an hour a week training the one quality you already have far too much of.

A class where the emphasis is on control, on holding a position rather than sinking into it, on the shapes you find hard rather than the ones you find easy, is a genuinely different thing and it can be really useful. Same with Pilates, where the reformer work in particular gives you a lot of feedback about where a limb actually is, which is precisely the information that’s been unreliable.

The research on both in this population is thin and mixed rather than damning, so we’ve written each of them up properly on their own, on yoga and on Pilates. The short version is that it depends almost entirely on the teacher, and on whether you’re being rewarded for going further or for staying in control.

Is heavy loading dangerous if you’re hypermobile

Short answer, no. And the fear of it has cost a lot of people a lot of years.

The rehabilitation literature in hEDS and HSD converges on the same place from several directions. Exercise and active rehab, strengthening, motor control, balance and proprioceptive work, graded to what the person in front of you can actually tolerate ^{[55][56][57][58]}. Passive approaches sit well down the list, and the people writing clinical guidance for other clinicians are now saying the same thing out loud ^[59].

On load specifically, heavier strengthening has been tested in hypermobile shoulders. It’s feasible, it’s tolerated, and it did at least as well as the lighter version on what people could actually do afterwards, without the harms everybody had worried about ^[60][2]. Progression and supervision matter a great deal, and the work that showed this did it properly rather than just handing somebody a barbell and hoping.

Two honest limits on that though. The evidence base is small, and the biggest open question in the field isn’t whether loading works, it’s which dose, which exercises and which rate of progression suit which person, because hypermobile bodies are not one group and never have been ^[55][60][61]. And how long you’ve had symptoms, and how wary of movement you’ve become, genuinely predict how well you respond. That isn’t a criticism of anybody, it’s a reason to start where you actually are rather than where a programme assumes you are.

That wariness deserves naming on its own, as avoidance does real damage here. Movement hurts, so you do less of it, so your tolerance drops, so more things hurt, and the loop tightens a notch. Balance and control get worse along with it, and the fear of falling turns up in this population often enough that it’s been formally looked at ^[24]. Breaking that loop is slow and it’s mostly about picking something small enough to succeed at, which is unglamorous advice and happens to be the advice that works.

So what should you actually do

Right, the practical bit.

– Stop chasing range you already have. If a joint is hypermobile, adding travel at the far end of it is solving a problem you haven’t got, and it remains the single most common piece of advice hypermobile people are given ^[2][62].

– Strength train, through a full range, and progress it over time. This is by some distance the highest value thing on this list, and the range turns up as a side effect ^[54][56].

– Warm up by moving rather than by hanging. Dynamic work beats long static holds before anything that asks for force ^[52][46].

– Stretch specific things, deliberately, where there’s a reason. If one muscle is genuinely limited, so calves, hip flexors, a shoulder that won’t get overhead, then stretching that one thing is completely fine. Stretching everything because you feel tight everywhere is the bit that doesn’t work.

– Work on the signal, not just on the strength. Slow, varied movement where you’re actually attending to what the joint is doing, in positions you don’t normally visit. That’s the part most programmes skip entirely, and it’s the part aimed at the thing that’s actually wrong ^[25][55].

– Expect the tightness to lag behind everything else. It’s a readout of how confident your nervous system is about a joint, and confidence gets built over months rather than weeks, so judge the programme on what you can do rather than on how loose you feel.

– If it burns, tingles, buzzes or feels electrical, stop, that’s a different conversation and it needs a different person ^[29].

What the first few months actually look like

Because a list of principles is easy to nod along to and quite hard to start.

Pick two or three movements you can do today without setting anything off, and do them badly on purpose. By which we mean slower than feels natural, with less load than you think you need, in a range you’re confident in rather than the biggest one you can reach. Three times a week is plenty. The aim for the first fortnight isn’t to get stronger, it’s to show a nervous system that’s been braced for years that load can happen and nothing awful follows it.

Then add, in small amounts, across weeks. A bit more load or one more repetition, not both in the same week. If a session leaves you sore for a couple of days, that’s information about the size of the jump rather than proof that lifting is wrong for you.

Somewhere in the middle of all that, start adding variety rather than volume. The same movement with your eyes shut, or on a different surface, or at a different speed, or carrying something on one side only. That’s the part aimed at the quality of the signal rather than the size of the muscle, and in our experience it’s the part that shifts the tightness when nothing else has.

And give it three months before you judge it. Strength turns up first, then what you can get through in a day, and the tightness is usually last, as it’s tracking how confident your nervous system is rather than how strong you are.

And if you want the massage, have the massage. Just don’t let it be the plan.

Where all of this runs out

A few things we can’t tell you, and it matters that you know which is which.

hEDS is the one type of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome with no confirmed genetic cause, which is a live gap rather than a closed door ^[4]. So treat the mechanical explanations above as the best available reading rather than a settled account of what the tissue is doing.

Almost none of the stretching research was done in hypermobile people. It’s healthy adults, in laboratories, and we’re reading across to a very different body. That read across is reasonable and it is not the same thing as evidence, so treat the stretching mechanism sections above as the best available rather than as settled ^[8][5].

The dose question is wide open. Which loading strategy, for which pattern of symptoms, over what timescale, is what the field is genuinely arguing about now, and anybody presenting you with the definitive hypermobility protocol is selling the argument’s conclusion before the argument has finished ^[55][60][57].

And the guarding explanation, which is the one we lean on most heavily in the studios, is an inference. A good one, in our opinion, consistent with everything that has been measured about proprioception and pain in this population, and still an inference.

None of this means never stretch, by the way. It means stop expecting it to fix something it was never doing in the first place.

Take care of yourselves.

The Fibro Guy Team

The Fibro Guy

---

References

[1] Morlino, S. and Castori, M. (2023) ‘Placing joint hypermobility in context: traits, disorders and syndromes’, British Medical Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldad013

[2] Carroll, M.B. (2023) ‘Hypermobility spectrum disorders: A review’, Rheumatology and Immunology Research. https://doi.org/10.2478/rir-2023-0010

[3] Malfait, F., Castori, M., Francomano, C.A., Giunta, C., Kosho, T. and Byers, P.H. (2020) ‘The Ehlers–Danlos syndromes’, Nature Reviews Disease Primers. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-020-0194-9

Read More