Jump to content

Talk:Bikram Yoga

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Britishleo (talk | contribs) at 13:14, 3 June 2014. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template Removal

Undid template 30 May 2014 as there is no justification given for the template inserted in the talk section. Having read the article I felt it is like many others which also have businesses running from the subject. It does not sell Bikram Yoga but gives a reasonably unbiased information on the subject and what it does and hopes to achieve. If these banners are to placed at the head of an article there should be some explanatory words in talk, not just hit and run. I have checked a number of links from article and references they seem to be working. I would suggest another admin checks out the edit for the banner before being reinstated Britishleo (talk) 13:09, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[Untitled]

None of the links on this site work. Although it advertises something pretty much known in many circles, more reliable sources are needed in this article.

[Untitled2]

"Sweating for the sake of sweating" has no benefits. I don't care if you've studied sweating your whole life; this is a claim comparable to the previous claim that tonsils had no benefit to the body, not a provable fact. I deleted it. If it had been "no known benefits," that would have been different. Even there, we would need a review of 24 articles in the medical literature to substantiate it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.167.215 (talk) 11:57, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"makes muscles more pliant and encourages sweating which acts as a purifier."

This should be removed or explained. At first glance it's nonsense.

Why is this nonsense? 35–40 °C temperatures do make muscles relax and do encourage sweating, and sweating is excretory, so I think it qualifies as purifying, in some sense.

-to whoever wrote "this should be removed or explained" you are taking this way too seriously

I agree with the critique. i'm not even sure what is being purified -- the blood? the muscle? or are we talking about "purity of essence"? Aside from having more salt, is the water in sweat less pure than regular water? I also don't understand the "you are taking this way too seriously" comment -- isn't the point of wikipedia to have accurate descriptions of things?

Indeed. I practice Bikram myself, but the above statement caught my attention. I have added citation requests, if they cannot be provided in one week, the offending statement will go. To whomever wrote "You are taking this way too seriously", you don't understand the Wikipedia.--Cylon 14:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take Wikipedia too seriously?!? Not possible. I agree with the critique. --DJSbass 03:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not change it to something like "which performs a similar function as the traditional sauna" and then link to the sauna article? Seragenn 02:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that "makes muscles more pliant and encourages sweating which acts as a purifier" is probably unsupportable nonsense, but it would be great if this article discussed the actual positive or negative affects of exercising in an uncomfortably hot environment.

I have been practising Bikram Yoga for 3 or 4 months and I would never call the "environment of 35-40°C (actually the correct temperature should be 42°C) as uncomfortable. I was very surprised the heat of 42°C was actually quite pleasant when I went for the 1st lesson. Of course after the first 10 mins you are totally sweaty, but it feels good. And believe me when the temperature goes down to 40°C, you actually start feeling cold :-) And why the heat? 

   * your body heat is not lost in a cold room
   * makes muscles more elastic
   * raises the heart beat to provide cardiovascular workout
   * strengthens the immune system
   * opens pores, cleansing skin
   * encourages detoxification through sweat
   * burns fat, strengthens willpower

And the negatives of it? Well, I don`t know about any so far... and honestly I don`t think there are any. To those who mention this as almost a nonsense or say "why not to link it to sauna article" - have you actually tried practising Bikram yoga? Or are you just trying to be "smart"? M. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.78.83.1 (talk) 10:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of whether or not the above users are trying to be "smart" (I wish I could put those quotation marks in quotation marks), they are right to ask for clarity--that's the point here. If you are going to say that the heat acts as a purifier, you need to say what is being purified and how. If it's due to encouraging pores to open and sweat to flush out their contents, that's excellent, but it needs to be stated explicitly. There's little in Wikipedia more off-putting than patronizing comments. -Blackbird

links at bottom of page

the links to Standing Bow pose and Head-to-Knee pose are worded in a way that makes it sound like they are exclusive to bikram, that they were developed for bikram yoga and not found in other types of yoga.

i don't believe that's true. both poses are used in styles of yoga other than bikram. one shouldn't get the impression that they were invented for bikram.

209.82.111.194 19:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)jpx[reply]

There are negatives to practicing this type of yoga. One should not have high blood pressure, nor low blood pressure. This yoga causes high intensity sweating and dehydration is a serious problem especially those who have suffered heat prostration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cartoonmayhem (talk • contribs) 15:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the following sentence:

"Through registration of this work, the United States Copyright Office acknowledges Bikram's exclusive right to the distinct series of postures and breathing exercises comprising the sequence."

This is a statement of Bikram's controversial legal position. Whether the copyright is valid and what it covers is unresolved and at the heart of the legal dispute with USYO and the general discussion within the yoga community. Registration by the Copyright Office is not an "acknowlegment" of any rights. Unlike the investigation the Patent Office conducts, the CO does not generally investigate registrations and Bikram's registration has little, if any, legal or other significance in this debate. --DJSbass 19:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above, except that it is too softly stated. I added a paragraph about how the idea-expression in copyright law does not afford a "system" or "method" of yoga, or anything else, protection from others using the system. Copyright affords protection from their reproducing the book. That's all. This principle is at least 130 years old in US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.167.215 (talk) 12:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

stub?

I think a recategorize is worth undertaking. This doesn't look like a stub to me? Still I believe this applies: Template:Bounty notice

I think more could be added in the opening section on how Bikram Yoga actually works, but I second the stub removal. --DJSbass 05:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article appears to focus more on the intellectual property disputes surrounding Bikram's copyright claims and almost not at all upon the actual Bikram yoga practice. Therefore I suggest the article either be retitled something like 'Bikram Yoga Controversy' or taken down. MatthewStevenCarlos 21:30 GMT 25 September 2006

This article needs information about Bikram Yoga itself rather than Bikram's legal struggles. Sinakor 22:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't Bikram Yoga also generally Hatha Yoga with the addition of the heated environment? Perhaps that has something to do with the legal issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.169.28 (talk) 07:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Please note that this article has been vandalized and needs correcting.--Cminard (talk) 02:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was one of those weird clean-ups - POV all over the place. Some of the article read like an ad, including unnecessary positive information about Bikram (he already has his own article) - and some of it read like a personally-invested criticism. I've rewritten most of the controversy section - it was essentially a summation of a single court case, and doesn't really get into the controversy at all - but I've kept the reference to the court case in case. Added a bunch of references too, there was a lot that needed citations. Should be cleaner now. Feedback and editing welcome, as always... --99.231.118.172 (talk) 01:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Controversy section looks much better. Thank you for taking the time to provide a far more balanced and referenced view. There is another side - the positive side and the incredible health benefits that one gets when one practices the postures exactly under the guidance of a trained Bikram teacher, and hopefully as time allows, I (or someone else) will be able to add that perspective to the article as well. As a yoga teacher in another tradition, I have taken classes with Bikram himself, and believe this is the most brilliant sequence of postures that has ever been put together. Additionally, these are very complicated postures, and the risk of injury is very great if not taught precisely. Despite the controversy, I must agree with what I believe the ultimate underlying reason for Bikram's decision to pursue legal action, which is to prevent people from being hurt.--Cminard (talk) 13:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Cminard. I think I'll work on adding a section with Bikram's rationale/response in the Controversy section. If you have any sources with the "untrained people teaching it could cause injuries" response, let me know. I agree that we need more about the purpose of Bikram yoga - what it's supposed to do, benefit-wise - so I'm adding a new section to this talk page with work that needs to be done...--99.231.130.185 (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent! The fine point regarding injuries, as I see it, is that if a yoga teacher is going to advertise that they are doing the 'Bikram' series without the proper training, and someone gets hurt, then this gives the Bikram series and legitimate teachers a bad name without cause. If, however, a teacher not trained in Bikram's studio is simply teaching the postures in that order in a hot room without saying 'Bikram' at all, then they are assuming full risk if someone gets injured.--Cminard (talk) 12:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Work that needs to be done!

We really need a well-referenced section on Bikram yoga itself, namely:

  1. how/why the heat is supposed to be beneficial, according to Bikram/instructors
  2. how/why the poses are supposed to be beneficial, according to Bikram/instructors
  3. the actual effect that Bikram yoga has on people's bodies, according to a medical/academic source (this may or may not differ from Bikram's opinion).

The first two in that list should be interspersed with referenced commentary - for example, if Bikram says the heat makes muscles more pliant, we should say whether doctors/physiologists support that notion or not. The third in that list is going to be hard to find, I'm guessing...Bikram yoga hasn't been well-known that long. I'm sure that Bikram yoga probably has great effects, but I'm not willing to speculate without a source. At most we could say that "Bikram enthusiasts claim that..." or "Many of those practice Bikram claim that" but again, we'd need a source. --99.231.130.185 (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I attended a week-long seminar with Bikram many years ago, he mentioned that he has put a lot of research into the posture series from a medical perspective, and cited many benefits that have been proven by medical doctors. Bikram always cited actual research and never provided his personal opinion on the benefits. He is the first to say that one should simply attend a class, and then there will be no need to explain anything further. Unfortunately a quick look at his website does not provide this medical research. My time is quite limited for the next few months, though I will try to find a source for this information that can be used in this article as time allows. In any case though, once it is found, the existing medical research that Bikram has done will speak for itself, and there would be no need to obtain opinions from Bikram or his instructors.--Cminard (talk) 13:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additional - while it has been quite a while since I attended the seminar with Bikram, the actual science behind the sequence includes elements such as the body undergoing a gradual building of heat in very specific areas just the right times so that subsequent postures become much easier, and the most incredible benefit that Bikram cited that was measured was that doing the Standing Stick pose for the prescribed time in a heated room of the temperature that they use actually exercises the heart as if you had been on a treadmill for 45 minutes (or something like this), and that one specific chamber of the heart is exercised in a way that traditional exercise is not able to do. These are the kinds of facts that need to be looked for in a search. He may have done the research in Japan, which may make it more difficult to locate. If all else fails, I may send a letter to him to request the details, or ask one of his senior teachers.--Cminard (talk) 08:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Founding Gurus, and unsubstantiated claims of potential injury

Firstly, while Bishnu Ghosh certainly endorsed Bikram's Beginning Yoga series, he did NOT create it. Therefore, the small introductory panel on the top left should be edited to say that the founding Guru is Bikram Choudhury and not Bishnu Ghosh. From what I can tell, the curriculum at Ghosh's college of physical education is quite different.

Secondly, the section discussing metal poisoning is unnecessary. The following statement: "A person seeking to eliminate toxins from the body, due to health complications such as metal poisoning, is at risk of developing further complications if they choose to practice Bikram Yoga rather than seeking professional medical advice," needs to be removed. Bikram Yoga has never and will never endorse itself as a system that can adequately deal with acute metal toxicity. It simply goes without saying that someone with metal poisoning will put their health at risk if they choose not to contact a trained health professional, e.g. a physician.

99.239.217.145 (talk) 20:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed "Benefits" Section

Hello, I cut the "Benefits" Section from this article. The "weight loss" benefits were cited to a website which sold "weight loss" books -- hardly an unbiased, scholarly, or secondary source. The rest of the "benefits" were uncited. Therefore, they have been removed from the article. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 16:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Bikram Choudhury into this article?

I wanted to float the idea here of merging Bikram Choudhury into this article. It seems to me that the elements of notability in that article relate directly to this one and there isn't a need for a separate biography. That's not to say that Choudhury doesn't meet WP:N and couldn't justify a standalone article, just that it would be tidier for the encyclopaedic content from that article to be in the section about him in this one rather than separate. Any thoughts? Whouk (talk) 17:13, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. Bikram is a personality, but the topic of the Yoga class/series he developed can and should stand alone. Andre.alyeska (talk) 22:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bikram_Yoga&oldid=611376520"