Is it true that gymnastics can stunt growth/damage the spine?

[musicalfamily]

My sons (5 and 6) do gymnastics and one of them was picked to join a slightly more advanced group who train 2 hours a week, (initially) as they think he has "potential". This is a proper gym that trains lots of very successful gymnasts. Both boys love gymnastics.

I was going to agree but then a friend who is a sports therapist told me that gymnastics is a terrible sport for injuries, that it stunts growth, can damage the spine and that many gymnasts have ended up in wheelchairs! She scared the hell out of me. Should I keep my boys doing recreational or is it ok for them to go down the more intense route? Any opinions would be gratefully received...

New one on me. Have you googled?

stunts growth, I wouldn't think so.
injuries and (permanent) damage to joints and backs, sadly yes. but only if not properly instructed and if doing too much. a couple of hours a week is nothing to worry about.

Yes sorry I know that 2 hours a week won't be a problem, but they indicated that it could lead to much much more by age 7 (I know some children that do 11 hours a week), hence the question as I would like to consider whether we want to go down that route...

I think concern in the past came from girls developing eating disorders on order to stay skinny and low weight and stunted their developenrbt that way? But that's talking like competition standard gymnastics.

Sorry for typos-developement

Louis Smith thinks it does:

wodumedia.com/british-olympic-athletes/louis-smith-23-gymnast-bronze-medallist-at-beijing-olympics-179cm-76kg-doing-gymnastics-since-the-age-of-four-has-stunted-my-growth-ive-got-really-big-hands-long-arms-and-big/

Some sports do change physiology, like swimmers usually develop big shoulders.
But the physiology can change again, look what happened to Lance Armstrong (he had been a triathlete and the cancer took all the muscle out of his upper body).

Young cyclists can permanently damage their knees if not careful. Some sports have specific hazards.

The googling I'm doing suggests that gymnasts are small because they are meant to be small, not because of their training (read this).

Thanks for all the links, none of it appears so dramatic as I was led to believe!!

I think the key to all sports is proper coaching and like others on here said, if it isn't going to be at elite level then really it shouldn't cause too much damage/physical alterations.

I don't know what will happen with the boys' gymnastics but it is useful to have the information. With my DD1's ballet I had loads of info from the dance school she attends, but the gym place seems very lean on communications and so it is hard to get some facts!!

Hi, my DDs do competitive gymnastics and lots of hours a week. My 9 year old trains 18 hours. When I was told this, I panicked slightly and looked up the research. From what I can see is that yes, it does stunt growth whilst they are doing gym, but when they give up, most gymnasts catch up within a year. That said, gymnastics is a bloody dangerous sport and I would expect a few fractures along the way :)

Disclaimer: I only looked at the effects on girls not boys.

My DS (10) does Acrobatic Gymnastics and trains for 12 hours a week (competition level) which isn't unusual for gymnasts his age male or female. The boys in his class and the girls in the groups that train at the same time vary in size from tiny little things to quite tall and sturdy so I don't think it effects growth dramatically. Although, in acro there is a tendency for coaches to pick individuals that will fit a particular role i.e. base, middle or top so there is potential for any size child to excel.
I think there are many sports and activities that have the potential to cause damage and carry risks once they go beyond recreational level but, at the same time, a child doing those activities, training at that level and possibly competing will be fit, strong and have an enormous sense of achievement. The pros far outway the cons and a good coach knows when a child is physically ready for more training. I think the major problems come when a very young child is pushed too hard too early.

Ex gymnast here. I'm 5'6 no spinal or other muscle/ ligament problems here. I recently took up fitness pilates and thank the lord that muscle has memory

Dear me, I hope not - Ds is 6, very small for his age and loves his gymnastics. If his growth gets stunted, he'll be invisible!

His is all recreational, though.

I don't think gymnastics stunts growth, only if a child is malnourished.
Gymnasts tend to be small because it is much easier for small people to do higher level moves.Try lifting a weight close to your body and then at arms length and you will soon see why long limps are a disadvantage!

long limps!!! long limbs

Pygmyangel- In acro you do need big and sturdy bases and small and light 'tops'

A friend who is a coach for another sport says the thing is not to allow them to focus on one sport early because it can lead to physiological problems. So do gymnastics but maybe ensure 1 hr swimming (as non-weight bearing) and 1 hr football/cricket a week too.

that's really good advice. Makes sense doesn't it?

We've decided to go for the 2 hours a week and then see where it takes us. Clearly I don't think 2 hours a week will damage anything but if it were to become more serious I have some good opinions on here. They might want to give it up by then anyway!!!

Ex gymnast here. I'm normal height

I had a few gymnastic related injuries like sprains, but nothing serious.

Well I guess if they were training to Olympic or even National standard it might, but they are only starting on 2 hours a week so I think you're right to take it as it comes

DD (nearly 14) has been doing it for 8 years, does 8 1/2 hours a week plus 2 hours coaching and is shorter than me normal height and very fit!

many gymnasts have knackered joints in later life I have to say (as an ex gymnast)

Ds' genetic heritage suggests knackered joints as standard. At least he'll be able to blame his on something he enjoyed.

If you look at an Olympic team from any country you will notice the long distance runners are thin as sticks, the sprinters are more sturdy and gymnasts are extremely bendy.

Doing a sport to the level of it being effectively a full time job is going to change your physique to a certain extent.

What sport you do will also lead towards different injuries, you are unlikely to break a bone swimming.

Virtually every professional footballer will have arthritic knees eventually.

Gymnastics does have the potential for a lot of injuries but it is getting safer all the time, moves that gained medals in the past are banned. Equipment is improving, the vaulting table replacing the old horse etc.

I wouldn't worry for 2 hours a week.

I'm an ex-gymnast with knackered joints. They're knackered because they're hypermobile. I was good at gymnastics because I was hyper mobile. It didn't cause it.

I'm letting DD try gym (and ballet soon) for a while, but will keep an eye on it. I would have benefited from orthotic insoles as a child, but nobody realised this.

I suppose the top gymnasts are top because they are naturally very bendy and slight. Otherwise every gym would churn out tiny tots that could bent like a pretzel and be 5.2 in height.

I think genetics, good training and luck have a lot to do with injuries and long term problems (in any sport/physical 'job').

I've heard that swimming makes you taller but a friends dad who is an orthopedic surgeon said that was rubbish!

Yes, moomin - at DD's gym, the petitest, bendiest and most agile girls are fast-tracked. If they continue to enjoy it and like training a lot, they could go far. However there are also lots of good gymnasts there who are tall/big and muscular - it doesn't seem to have stunted their growth!

Re swimming, good swimmers develop good upper-body strength, but it's all a bit chicken and egg - if your physique suits a certain sport and you get good at that sport...