Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
bcoddens

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 26
 #1 
Hi All,

I repost the post here verbatim:

I have studied the decline in gross efficiency during sub-maximal prolonged cycling and found data to support that the increase in O2 consumption is likely due to a mixture of increased ATP cost of power production and increased O2 cost of ATP resynthesis. There are a lot more factors that you'd need to account for as well, as mentioned above; environmental factors, nutritional status and upkeep etc. Daniel Green has some really interesting work on this.
 

I think we can see the same thing with moxy ?
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #2 
Thanks  this is a great  work and  there  are some similar  works  done  before.
 The  interesting part is as well the  efficiency  of  not just the  VL  so  we have some interesting difference in  this when we look at trained cyclists versus non trained athletes.
 An other part  which  has to be taken into consideration is the   " fatigue " of the respiratory system with than changes  the CO2  releases  and with it the O2 disscurve  which shows  up s a   lower SmO2 by a given load  but as well  shows  up  as a   different recovery of HHb.
 I just finished  a  study  with  2  swiss people   who where here  for 2 weeks  where we looked at the  drift in SmO2  in connection with the change in respiratory parameters like RF  and TV over time  and therefore a  change in dead space  volume. The datas look very  fascinating.
 The key in this  is  to see not just the SmO2  reaction or  O2Hb and HHb  but it would be nice  to have  from this study  as well the tHb respond.. I will ry to  dig out a  study  we did  toegtehr with Claude Lavoie  from the university of Trois  riviere  Quebec  some years back  during a Mount  Saint Ann MTB  world-cup  and  the   shift in  T1  T3  reaction over  2 leaps  was super  fun to assess  as we used  than Portamon.
 The  reaction than  is a   change in SmO2  due to the shift  of blood  from either  skin area   to muscle or  from Muscle to  skin depending on the  athlete  and the  muscles priority  to  maintain    survival situations. will try to   show this  this evening .  I hope we will see more and more  studies like this  as it helps  us to confirm  what we use  now in training  for physiological workouts  since many years .

We   work on a  simple  systems  for  patients  and  basic  health people  with a physiological  zoning idea.

  Get or find  your P.H.D

Three  "zonings" P  for  physiological intensity training
 This in simple terms is  your   most  important intensity as  you  can decide  on what you like to  stimulate. ( Cardiac  stimulation, right ventricular  load  or   RPM  or  O2  utilization or  2.3  DPG  stimulation  you name it  and you target it.

H  for homeostasis intensity training . Here you loose some options  as you will push the limiter  to its    workout.

D  for   Disruption intensity training. Here you loose  completely  control as you will push not just limiter  but as well  compensator  over   the   disruption   and   stimulate  all of them Here the key  is  to   find the proper  recovery  for each system  to  have the best   progress.

bobbyjobling

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 219
 #3 
On my long rides 2-4hours I tend to see a lower ThB response variation to load variation and a higher smO2 utilisation and a higher HR. I think my SV is effected by blood volume or could be that blood flow resistance is increasing.
bobbyjobling

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 219
 #4 
Juerg, I didn't see your post response when I posted mine [smile]

I wonder if we measured ThB variability, would this help assetain "fatigue".
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #5 
Bobby , Absolutely. As   many times  mentioned    we can sue SmO2  alone  to make a great   idea  of NIRS simple  just because   some people like  to have it simple, but we  can make it  actually so simple that  it  does not work  anymore.
 tHb  / SmO2  and  HR  paired in cycling  with wattage  and a  little bit  an ability  to   assess your respiration   will go a   long   way  to actually  learn  and understand  physiological guided  loads.
 Some people think it is very complicated. It is not  at all once  we open up our  minds, that we  can sue  performance  like wattage  to   guide  us  back into the  optimal physiological intensity  rather than   we believe  that the  fixed wattage  will be always the  same physiological   stimulus.  Nothing against  the  work we  discuss on here but  for me  it is  super intriguing to see big groups    from great locations still using    just one or the other  feedback    to make than  some conclusions  where there is  still a lot of  questions left.
 The reason we started  to combien  different  systems  is  to avoid  speculative conclusions  as much as possible.  Example.
 If  I like to know, whether   the drop in SmO2  and tHb in an arm muscle  during a  cycling load  may be  an indication of a  loss  of efficiency  and not integration of  arms  to  try to maintain a fixed wattage  or whether this  indicates a shift  of  blood volume  to the  legs   due to   reaching a cardiac limitation, than  I set  it up   with using a   study  with hemodynamic  feedback  of SV, EF %  LVET  and so on. I  than look what the cardiac output  of this athlete is   and whether he actually reaches in certain activities   this  CO or not.
 If not  than I  look  at the  SmO2 thB respond  and will have  with some  imagination a picture in front of  me  to see, whether  HHb  and  O2Hb  move  symmetrically or whether we have a higher or lower  HHb compared to an activity.
 In simple words. If   HHb  goes more up  than  O2Hb down  we have an accumulation of HHb. This  can happens out of different reasons  and one  simple one to check this out is a venous occlusion.
 I have  no  outflow of HHb   and only inflow . Another easy one is  to  lift your leg  and hold it  relaxed  against the wall. What  do you expect  happens  SmO2  and tHb   wise.
 Check a  full explanation I showed on the forum.

 Summary. Yes  you are getting close to be  great in physiological feedback  Use  tHb  , SmO2  and HR  and respiration feeling and you will soon understand your  body  better and better.

What we like to see in studies  is , that they use  VO2 feedback   for respiratory  feedback  like TV  and RF, FeO2  % as well as  CO2  feedback,
 Than  NIRS feedback if possible  on 2 areas  and if possible  combine it with a TSI %  feedback to see as well possible   blood shift  from or to the surface.
 Than  add cardiac feedback  like  SV, EF % HR, LVET  and   so on  so we  have a feedback  from there.
 You can add as we  did  SEMG  for  this information and  if needed  Blood values  from  ammonia  to  lactate  to what ever in case we  do loads in excess of  8 min in  a stable load  situation so  intramuscular  ( cellular ( feedback)  can be  as close as possible   check  as well with systemic reactions.
Now   we have much less of speculations  and this is   what we used  years ago as our standard  to come to  possible conclusion and now  moving  back  to just using NIRS.

Duncan Clark , in case  you  are on here once in a  while  can you show us  some of your great  studies  and  information  with Marcel on roller skis   and the live  cardiac  VO2  and NIRS feedback  you did as the first  field  use  ever in the world. The picture with the   back  bag. Thanks

People  who followed the fact  forum  have  the idea  still in mind.


. If  there is no  proper  answer with NIRS only ,we still combine  than all of  the above tools.
BUT
 the idea is too make it simpler  but usefull simple.
dclarke

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 6
 #6 
Let me try to find some of that data.

Duncan
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #7 
Duncan  , nice to see you on here. I  found in my mess some  fun  picture  from You and Marcel  the  first    ever    in field testing  with  NIRS , Physioflow and  VO2.
Marcel real.jpg 


Top pictures  show s a live  feedback  from the cardiac  system  with Physio flow.
 Some  background information.

Below  working on the computer  the Genius Frank Bour   and his dad  who  made a life long commitment  for  non-invasive  cardiac hemodynamic. On the treadmill a  runner getting prepared  for  some fun assessments. and behind  Frank . Dr. Jan Venter from  South Africa  now  in  Vancouver  who is doing some intriguing brain mapping  and  functional medicine. I had  the  privilege  to  host them in my  small goat  farm here in the bush  for an intense  open week  of brain  storming  and  open  hard  discussions  how we  can improve  the  grassroots  work  for all the great coaches  and people in the field  with limited  money  and options  for  scientific  help.

  Frank corrected.jpg   

The  top  picture  from Duncan shows  you  the live screen feedback  and below a  closer look  of  some of the parameters  we  can collect.

      eva corrected.jpg 
Top  row  from left to right.
 HR  than SV ( stroke volume in ml per  beat )  which  than HR x SV = CO  ( cardiac output) in l/min
Bottom row  left to right/ EF %    Ejection fraction  of the left ventricle  so how much  you  throw  out  from the  total   volume
middle bottom row  is LVET ( left ventricular  contraction  time  or the  time  in ms  it  takes to heart to contract  when throwing  u your blood  out. If you  take HR  x  LVET  you can see how long the  heart is contracted in  one minute  and there are some   intriguing numbers out there between  trained  and less trained  hearts.Than  you  combine this  with the  respiration and NIRS  and you see how tHb  and SmO2  suddenly  can get some   information  form not always  excepted   trends.
 On the right bottom line SVR  or systemic  vascular resistance. In simple term a kind of a feedback  on how  BP  is controlled. Now  you can imagine how this  feedback paired  with NIRS ion a priority  and a non priority muscles suddenly showed  some common trends.

Below a closer  inside  what motivates us  to  do this.

wheel chair  corrected.jpg 

A local    friend    with as you can see  a   unfortunate  result  after an e  accident.
 The key  here is to  find out  cardiac  workouts  as  due to the fact  that he  has a very  high Th  or low C  spine  damage  he has a very  limited   active muscle groups left  so  little to minimal CO challenge  and one  of  the common reason of   death  down the road. So  the question is or  was  on how we  can train cardiac  ability  in this case.  Now  we have a  world  wide  small  but   very open   group  of  friends   where e  discuss the impossible  and allow  us to challenge  common believes for our self  to improve. No papers  no publication  simple straight forward  personal improvement  which never  ends.

Below  an international  seminar  organized by SWINCO  Switzerland  , where we   had  the  fun to welcome  people  form  Russia, Poland , Check Rep. Hungary, Finland, Norway, GB, Italy  France  Switzerland, Japan, Germany  a more. The  cyclist  is a  world  class endurance MTB  athlete  and Andri   just  beside  him   right is Caesare Manhart in the back  and in front Is Martin Bruderer  a former  top   national  player in ice hockey  working now  for swinco.
You see live  feedback ( ).7)  yellow  as  part of  NIRS ( portamon) the small  computer  in the side is a     first version of  MOXY  combined  with  Portamon. Than a VO2  equipment form  Cosmed  and in the back live cardiac feedback plus  blood testing on the table in front.  What we like in this live demos  is that people  can intervene  and argue  a point and we  than can immediately try it out   to confirm  or  throw  a  counter  questions  with live data's  back. Example. We  can   bike a  FTP intensity  and   than  change  respiratory pattern  and shift the eO2  discurve  so we  may see a  drop in SmO2  very fats  but a decline in  lactate  form a high number  down to a lower number. Or  we can increase  systemic  SmO22  and  SmO2  goes up  but lactate  does not drop  it actually increases ???? Than  we see this live  and  throw  the question back  to  the  start point  why  it is  very different than  some may have expected  or  learned in theory. It is  exercise physiology in its    cleanest  form live  with  direct  questions  and than the search  for a possible but often

not found  answer.

swiss present.jpg

So  over the weekend I will  get some  practical  physiological guided  examples  to show  how we  end up  with  MOXY  and  you can   look at what we  had  to  figure  out  with all the combination of so many different great equipment's.
 And  why  with MOXY  we have a field  tool now  with an incredible  amount  of trends in  and information we  never thought of it  or   did not  dreamed of  it.

 Now  you  may understand , why  when I read some great  studies  where they use  NIRS   with  a  %  of  something   and than make  some conclusion it feels  very much  the same as  when we started out  and more   often  than not  made  wrong but  logical looking conclusions   just  to  find  out the next time  when we added all the equipment that we  have to rethink  the idea.
 So  the case I promised  from today the BFR  restriction  will come later. Here is the  case as a picture.


fracture.JPG 



ryinc

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 369
 #8 
Thanks for sharing Jeurg. Looking forward to the guided workouts you will show us.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net