Fortiori Design LLC
Registered: 1355349061 Posts: 1,530
I promised more " headache " to the discussion, that SmO2 is not an optimal marker to simply be used as a fitness indicator.
I tried to argue, that it is a super great marker to indicate utilization trends and changes of O2 in the working muscles. An improved fitness may be achieved by improving utilization of O2 so SmO2 would drop. but on the other side we may not like to see a too extreme drop in SmO2 when improving fitness, as we may rather like to see by the same absolute workload a less low SmO2 as we may have improved delivery options like respiration ( less hypercapnic ) or higher CO ( better return of blood for preload , or higher capillarisation due to specific workouts. Here once more the 2 5/1/5 data collections I showed you a few days apart and than an open discussion on where we may have some additional feedback on what caused the change when looking at NIRS feed backs. Dark green a few days later. same start watt load and same step increase. The last to spikes are 11/2 min 240 in light green and 21/2 min 270 dark green. On the next pic there is a mistake in the timing which you see here correct. Have fun
Development Team Member
Registered: 1412923680 Posts: 264
regarding the SmO2 drop topic, some time ago I posted this research: Effects of short-term endurance training on muscle deoxygenation trends using NIRS with the case of an athlete who had better performance despite a slower drop in SmO2. As you said previously, if we have more delivery we can expect a lesser drop. I think tHB trend can confirm this adaptation, but I would like your opinion on this.
Fortiori Design LLC
Registered: 1355349061 Posts: 1,530
I am not sure, whether we can make this kind of conclusions. We need much more data as we see any possible combinations. There are some interesting trends but I have to get many more picture and data to make a relative smart statement. I think you are on the right track as we can not look at SmO2 alone but have to take the " delivery " trend" we get from tHb in consideration as well. Additionally we seem to see, people who simply stay high with SmO2 in endurance type of loads. as the limitation is less the use of O2 but based on other means. Here a surprising 5/1/5 from a world class 100 mile runner. And below 2 workouts the speed was done on the 5/1/5 third last double step intensity Idea was: SmO2 after initial drop still is increasing and tHb is not dropping at the end of the load. see tHb SmO2 assessment below. and than followed by the 2 test runs. So what I propose is: Trend in SmO2 as well as in tHb; are sport ( activity specific) and individual. . What you look is at the physiological demand of the activity. In the case above a 100 mile runner. the key for " survival' is optimal delivery and balanced utilization. So the key seems to be to have tHb optimal stable and as such a secured delivery over optimal blood flow. The utilization is only a interesting; as it has to be balanced. This brings us to the super interesting situation, that I can train oxygenation or utilization of O2 in two very different approaches and I will show some very practical live examples we did in cycling many years back This info we use now in game sports. So first a thought on the case we discuss here. once more the 2 5/1/5 assessments and the smo2 trends. light green is first assessment. Again same start wattage , same step increase only difference the last 2 short loads light green 240 watt and 11/2 min and in the dark green 21/2 min loads and 270 I have no other back ground on this 2 assessments as that they are a few days apart. Andri is working on this case and he simply sent me the csv files and asked for my thoughts. So again , when we look just SmO2 ( not optimal ) we see a much lower O2 utilization in the first assessment and a less high performance at the end and at each same watt level a clear lower SmO2 level. a) if I have only 2 data like in here than I would not push the ideas too far. If this are data from an athlete we work with since many years and have a lot of SmO2 data and close to the same placement of MOXY we make much more conclusions. So SPECULATION). The first assessment ( light green) is done in a " fatigued" body. What ever was done on the same day before the assessment or the day before triggered the need to utilize O2 to a very low level as the delivery systems may not be recovered as of the moment of the assessment. BUT. The low SmO2 shows, that this athlete has a training done in the past, where he created the ability to utilize O2 optimal. So most likely lot's of vasuclarisation, as well as lot's of mitochondria density . The delivery systems who may have been affected are .: 1. Cardiac system. I that is the case we may have a lower than usual CO and as such we may have a low tHb as the muscle contractions may overrule the weak CO. to see that we would have to look SmO2 and tHb in combination. If this is the case we should see in the rest 1 min a normal SmO2 increase at least to baseline but actually even higher. ( if respiration as the delivery would be limiter the SmO2 would not go up ( High CO2 so good utilization not optimal reloading ( O2 shift to the right ) as well as tHb would go high to very high ( CO2 as a vasodilatation systemic reason ) So the combination would help us. Now again if the Cardiac system would be fatigued than we would as well see in the last stages ( very short and high load ) that the muscle contraction will overrule the CO pressure and we may see in the first light green test a venous occlusion trend and in the second test this would be gone. You can see that in the graph I showed. So leaves us with one more question. Cardiac fatigue ( limitation ) but as well muscular fatigue. If we have a muscular fatigue, than we may have a higher resting SEMG and as such in the rest period we will have higher activity even without actually doing anything. This would reduce the tHb back flow as we still have a little bit contraction and it would as well reduce the SmO2 rebound as we still have this little bit activity. . This is where I am not sure. How would we solve this question. That's' where we have in all our assessments a MOXY on a minimal or non involved muscle. . If it is a systemic fatigue ( limitation ) than when pushing hard the body will try to shift Blood ( thb drop ) as well as reduced SmO2 from the non-involved muscles to the involved muscles. If it is a local fatigue the non involved system will react not or absolutely minimal, depending on the technique of the client and how hard he tries the last step to simply push the needed time and wattage. . That's' where the fun word " brainless " test come in, as when we give a load and not let the brain decide , whether it likes to push than we create this pictures, where we loose optimal feedback created by physiology. The absolute drive for an absolute power messes the feedback loop option up. ( See Kenya runners. as one of the examples.) So let's end this thoughts here and put 2 assessments down SmO2 and tHb below the first assessment SmO2 and tHb You can see that the overall trend in tHb is all the way the same with some minimal increase towards the end due to higher CO. lets see the second one. below Now let's look closer the last two heavy loads. and here the second test last 2 hard loads So the question is : Did the workout before the first 5/1/5 created a fatigue which forced the body to use the utilization option in the first test. than after some recovery time the delivery system where able to contribute to the performance ( even higher performance ) and the there was no need for the low utilization situation, in fact the team work was much more efficient. . In the first 5.1.5 the limitation of delivery ( which included as well the outflow as delivery depends on in and outflow ,) created a situation, where it was only possible to create a certain performance over uitilization. In this athletes case, the system was able to do that but it is not optimal. In many cases the clients can not do that as they simply do not have capilarisation and mitochondria density as well not the metabolic ability to use O2 optimal. In the next thread , to move it apart , I will come back to the idea of O2 utilization improvemnt over long slow endurance loads so stable and secure delivery ( 100 mile runner ) or over HIT with the proper duration ( as we create a planned delivery limitation )so we can use O2 in short bursts and relaod and can go go for a very long time as well. So the aerobic LSD idea with low load long duration or the aerobic lacticid of going super hard but very short. Controlled by moxy.
Fortiori Design LLC
Registered: 1355349061 Posts: 1,530
Here very short for the careful regular reader. In this topic here we had a short thought on a 6.6 % HR change, where i argued, that this is correct looking form a mathematical point of view. Same problem as when we use performance like speed and or wattage to make zoning based n math instead based on physiology. Same is true for MAX HR and or 220 - age, VO2 max and % and even using lactate threshold ideas and than a % of this values.
True we always can find a calculation and a statistical value. Why would we still use that , when we can see it live. So here the answer from one of my student on the discussion on the 6.6 % HR change. His answer is a simple word. Karvonen Martti Karvonen (1918 – 2008) might be most famous for his equation (Training heart rate=[maximal heart rate-resting heart rate] X desired exercise intensity) that he thought up in 1957, or as the surgeon general of the Finnish army. But subsequently he deployed himself as the “father” of exercise science and of the Seven Countries Study and of the North Karelia project in Finland. In 1945, Karvonen graduated from Helsinki University as M.D. after which pursued a PhD in physiology at Cambridge University (received in 1950). After that he immediately showed interest in sports and exercise science, and became lecturer in Sports Medicine in Helsinki before getting involved with the Seven Countries Study. Karvonen was a devoted collaborator as well as an independent investigator who organized Finnish studies as early as 1956. He later recruited the Seven Countries Study cohorts in Eastern and Western Finland to compare those distinctive cultures within that country. population Karvonen was consultant to the World Health Organization from its outset and behind-the-scenes organizer of the North Karelia Project, the first major community project to try to reduce the risk of heart attack. Over the course of a long and active career, he initiated innumerable physiological studies and well-crafted epidemiological studies, clinical trials, and community research projects. He has numerous awards, especially by sports medicine associations in Finland, Germany and the USA..