Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #1 

A  preview  is often based on a review.
 So over the  lats month I  revived  many of  the  great email feedback's  I  got.

There where mainly  2  categories    roughly off  themes.

a)  the  super  great constructive   feedback  where  readers sent me  research articles   from all over thee world  , where they  show, how many of the ideas we   do here with a  very simple  and basic  method   are getting  supported.

b) a surprising  big number of emails  asking  for  " cook books " on how to train  with NIRS/.

The  a ) feedback's are  often coming  from researchers  and people I know   from universities who over the last  25 years  where regular customers  and still are   from  FaCT-Canada. It shows  their  interest in starting to combine  the different tools  we use  like  Cardiac  feedback ( Physio  flow )  NIRS  feedback  ( Portamon and MOXY )  and  VO2    options paired with  blood  testing  and SEMG ( BTS )
Here the  2017  discussion will be  very  interesting  and I will start  this week with an overview   from some of this combined  testing  and how we  where integrating NIRS into the  classical tools , and where we  had  new  questions and new  answers  to some very old   discussions.  So  it is all about  possible interpretation.

The  Trigger  for this interests  was set by 2  pictures  we had on the forum. 

Below a  Presentation   organised  by Swinco  In Zurich Switzerland  where  we had people  from all over Europe . ( Russia, Norway, Italy, France , Great Britain, Finland Polen , Hungary, Germany , Czech  republic,  to name  just  spontaneous  the once  where I get  regular feedback's.  This   was one  of  the  worlds  first  seminars  where we  where running  live  all  feedbacks  possible  for coaches  in one  assessment. You can see ht e Portamon  big screen  with three  penetration depth  behind the   finish  top cyclist   and  Andri  from Swinco  doing some blood sampling, In the far left back ground  you see the live  cardiac feedbakcs  where   people  can look at  live Stroke volume   , HR  (  so CO )  LVET  and SVR and Ef %    and  if  you like more  .
 Than   Cosmed  VO2  equipment which now is paired  with NIRS ( MOXY)  and  MOXY parallel  to   Portamon  as well as  SEMG  activity

swiss present.jpg 

 So thanks  for the  great tools  we  got  from . Frank Bour  France Manatec   ( Physio flow ),  Portamon  and thanks  to Willy  Collier  from Artinis, MOXY  thanks  to Fortiori  and Roger and Stuart, SEMG  thanks to BTS  Italy,  Blood sampling  thanks  to Akray  Japan,VO2  equipment   from Cosmed Italy.
 To make it clear, we  always buy  this  equipment to allow  us  to be very independent on what we use  and do.

Than  the bog big thanks to all the   in the back ground  working people,  who sent us  many  data  and  help to keep us  straight  forward  before we make  conclusions.

In this  big group  are  regular  readers from this  forum and  from  many different forums  I    once in a while peak in and  ask  some questions.  As  one  example  not  to   forget the rest here   one of the fascination in  practical approaches and pushing  interest   for the sack of  their own interest  without  any EGO  to be  a big guy.  Below  one of  this  amazing  ideas  and  gathering personal more knowledge  is  the  picture  below.
 Duncan Clark  a  coach  but a  full time  Helicopter  pilot  with his  friend in Great Britain  Marcel  a  coach  and a biathlon   athlete  doing real  world   live  data collection  with the baove tools    we just explained.
Marcel real.jpg
 


Having  the luck  and privileged  to  work  with  all this type of people  together over the last  35 +-  years   makes  you humbled  on how  much we  can learn outside  official  education  institution and how much more we  really  can gather , when we have connection to open  not  indoctrinated people.
 One of  this open minded  groups   I  was privilege  to   meet  was  Per  from Red Bull group  whit an incredible  exercise  physiologist there  Leslie Shooter.

She  sent  me  a  great  paper  and here one section which all of  us  can take as a new years resolution 
  

PROFESSIONAL SCIENTISTS usually respond to new findings with a profound skepticism that goes beyond the specifics of the research. When first confronted with new work, gatekeepers judge it according to how well it fits with prevailing beliefs. Therefore, the more novel and unexpected a discovery, the more likely that other scientists will reject it-­-­precisely because it contradicts current understanding. When they were initially proposed, ribozymes, prions, and cold fusion all looked like long shots.

Faced with rejection, the researcher experiences a deep sense of insecurity. Error often accompanies the ambiguity of discovery, and in science, being wrong is almost as bad as being ignored. On the other hand, as another saying puts it: Don't give up a good idea just because others don't understand it. To succeed in science, researchers have to confront rejection by becoming advocates for their new findings.
  By   The practice of science at the edge of knowledge.Grinnell, Frederick

Chronicle of Higher Education;; 3/24/2000, Vol. 46 Issue 29, 


So  the   for sure thousand  of datas  we  had  the privilege  to look  through one by one   with all very individual   stories  behind   was  and still are helping all of us  to get a very new interesting picture  of  the future  in  health  and activity planning.

It allows  us  now  to plan individual  approaches  depending ion   limiters  and compensators. 
We  can plan  cardiac  improvement  or  respiratory improvement.  coordination  changes  and  even  blood picture reactions  when paired  with proper nutritional interventions.
The later   nutritional intervention  paired  with the physiological gathering  started  very intense   soon 10 years back in California  with a person very  quite  and very   humbled  on what she is able  to  do. Here one of  this pictures  where we  had  people in a " science  setting .    from USA  alpine  skiing, USA  rowing  coaches,  Cross fit  starters  and so on.  Mary Ann Kelly  now in Chicago  and California 
dec07clinictest.JPG 

  Which  brings  as  to the end of the review and what is  preview.

b )  the biggest  group  of interests  and the  forum gives  a very  wrong idea  is .  Personal trainers  who are  ready    and need some  more help  to integrate  this in a  one to one  indoor training session.
 The second  biggest  group are  game  coaches   from Ice hockey,  soccer, tennis  , badminton  and more. 
The third   biggest group are  rehabilitation  people   from individual  rehab  and health improvement.

Good new. We  should have a very  great software  ready  for this  type  of  assessments including  live feedback  control  for   workouts.

So  we will focus  on this groups more over the coming  month  and  2017.
  So  all  will be based on what we  do here all the time learn  to  read  and make interpretations  and   many of the  ideas and feedback's  are based on  the  years of  combinations  of the tools  above.



ryinc

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 369
 #2 
Juerg special thanks for all the time and effort you put into the forum and being willing to share knowledge during 2016, it is a fantastic character trait to take time to teach others.

Thanks also to Bobby, stuart, craig, sebo, danielle, ruud, fred, sandy, jiri, andrew and any others i have forgotten who regularly contribute and who have been willing to share ideas which made me have to think.

My hopes for 2017 for this forum are to learn more from you and others and how to turn moxy into something i more fully understand for myself how to meaningfully and practically integrate into training (sebo is setting a good example for us to try follow). I'm starting to know the ingrediebts but need to start cooking at some stage [wink]
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #3 
ryinc   thanks  for the  kind feedback  and I  can tell you out  of  40 years  of experience  you  are  far knee deep in perfect cooking  when I compare big names  who   cook   with  far too much salt on  what they believe is the truth and what really matters in training.

y  

The practice of science at the edge of knowledge.
Grinnell, Frederick

The behavior of baseball umpires helps define the issues. There are three types of umpires.
The first 
type says: "I call balls and strikes as they are
." The second says: "I call them as I see them."
And the 
third says: "What I call them is what they become."

What distinguishes the types of umpires is not the situations in which they find themselves, but the attitudes that they bring to their work. As a result of those attitudes, they practice umpiring differently.
The first type claims truth;
the second, perspective;
and the third, power.

 

Philosophers might identify the umpires' different claims as
-realism,
-contextualism,
-and social 
constructivism.
Realism corresponds to the traditional view of science that links reality directly to

observation.
Contextualism suggests that how one looks at things will determine, to some extent, what 
one sees.
Social constructivism corresponds to the postmodern view, linking reality with power.
To 
determine which view most accurately reflects what scientists do, let us consider the two central features of scientific practice:  
                                       discovery and credibility.

Discovery begins within the context of prevailing scientific beliefs. At the same time, the goals of discovery assume that previous knowledge is incomplete or wrong. Discovery takes place at the edge of knowledge, an ambiguous place where no one has been before. At the edge, one must make risky choices and address hard questions: What should be done first? How does one recognize data,
especially when one is searching for something never seen before? And when experimental results do not meet one's expectations, is it because one's original idea was wrong, or because the methods used to test the idea were wrong? Scientists have a saying:

Don't give up a good idea just because the data 
don't fit.

That description of research contrasts sharply with the traditional idea that in science, one proceeds from hypothesis to discovery in a linear fashion, guided by method and logic. Of course, some science does conform to that traditional model. An example could be a clinical drug trial approved by the Food
and Drug Administration, in which researchers agree in advance on what will count as data, how many patients will be necessary for the data to be meaningful, and what will constitute a positive or negative outcome.
At the edge of knowledge, however, method and logic are insufficient. Intuition and creative insight become just as important. Moreover, researchers frequently find themselves taking unplanned journeys to unexpected places, realizing only later just what it is that they have discovered. Because experimental conditions cannot be controlled completely, unexpected and important results sometimes
occur, an aspect of research that

Max Delbruck often called the principle of limited sloppiness


So all on here keep  cooking  keep  the limitless  sloppiness and look  for unreal seen and   unseen real  to be separated  based on  facts  and not indoctrinated  ideas.  and theories. 

bobbyjobling

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 219
 #4 
Merry Xmas to all [smile]
Stuart percival

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 79
 #5 
Juerg thanks for all your help! Since in became a moxy certified centre I hear radically changed the way I analyse athletes and prescribe training

Thanks ryinc for the mention although I need to find more time to join in discussions. I am setting a new business up so hardly ever get time to join in

Although I am determined to learn more and add to forum over coming weeks

Onwards and upwards !!!
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net