Fortiori Design LLC
Registered: 1355349061 Posts: 1,530
I got some very nice test information by S.M. I like to show you here what may be possible with MOXY, once we overcome the initial hesitation.
The fact, that we use a combination of noninvasive cardiac heamodynamic testing ( Physio flow ) paired with the traditional; VO2 equipment ( using mainly information like VE , RF and therefor TV as well as EtCO2 and the rations of VO2/HR and VO2/ RF and SEMG and last but not least over many years lactate/ glucose and in some cases ammonia , all this combination and data collections over the last 10 - 20 years including NIRS , allows us now to make some very specific statements ( sometimes right sometimes wrong ) but in any case it will show you how much fun it is once you start looking at performance from a real physiological point of view rather from a mechanical or physical point of view. This does not at all exclude performance in sports where we easy can collect performance information. Now you bundle the above equipment into a lab and into a bank account of close to 100'000 $ and now you see how limited this combinations are. So no wonder do we have fun to show you now how we can with a 1000$ + equipment have a very close information based on what we learned and now see with MOXY and this all in the field. So the example from S.M. is one example of basically all we get in who can start a great discussion on the different influences we can see by looking MOXY data's only. Here a 5/1/5 bike test. I have not a lot of info, just that it was a bike test and I have HR and MOXY info. I like to take a chance and may go very very wrong but that is what makes us learn and see where and what did not fit as of yet what we may see. So here we go. What you see here is HR ( r axis ) and SmO2 l axis of the TIP You can see the TIP ( Training intensity profile here based on SmO2 ( MOXYgenation trend) ARI ( Active recovery intensity seems very clear with the trend of initial deoxygenation ( SmO2 drop ) due to immediate need of O2 but lag of CO and VE ) for new reader here the back up of this statement with a physio flow look . See at the start. but as well see, what we miss, when just doing a "classical " step test instead of a TIP ( 5/1/5 ) See the start phase and the HR, SV and therefor CO lag. In this lag time we still need ATP and YES it comes as well from O2. ( and yes may be the statement is here to stay form Mb as the storage area. Now back to the TIP/ Look in the STEI ( structural endurance intensity ) the second step repeat ???? ( why a drop in SmO2 during the same load? . the third step than back to a cl;ear reaction with a SmO2 plateau on a somewhat lower level. Than we follow with the FEI ( functional endurance intensity ) with 2 clear indication, that more O2 is used, than can be supplied so great utilization but somewhat problem with delivery ??? and last HII with a very interesting trend in the first load as more O2 use than supplied ( utilization ) but in the second repeat an increase in SmO2 ??? Lets go step by step over the next few days. This TIP is based on O2 utilization and or trend. BUT if you make the TIP based on another bio feedback, the HR you will do the " zoning " slightly different do you. What can you see on the trend we have from HR as a part of the cardiac hemodynamic . CO = HR x SV ??? This gives us the blue " battle zone " see again here so easier to follow So this is very interesting and calls for the following question: Why is the cardiac system not reacting as we would expect. A dys balance of O2 supply and demand so a drop in SmO2 by this low HR would let as expect and increase in HR to increase supply ( delivery ) of more O2 to still keep the SmO2 in balance ??? The HII intensity proofs, that HR was not at its limit form the frequency. What we do not know here is, whether this person may simply has increased the SV to increase CO and keeps the HR stable. BUT if he had done that su=successfully than we should see a balanced SmO2 on a lower level. But we do not see that. What we see at the rest SmO2 rebound by this load is a lack of rebound of SmO2 to the same level as before but as well after this load. So here is a battle going on between delivery and utilization and the recovery of SmO2 much less high than before and after shows, that the delivery system Cardiac or respiration ) need much more O2 than before and after and therefor the rebound of SmO2 is much lower. So something with delivery is going strange. S.M. do please not yet step in as I like to try how far I move myself into trouble here. So if we see a delivery question we have to look at the delivery information we get from MOXY which is tHb. ( trend for Blood flow or blood volume.) To start out and make all of you thinking here a tHb trend of an other athlete left and right leg TIP assessment. Rember relative numbers as the chance that we hit exactly the same place left and right is zero so simply look at the trend. One interesting not when ever you test. At the one minute rest always have the same resting pedal position or stand the same way on the tredmill edge and so on. T2 is the left leg and here it was always at 12.00 o clock psosition. This is what we expect in a TIP at rest. So here the tHb from our discussion point from S.M. There is somewhat a pattern but very different. So the " delivery " is somewhat different. 1. we have to rule out the case, where the client may be restless at the one minute rest and or pedaling back wards . If he really was doing nothing and had the same leg always at the same position and or even one up one down we would expect at the rest a much different reaction of tHb than we see here as we should see an increase in tHb at the rest period at least in the very low intensities till perhaps to FEI and HII. Do we see this. What factores can influence tHb. and what is tHb influencing in return. Have a great evening and we will be back for more.
Fortiori Design LLC
Registered: 1355349061 Posts: 1,530
So first question is always.
What do we do " wrong " or did we manipulated the results due to some changes in the setup. In many cases the actual protocol will often decide the physiological reactions. " Classical" 3 minute protocols or ideas like a Wingate have little to do with physiological information's. They are simply a set of loads who will create a set of results, which can be compared with each other without a lot of full physiological feed backs. I do not like to go again in this discussion, but like for new readers to show you a great example. This is a great example done by a research project from the RED BULL research group. The 2 circles show you 2 " test protocols. I like to name it 2 loads, with different length of steps before loading more wattage. It was collected with a Portamon from Artinis. Yellow and purple are the traces we look at.. tHb and Hb diff. where Hb difference trend is close to SmO2 trend. Even without having a lot of information it seems easy to see, that the 2 different step length have a incredible influence on the reaction in Oxygenation ( Utilization and delivery.) When we take SmO2 or on here Hb diff as an indication of utilization and tHb as an indication of delivery, than we can easy understand, that the protocols directly create an end result based on the time we offer to the different physiological system to try to react. . The relative fast increase in load in the second circle gives a great indication how the increase in mechanical muscle tension on the blood flow directly is linked to the drop in tHb . As such we have as well an immediate reduction in O2 supply ( delivery ) and we have to dig into the available O2 supply and storage are and as such SmO2 ( Hb diff ) have to drop. HR or better CO ( HR x SV) as well as VE from the respiration point of view VE = RF x TV will have as indirect delayed reaction a very different influence on the performance. In short the test step protocols directly will influence the end result and as such will not give any information on limiter and compensator with exception of the end result. So we have one point in this assessment and the rest as so often is calculated from which end point the 5 or the shorter minute step test. ?? So back to S.M case. We have this interesting reaction of the tHb in a TIP 5/1/5 protocol. The TIP suppose to show us, what happens in the 1 min break. In short. I suddenly stop using my leg muscles in biking. Meaning I stop suddenly the demand of O2 ( ATP ) but the delivery systems like Respiration, Cardiac as well as the vascular delivery situation will not immediately stop as there is a lag time. ( correction ) the mechanical reaction on the vascular system, the muscle tension created by the load will immediately stop . what may lag behind is vasoconstriction or dilatation reaction due to "chemical" reflex situation ) Or in very simple terms. The sudden stop will show the "use " of O2 from the muscles involved in the movement. and the sudden start will again confirm the need of O2 to restart the load. This when we look at SmO2. When we look at tHb we should as well see a trend in stop and start, as we unload mechanical the muscle and reload with an initial muscle contraction. To recap here the tHb reaction in the S,M. case As you can see, there are some up and downs, but in no way do they look as a nice pattern of load and deload. Why and what happens. 1. If this is a first time assessment I would repeat it and have a MOXY on the left and the right side. Here an example with a dys balance pattern of delivery between left and right. Courtesy to Jon from Boulder. You can see the difference, but you still have some indication in both traces, where we load and unload Even the most religious VO2 max user and FTP user has to agree, that this could never been detected in any of the current test ideas. Now in Jon 's case it is not as " bad" compared to S.M case, where it is really hard to see a decent 5/1/5 pattern in tHb. So is there something very different. In S.M case we have a test back from march so let's see, what tHb trends where than. As you can see the dark brown is the first test and now we have the light brown. So a dramatical change in the way tHb ( blood flow and blood volume react. So is it a delivery change based on a structural change or a functional reaction?? lets see the SmO2 reaction than and now as well as Delivery " over HR bio marker. You can see in the overlap that at the low intensity HR are identical and SmO2 in the first load of the same double load. After that we have a clear trend of a lower HR and a lower SmO2 reaction in the second test. Indication. " Cardiac reaction: lower HR by the same loads.( If they did the same steps / hopefully ) Lower HR would than mean CO = HR x SV so what ever they did change the cardiac hemodynamic to a much bigger SV by the same load or a lower HR. So in case we now add some specific functional cardiac training to it we have a much higher CO in a few weeks. Good or Bad ??? The SmO2 trend indicate a much lower SmO2 as an indication of a change in utilization. There are different reason why we can utilize better. ( Functional and structural again ). There are different way we can train the heart ( right ventricular stimulation or left ventricular stimulation) so called cardiac remodeling. Now I do not like to go into training suggestions as there is a risk of a cook book. What ever S.M. and her help in the back ground did change some very nice structural situation. Here my speculation based on what we see here. 1. Improved cardiac delivery. Great. Improved utilization supper. Where is the problem now. . The drop in SmO2 still indicates a delivery problem. Could be vasularisation or but the low intensity double step seem to refute this suggestion in fact compared to the first test it is more likly improved as well. The increase in cardiac reaction ( structural ) the improvement of vasuclarisation, the improvement of O2 utilization can be done over some very simple respiratory workout ideas. ( We do not like to show what this person did again as it was based on his first test result and as such should not be copied from any body. What I believe was done here, was a very specific intense training with a steady hyper capnic situation. Now this seems to strong in this person, that he manipulated his respiration during g this test as he is used to but it is not efficient for a race or a hard workout. He now has the limiter in actual ventilation of air. He has to improve his VE form where ever hie is to try to double the VE he can move, so respiration can play with CO2 whether he likes to be hyper capnic in a work with or hypo capnic and=in a race he just let's nature do its work. The tHb indicates a manipulation of respiration which overruled the mechanical pressure of load and unload. Next step in this case is to lift the limiter respiration up to the great respond he or she created with the training over the last few month ( since march ) thanks S.M for this incredible data feedback and god luck with your corresponding long distance coach in Switzerland . You are a great team and lot's of fun to listen in to your regular conversation. Last but not least I like to show without explanation just let the picture talk the structural the change in utilization. Look at the red only as it is O2 Hb and as such a similar trend as SmO2 would have. You can see the difference e now and form than.