Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 3      Prev   1   2   3
EternalFury

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 25
 #31 
Roger,

I think your experiment shows that athletes have a greater ability to consume oxygen to produce work. (which is a usual conclusion)

This type of feat is the result of a long chain of systems that include genetics (raw potential), ability to capture and deliver oxygen to the working muscle (development of capillaries, myoglobin, the number and size of the mitochondria in muscle fibers and aerobic enzyme activity), muscle composition (ratios of fiber types), etc.
Arguably, SmO2 is not a biomarker for any one of these systems in particular, but, as your experiment shows, it seems to correlate positively with them as a whole.

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #32 
Roger thanks great  pictures.
 Here what we do since a long time  with Brian.
 We call it IPAHR as in contrast to IPAHD.
 IPAHD is now well introduced here. Individual physiological assessment of homeostasis disruption.
 IPAHR is for acyclic sport and stands for Individual physiological assessment of homeostasis  recovery.
See picture below to explain.
The third picture is a IPAHR on the ice with a player. We look at game specific loads with 30 - 60 sec all out loads and 3 min rest and see, how long can athlete deload and maintain the deloaded level. Than how fast is he reloaded and perhaps super compensated and what can we do to accelerate the recovery during a game and as a training intervention.
So to your question: can we test the recovery . Answer yes and it is already done and a test is already established for this  and we use mainly NIRS, as HR and lactate give very limited feedback on the actual situation.
 The idea of IPAHR is actually a topic this week in the international meeting in Switzerland, where I present exactly this question  Recovery as a part of endurance and how we integrate Spiro Tiger to shift O2 Diss curve to speed up recovery and how we use MOXY / NIRS to proof that it actually works as we can see live  how oxygenation and deoxygenation can be manipulated with specific respiratory interventions.


Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: ROACH_ICE.jpg, Views: 12, Size: 70.88 KB 

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #33 
Thanks for this great summary:
"This type of feat is the result of a long chain of systems that include genetics (raw potential), ability to capture and deliver oxygen to the working muscle (development of capillaries, myoglobin, the number and size of the mitochondria in muscle fibers and aerobic enzyme activity), muscle composition (ratios of fiber types), etc.
Arguably, SmO2 is not a biomarker for any one of these systems in particular, but, as your experiment shows, it seems to correlate positively with them as a whole."

This helps to explain why we  think MOXY has some great places in training
The classical idea of looking at progress is , and it makes sense, running or cycling a specific section we use and see, whether I can cover the distance in a shorter time  for example. or in the same time but lower HR and so on.
 Control training  end result is still best done by looking at a specific performance.
 Problem.
 If I see progress I am happy but  I may not really know why I made progress.
 Remember the body as a team.
Many reason can contribute to a faster time.
 Form all the above ideas to many more.

So when there is progress we are all happy. When the athlete  is winning a race we are all happy. We often not even look critically enough why he won.
 What happens if we do not see progress.
 Well the same as when we see progress we do not know why. but we are not happy.
 By using different biomarkers and bringing them together we can understand what system is still or newly limiting performance and what is trying to compensate the limitation..
 Some examples: I may see the same speed or time but have a lower HR.
Possible reason . Higher  stroke volume. By the same  cardiac output a higher SV will bring the HR down.
Now what caused the higher stroke volume.
1. Change in respiration ?
2. Change in plasma volume due to change in hydration habits. ( Electrolyte control )
3.Change in EF % not due to  preload but through actual left ventricular  improvement of strength.
4. Higher  blood volume return due to avoidance of vasoconstriction due to respiratory training or due to  strength training of the lower extremity ?
 Many more options.
IPAHD is the assessment of  many of this questions.
 By looking live at cardiac hemodynamic ( Physio Flow ) paired with live info on ventilation ( Flow meter and live MOX / NIRS  we can see how this different system interact with each other.
 All this creates many of the interaction we got in the nice summary and therefor sometimes no "progress in time " will still show progress in one of the weak links and can therefor be used to change training ideas and  interventions.
Practical example of 2 world class athletes see pic. One has an incredible capillarisation but a " relative weak " respiratory system . ( diff. athlete 1 160 +- VE versus 260 +- VE)The other exactly the opposite. They are in the current world ranking 3 spots apart but have very different strength and weaknesses.

Summary. That's where ideas like MOXY come in to actually guide  intensities , see, what caused a faster de and reoxygenation  when I use certain training stimuli live and than see, whether this functional reaction,  if repeated  enough time will stick as a structural adaptation.
 We use and will demonstrate  wed. how we can see live , what caused deoxygenation , when using different ideas and what caused reoxygenation in the same way.
 Than we can integrate this in workouts and  MOXY allows us now to give the client a direct feedback, when he has to quite the workout and or how many times and how long he can use the intervention, as the stimuli is still active and working well.






Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: yama_gk_closer_look_comp_2_vasc.JPG, Views: 13, Size: 82.66 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: yama_gk_comp_1.JPG, Views: 13, Size: 93.47 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: yama_gk_comp_2.JPG, Views: 13, Size: 116.48 KB 

EternalFury

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 25
 #34 
Thank you, Juerg.
Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #35 
You are more than welcome.
 Here in short what I try  over days to explain and than a great reader in our forum comes in and get it done in a short perfect way.
 enjoy it again :
 " "This type of feat is the result of a long chain of systems that include genetics (raw potential), ability to capture and deliver oxygen to the working muscle (development of capillaries, myoglobin, the number and size of the mitochondria in muscle fibers and aerobic enzyme activity), muscle composition (ratios of fiber types), etc.
Arguably, SmO2 is not a biomarker for any one of these systems in particular, but, as your experiment shows, it seems to correlate positively with them as a whole"
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net