Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
marcorsini61

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1
 #1 

Hello I am a cycling coach and I wanted an interpretation of the csv file attached.

 I have done a test MLSS of an élite athlete using the following protocol and Moxy.

MLSS test:

1 step-100 watt -3 min- lactate 1.2-fc 109

2 step-100 watt-3min-lactate 1.3-fc 111

3 step-150 watt -3 min-lactate 1.2-fc121

4 step-150 watt-min 3-lactate 0.8-fc121

5 step-200W-3 min-lactate 1.3-fc134

6-ste 200 watt-3min-lactate 0.8-fc 140

7 step-250 watt-min 3-lactate 2.9-fc158

8 step-250 watt-min 3-lactate 4.1-FC170

9 step-300W-3 min-lactate 3.7 -fc180

10 step-300W-3 min-lactate 4.1-fc184

11 step-350 Watt-3min-lactate 7.6-fc195

12 step-350W-3 min-lactate 12.3-fc 200

 

Thanks for collaboration.

 

Marco

 

 
Attached Files
csv test_mlss.csv (367.16 KB, 29 views)

Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #2 
This dataset contains data from different dates and it looks like multiple tests were done on different dates,

Which date is the test you are showing the lactate results from?

Also where did you place the Moxy???
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #3 
Tired  over     a few hours  to sort out the data  mess but not yet success full  will show  later  what I deal  with . There is  one great feedback  I will show  as well the lactate feedback   as well as the misconceptions  and interpretation on what MLSS  suppose to be.
 This   problem  with 25 different LT  concepts  and  a few  ideas on  what MLSS  suppose  to be  has to be   to avoided  with NIRS as we run into the same  discussion without ending.
.
 The worst  we  already started  to  combine lactate   idea   with NIRS  Breakpoints.
 NIRS is what it is a   live feedback on O2  utilization and delivery paired  with some  feedback on the blood  volume/  flow. That's it.
 Than you ca make   connections  with  other ideas  but you  do not replace  NIRS  with   lactate numbers  or NIRS  with  SV  Numbers  or NIRS  with VO2 numbers in the field   for practical applications.
 We have trends in practical applications  and that is good enough. will be back later  to show  how  lactate is directly   dependent on  step length as we have  some nice    values here. If  I  can get a  hint  on   what data  where really  related  to the test  form the  huge amount of data on the MOXY  csv  file, that would  help.
sandor

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 61
 #4 
Is this why many have stopped training based on lactate "middle" levels, as it can change from person to person if it even exists at all (lactate break points) and have instead built up from the bottom, ie baseline lactate at rest + X.X mmol?

We want to balance growth response with recovery time.
This is where Moxy has been really interesting for me so far - the real time reading has forced me to acknowledge that in some training sessions i am not recovered as much as i previously thought. So i must back off how hard i train.
DanieleM

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 264
 #5 
I think I've found the test described 12 step of 3 minutes (each repeated twice).
Below the graph with SmO2 and tHB
step3min_eliteathlete.pngVery balanced (as expected since he is an elite athlete).
Both SmO2 and tHB are levelling off at the last step.
Very fast SmO2 recovery.
tHB spikes after 40/50 seconds from the end of the test.
The lag time may mean it is due to a BP control reaction?

juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #6 
Nice  work  Daniele. I was searching  and  had no luck I was searching  for  3 min  go 1 min rest  for the lactate sampling .Than I was searching for MLSS and found really nothing even close to a MLSS  as he pointed out  so no  clue  why   his protocol  was MLSS  named. ( will shows  some  back ground  on MLSS  and  where  and how it got developed ) In the csv  file  what  date    do you took  so we  now  can connect the lactate  information  with the SmO2 trends   and tHb  reaction  to show  you   whether there  are some common grounds  and where we have  some  conflicts  depending in the view  we take.
 Great  work Daniele.
DanieleM

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 264
 #7 
In the csv file from raw 10646.
Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #8 
Yes. MLSS test are different tests to actually establish the level of MLSS instead of 1 single shot
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #9 
. I like to start a whole set  of responses  and thought we  got in the last  few  weeks  from an ever growing reader group on here  and  more  and more  great  critical  and  interesting  contribution.
Important: as we  grow on here we  will have many great ideas  and  thoughts  which  hopefully  clash  once in a while  and I hope we  can keep a great open minded  discussion going.
 For me.
 It is NOT about   NIRS as the gospel
 It is about  improving and closing the gap  between   the   rapid  growing information we have in labs and in specific  interest  group  and move them  towards the  mainstream application, so  centers  and coaches  can make  some educated  critical decision on what they use , sell and  offer to a  huge  variety of  clients For me it is all about individual  quality  service  to   clients  who pay  professionals  for their  service .
In other words  if we  use  220 -  age  for  training zoning,  why would  I pay a professional for  that. Do I need   information if  I do a  VO2  max tests  and get the printout  with the %  zoning. I  can do a FTP  on my own  and  than order the cookbook and many more ideas.
 The  future  training center  and personal  coach may have to come up  with some higher quality service in the every growing market  of  fitness  and health promotion.

This opens the critical question we often have on here.  MOXY is  too complex  ( NIRS)  for the   general user on the street  and many   most likely   a good  and accepted reason point  to this and argue, that MOXY  will en never be sold  like   FIT BIT  or a  Energy  band  or a  HR  monitor.
 I  actually agree.
 I  see MOXY  really  as the  tool  for  serious  open minded  and  smart  professional  , who  cares and  likes to make a difference on each client they have  and  like to improve each client on  at a time of their performance level.
Training  and  serious  fitness center   will be able to asses their  customer and design  smart workouts.
Team  coaches  and   school  teams  have a chance to  create specific  workouts  for specific  weaknesses'. Personal trainers  have a  live  feedback as they work  side  by  side  with other coaches in a training facility they will show live  when to stop a  load ,  how long to rest before they reload  and  how many sets   before they  change  to the next  stimulus.
This besides a  personal trainer  who will count  repetition and looks a  stop  watch  to have  a nicely looking organised  workout  with  minimal  physiological meaning  but  for sure  not  set up  for a  one to one individual  program.
 BUT
 before we are there  we have to be able to  show  that we can combined current interesting concepts  with new  emerging ideas and technology  and be ready to replace  old ideas  in case newer ideas  seem  more beneficial.

 To  do this  we have to know the past  and w e have to  have an open mind  to embrace critically  but  fair the future.

 I like to use this  feedback  of this  assessment to show  what I mean.

So PLEASE  nothing is personal  if I pick a specific   feedback  we get on here, I simply use them  if I see an opportunity  to make some  critical points  to the topic.

Let's start here.
a) I like to show you  how  stupid   my  step where, when I approached this  information. I  made the basic  mistake   and a task I teach my students in the first lesson   we approach.
 " Always read  all  carefully ,   avoid  SELECTIVE reading, meaning you read what you like to    read  or   you like to accept.
Well Juerg look in the Mirror.
 I  was reading ( selective ) this interesting thread  just before  my first patient was coming in.
 So here  step  by step  and I show you how NOT to approach a thread  or data's  ( Thank you Daniele  for the wake up  call when you sent me the s section of this assessment )
 Here my selective reading

Hello I am a cycling coach and I wanted an interpretation of the csv file attached.

 I have done a test MLSS of an élite athlete using the following protocol and Moxy.

MLSS test:


My thoughts . Woww  great  that is  what we  did  a  week after we  had our  first NIRS  Portamon many many years back. Why wow.
 Because it was a reminder   how  sceptical  but open minded  we  started the  adventure  NIRS integration in our  existing  assessment tools. The tools  where -  cardiac hemodyn,maic   noninvasive,  VO2  portable,SEMG  blood  testing including lactate Bio harness  for  g  force  and quality  control  and now  add on NIRS as a live direct feedback.
 Problem , very expensive tools   and now we added  another 15'000 $. Completely  wrong directions from what we  had planned , bringing science  down to practical application. But as it turns  out the  10 + years of this combinations opened  up  the steps  we now discuss here  form  1000'000 $  lab equipment down  to a  single 2 MOXY assessment  non-invasive   and with all the  simplicity  but as well risks  of  over reading  or misreading information

so   when I saw  I have done a test MLSS of an élite athlete using the following protocol and Moxy.
I
 was very exited  and lets  move it down to just lactate  and MOXY  and MLSS.
 Finally we ahd  somebody  form the  Lactate  group  who  takes the  needed step  to see  how  lactate combiens  with  NIRS. Do they  combined   and complement each other  ,  or   can NIRS  replace  lactate   or  do they give very different  information's.
Now  to talk the same language.
We   where looking  at  MLSS  and NIRS under the  information, that lactate is NOT the reason of  fatigue. lactate is not  produce  by anaerobic  means  alone  as this is rather the exception than the rule ( Gladden ) That lactate is the reason why  we can sustain  a longer  performance rather than the reason why we  quite a performance.
Now  lactate is a  systemic feedback  and  if wee take it  we have to keep in mind  some  variability   from  the equipment +- 0.2  for heavy lactate believers   and  we have some variability  +-  0.3 mmol  depending on location we  can take it like toes  fingers  ear. Now small  neglectible variation but still when we use  certain LT concepts  they  will make  a  huge interpretation difference. ( we  for sure  will get back  to a discussion on this )
As lactate is a system  reaction we  do not have  any decent information  where or what  muscle group in a certain sport  create  a high energy demand so lactate had to be a part of the energy solution. We  as well have no  idea how  high the lactate production was in one area  and how much was  reused   in other areas   so what is left over  has  a lot of questions. Last  but still incomplete  the question, when  during the activity this lactate   was produced.
NIRS  could perhaps  answer all this  questions or at least  reduce th  big  questions to some smaller  questions.
 NIRS is live , it is locally  and if  we use  multiple areas we may  have some better  feedback on  where we needed lactate as a helper  and where we  could  afford  to   redirect O2  and  blood  to be used in more   loaded  or higher performing areas

 So  combine lactate and  NIRS Now  here we have a reader , who just did  this  and even  sent us his results .
 So I thought  due to my  selective reading
 MLSS  was   the answer in the 1960  to the  growing idea, that we  can use absolute numbers in lactate testing to design training programs.

2. MLSS Concentration (MLSSc) and - MLSSw Determination

The MLSS concept was previously proposed by  Margaria et al.[34,89] in the 1960s using five to eight

independent constant load exercise tests to deter] mine MLSS.

Margaria was  one of the smart   physiological  brains, who very early on  had  some problems  with the at that  time current ideas on lactate. He was not yet ready to get rid  of the whole  idea, but he  very nicely  demonstrated with his work, that the better way to use lactate  was to see trends.
 In  simple terms.
 old  wording:
 If  we  go  aerobic  wee  will see an initial increase in lactate but if  we allow  a  long enough time  so the lactate concentration from  the initial  start  can be  diluted in the systemic   circulation  it will drop again.
On the other  side,   if we go  too hard  ( anaerobic ) than the initial  increase will keep going to a  steady increase  and work will be terminated due to the " lactic acid " concentration.
So somewhere between easy  and too hard  will be a  speed or intensity , where the body  will be able to  sustain performance due to the balance in bad  lactic acid  and the ability  to  just tolerate it. This than will be the MLSS  or  maximal lactate steady state.
 To be able to find this MLSS   they did  many many   protocols till they   had a time offering the  findings fro MLSS the time was  16 plus minutes.  .
 Now  jump forward.
 If  NIRS is a  live  direct feedback  than  we should see
 a)  if we  go " aerobic"  a steady increase in  SmO2 values  after an initial  drop.
 If we go " anaerobic "  we should see a  steady  drop  and if  we  are in the  MLSS  we should see a stable flat  SmO2.
 Really  a no brainer at the time.
 If that  would work  we can avoid  many many   finger   stabbing  and have a great  non-invasive   option  to find MLSS and  the beauty  we  can do this live  in the field during   a  run,bike  a cross country ski a  row  and so on.
 The  non-invasive lactate tester  was  born  with Portamon. The time   after   or  till today  showed  us,  nearly but not  really. NIRS is NOT a lactate tester. it is a NIRS  equipment doing just that.
 Now  step  back.
  Question.
 How  would a MLSS  NIRS assessment look like.
 So  when I had the feedback  MLSS  with lactate and NIRS  I was so  happy to  be able to show this here independent  form our  biased  data collections.

So  after my  first patient I run back to the computer  to move the csv  file  on the screen   expecting very  specific  picture . What  kind of a picture.

 Here a MLSS  from swimming Lactate trend

max lass swimming.jpg 

or here a MLSS rowing
max lass  rwoing.jpg 

So  I opened  the csv  file

Expected  somewhere between 4 - 7  16 plus minutes  moxy datas  so easy to see easy to overlap  and easy to make an interpretation.
 Let's see
smo2  thb all  datas - Copy.jpg 
wow what is  that. Now  the  challenge started  and instead  settling down I rushed into  analyzing  what  this all was.
 So  first think before you start !!! Last   datas  would be the last collection so most likely the last  datacollection iss   what ever  he  did  but for sure no MLSS.
 So easy  go back read the full  thread  and here we  are.

 12  steps  3 min each step but really  6  steps  6 min each. So  easy.
 Step one look for a one or three minute  SmO2  thB  calibration.
 Than  add  36 min to the time  a and look for a sudden steep increase in SmO2  and tHb.  Now as you can se e there where some options.
 I had  no  real info, whether the MOXY was sued  after the data collection of not  so  simply look  for  40 +-  min  data collection section.
 That's  , when the  time  start to run as I look  to  the different raw datas in the csv file where you have a  day  set  when  ever you start a new  collection so I had 7  different data collection dates. There where a few  close to  the 40 +- minutes. Fast  forward  lots of data analysing, interesting  findings in each section,  question what the  challenge  may be we  are getting here as we have many mails where we  get datas  sent  to try to  push some   short  fast  interpretations out  from us, where we  make a   not really good contribution to  NIRS use.
 So  got lost . Daniele  than  opened the   proper  direction ( Thanks    Daniele)
 So I shifted  to the HR lactate data's  to see what  we had  there.

lac HR.jpg 

Beauty he  took lactate 2  x in the same load  so 2 readings  in 100 watt and so on.
 So  one reading  after  +- 3 min and one after 6 min+-

So lets'  go there.
 Critical look  on lactate testing .  and you give the answer. Her a short  help ' Step length  and lactate

lactatedynmic.jpg 

 What is the proper  step length  to be sure your  conclusion on HR  and   performance reflect the real  load ?

So  when the below  rowing test would have been done of ver  6 min  would the   two  LT1  and LT 2  still be by the same wattage ?
rowing 2.jpg 
Or in this 4 min  rowing step test, how  would the result be in a  2 min step test or a  6 min step test or in a  5/1/5  lactate dynamic.
rowing lactate.jpg 
 How  come , that we  all accept this  test result s use the performance to work out  no critical questions  asked  and than we  do  real great and accepted critical questions  when it comes to NIRS.  Help  for an answer  and we will go fuethe rin this case  to see  what we  can combine  with lactate and what not.
 Here a hint. How  doe s a  6 min SmO2 tend  could look  at a  100 or  150 watt   load. . What dies  the  increase e or higher  lactate value  after three minutes   can be  contributed  to  and why  can we predict  with the SmO2 trend where the  next lactate value most likely  will be ?  And here  just a   really nicely reminder form some very smart critical people  from  may years  back. They  where  just not accepted  or we had selective  hearing as they would have destroyed a   nice  working theory.

Thirdly, an alternate or a complementary explanation to the pattern of plasma ]La-] response to ramp exercise can be suggested. According to this explanation, lactate is produced in the working muscle: (1) as soon as the exercise begins, as suggested by Brooks (1985); or (2) following a delay, according to the theory of the anaerobic threshold (Davis 1985). Under both hypotheses the onset of lactate production within the working muscles occurs at comparatively low work rates. At that time: (1) the amounts of lactate produced  and the gradient between muscle [La-] and plasma [La-], and the amount of lactate released from the muscle remains small; (2) cardiac output and muscle blood flow are also low and do not favour lactate release from the working muscles and its distribution into S; and (3) the small amounts of lactate released are diluted within the comparatively large S, thus resulting in a very small increase (if any) in plasma [La-]. Therefore, a delay could be expected between the beginning of lactate production within the working muscles and the parabolic rise in plasma [La-] in response to ramp exercise in a similar way that, in response to a short period of severe exercise, the peak value of plasma [La-] is only observed following a several-minute delay into the recovery period (see Hirvonen et al. 1987, 1992). Consequently, plasma [La-] concentration at a given t during a ramp exercise does not reflect lactate production in the muscle at that precise t and at the exact corresponding work rate, but at a previous t minus ~ of unknown and probably variable length, and at the corresponding work rate. This phenomenon might have been overlooked in the development of the theory of the anaerobic threshold which implicitly assumes that plasma [La-] at a given t reflects lactate production and thus the metabolic state of the muscles at that precise t, and at the exact corresponding work rate. This is very unlikely to be the case, particularly during the exercise protocols of short duration and with steep increase in work rate used for the detection of the anaerobic threshold (Anderson and Rhodes 1989). In this type of protocol, where VO2 significantly lags behind the value expected for the corresponding work rate (Whippet al. 1981), it may be expected that plasma [La-] also tracks the metabolic state of the working muscles with a significant delay, particularly at the beginning of exercise for the reasons presented above.


Stay tuned  as we will have much more  from this data collection and than leading into the rowing  and other topics  we  still have to reviewed



juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #10 
Question of today.
 What  do we  often expect   on a trend in lactate curve towards the end.
 See the  "MLSS"  resp 6 min step test in these discussion. . So  what  do most people  would expect the SmO2 trend  curve  would look like with a  lactate curve  of this  configuration ? Small help  . Here again the   LT  test   of a 4 min rowing test.
rowing lactate.jpg 
 How  would a NIRS  SmO2  MOXY trace look  like    perhaps. Interesting but    typically  for rowing is the fact that they use in many cases  Maders  idea  of  2  and 4 mmol lactate. If interest is  here we  can show te original study  , where  from 16   cases involved in the  study  non   had  actual 4 mmol lactate  and he  already showed there  that   step length will throw these idea  over board.
 Selective  reading   introduced  2  and 4 mmol  as  we  could  hang on absolute numbers.
 Below a  similar idea .  from a triathlon  association
. triathlon lactate.png 

I love this one  as  we had in   thousands  of lactate sampling very  seldom  the  luck to hit 4.00  lactate  values in any  classical step tests.


Now  what  do wee  do with this  here.  From a well  accepted  running coach .
typicl for runners.jpg

 Now  we  combine the cook book  of  4 mmol   above  with the " typical  lactate curve  of a runner  and we look how a   running reality looks  like  here  the  idea  you may get.

lactate korir.jpg

More  to come in our  weekend  cooking classes.
  Hope  the  digestive systems is  up to speed.


juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #11 
Now  let's  come back  with the  above information to our   6 min step test assessment here. Before the  nice  help  from Daniele  I  went  though all the different  section looking for  a  time optimal section  for his  assessment. Than I got lost in the  interesting  data's  we  had  besides the one I was a actually looking  for., Here an example.

8000 up load.jpg

Above  a nice feedback of  a  workout  he  did  as one of the   data  findings.

 Now   the section  Daniele    figured  out as the 6 min step test.
 Below  the  full data  set  where  ate the end the 6 min test is    shown.

whole last  data collection smo2  thb.jpg 



Now  when  we assume the timings  where done   decently  accurate  than we  can go backwards  from the clear feedback  where SmO2   nicely  and tHb  decently  shots  up so  just  after 23248. So  when we  do that it looks like this  here

real  tets plus lactate.jpg 
I  than  still had  some   questions  for myself on this  red  circle  section.
real start perhaps.jpg


So  this is  where we  have  questions  and when we  get  data's  it would save a lot of  time ( true less fun  as we do no search  and try to find  stuff out ) but it   would give as well better feedback  as we   avoid  some speculations   which are not needed  . So  speculation here still  where was the   actual start.  perfect timing than the  above  perhaps  not than the above  here  with red  circle.

The one  going  back ward look s really nice  when we look the   6 min step length.
real  tets plus lactate.jpg 
So  different points here.
 1 The lactate  number  after 3  min and 5  6 min so in the same  step  2  times  show, that a  3 min step test in this  client   or in this case a  6 min step  test  will create 2  very different lactate curves  and as  such  tow very different  zoning outcomes  based on though   curves. (  At least I hope  we do not have to  discuss this  too much, but we never know.)  Now  before you start a  discussion please supply a  3 min step test and a  6 min step tats  from the same athlete. Even better if you do them in a  row  or you can even   repeat  3 min steps tests in a  row  that is a fun teaching  way  as well.
Here  an example  of three test in a row
superconconi 3.jpg 
Three  same  step length  and  above we  had  3  different step length protocol.  so  6  LT  assessments  with 6  different outcomes  x  25  different  LT  concepts  will create some  small confusion but it is done  regularly. And we are not even talking about the confusion and speculation if we take a concept  like  1 mmol increase in 2    follow up steps  which is a very popular idea add the 0.2 +-   variation in lactate testing  equipment  to it  and the  timing and you have a fun  " scientific " looking mess.


Next up. Take the  SmO2 trend  and  try  what ever  formula  you like to   enjoy  and  find a  BP . True  you may  find  something but it loos  that it goes in  the opposite  direction.

 In  7  mails  I got  back on the  question  where do we  expect  SmO3 trend would go    when we  have 7.6 lac  and the next reading is  12.3  Everybody  suggested a  relative clear  and step  drop in SmO2.
 Absolute ly  what we  would expect  including me.
 BUT
  If the   MOXY assessed  muscle is not the  real  reason  for the increase in lactate production but some other   not tested muscles , than the lactate trend as a systemic  feedback   will fool us  on what  we would expect in  the  SmO2 trend. 
 Case in discussion is what we show here.
 So  SmO2  can  drop as  lactate shows  up in a step increases in the  blood but it  does not has  to.  So we  may have to delete this results  if  we sell LT   =  SmO2  BP  or  we may have to  review our theories on this.!!!!

Next up . Look the SmO2 trends in one single  step  and you may see  that at the start you can a  kind of predict  what may happen  with the first lactate reading  will it possible  drop or increase. ? If  you look carefully  you are  pretty confident  up to a  certain step , than you   start  to rethink the   prediction and we loose the prediction, when using one  MOXY  completely. Question.  What would as second  MOXY on another involved muscle possibly show us.?
 Here  the answer in  a great   work  Daniele  did (  Yes  they  where done on different days  but  they hold up )
smo2 all three.jpg 
If  you like to  dispute this  claim  ( which is always  fun)  I  ad already  an assessment  done by Ruud on three muscles. at the same time same  assessment left side.
ham  VL smo2.jpg  Hamstrings  and quad  and below  we add  calf. See similar  reaction as  in Daniele  VL  flat or even a  slightly increase in  SmO2  in the last step

calf   VL  left isde  smo2.jpg 

Specific  reason  why  we where not  able to overload ( well   our  systems  did not allow  and overload  so  we had  to  separate  them )

Now  our  case looks  very  similar   on the VL reaction.  Flat  to even slightly increase in SmO2  but a clear  sharp increase  of  lactate values   ????
 Throwing  an unfortunate  rock in our  way  to  use  SmO2  as a lactate feedback.  plus  the  loss of a   very promising idea on Break point in SmO2  traces. 

Last  points  to think  for today.
 Speculation > Based on the  data  we  show  the  6 min step test was not started out of  " cold "  situation but there was some more or less controlled  " warm up " going on.

 So  when we  bias  the  data's  from the moment the 6 min test started  than we  have this result here.  despite a very low start  load.
biased    plus thb.jpg

With the exception of the first  100 watt load he immediately had a  delivery problem and never  was  able  to actually even in lower  loads  to  increase the O2  content in his muscles  ( VL )

So is it a  delivery problem or is the VL in the  cyclists  simply the main  heavily involved muscle  and he may have a  relative poor   inter muscular  coordination   and only  attract   more helpers as soon he  runs himself  into trouble,

 Below Daniele's  VL  biased  reaction. in a assessment.

bias  VL.jpg 
Here we have the  same  trend in immediate  lower O2Hb  but in the 1 min rest we see, that he  actually delivers  nicely. In fact   look at tHb    towards  the end  as well as SmO2  ,.  what  doe they tell us  thanks  to the  1 min rest ?

 Now  is it just as well a  highly involved VL in the  cycling technique  and if  we   would look at RF  we would see  a different picture ?
 Well lets' see. ?

bias RF.jpg
  Fun  isn't  it.
 Now look his tHB here and  O2 Hb  . what is different   and it could indicate  a  possible  delivery problem to this area  or systematically ? Well let's  look.  Daniele  did  as mentioned  an incredible job  and I  simply messed  up to honor the incredible  work he  did  so  here the delta  section.

bias D.jpg 
 What do you see here.
  Summary. VL is  very involved muscle  and has  priority   if we  have to   bike away  from a  chasing  Grizzly bear.
 So  as long as possible we use it  , when it is getting   hard  we  try to  activate some additional  once  and as  long we  can deliver  , once we run in a  O2  demand situation  where we need  to  protect vital systems like respiration and cardiac system than  the last option is to shift  form less efficient  muscles to the main  and most efficient muscle  VL.   Now in rowing  and   cross country  skier  that is  even more   often the  case.

So  take  any of  the current   popular  rowing styles  and you can see  what  will happened in less advanced  rowers.
 If  we  look at VL  alone  we  get a small section of the picture,  but when using our idea  of   rest in between loads than we have somewhat more feedback  but again not optimal  so    that's' where we  use  3  moxys  for  a complete   or   let's  be careful ,better feedback  and less speculations.


three styles.jpg 

This is  from  the Australian Institute  of  sport,  by  Dr. V Kleshnev.

Side note  I got    as a feedback  form Roger.
Australia   is one of the fastest  growing MOXY  users in the last  few month.

DanieleM

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 264
 #12 
Juerg, I didn't fully understand your summary
 
Quote:
Summary. VL is  very involved muscle  and has  priority   if we  have to   bike away  from a  chasing  Grizzly bear.
 So  as long as possible we use it  , when it is getting   hard  we  try to  activate some additional  once  and as  long we  can deliver  , once we run in a  O2  demand situation  where we need  to  protect vital systems like respiration and cardiac system than  the last option is to shift  form less efficient  muscles to the main  and most efficient muscle  VL.   Now in rowing  and   cross country  skier  that is  even more   often the  case.


I want to add here a couple of of graphs.
First the overall assessment
elite6min.png 
I drew a yellow line as a sort of average SmO2 for each step.
We can clearly see that there is a drop of SmO2 at each increase while at the last step SmO2 is stable.
In my interpreation, the muscle VO2 for the VL is reaching the limit here.
As you said, probably there is a large involvement of other muscles (like RF, hamstrings etc) which probably would show a very different pattern (like shown on Ruud or mine assessment) and may explain the large lactate (systemic) increase during the last load.

Second,  the last step + end of execise with a delayed overshoot of tHB.elite_eot.png 
Any explanations?




Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #13 
Daniele, the delayed tHb spike in the end could be (mind the word "could") due to some delayed release of muscle tension (maybe he turned pedals quite slowly onwards?). He has a lot of (systemic ) high CO2, well vasolidated (if that is a word[wink] and high CO (although yes maybe decreasing already a bit) so an overshoot on tHb above baseline (although we do not have that real baseline), but later since it did not overrule muscle compression immediately. Just a thought
Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #14 
And maybe there is actually a vasoconstriction right after the load but we don't see it due to a very strong CO. As vasoconstriction was actually overrruled by CO thB initially remained stable (this was an elite athlete right/ sleeping giant???) seconds later CO fell but relatively not as hard as muscle compression fell. Anyway. This was just another thought. Which is however not seen before in any other test I seen here (as far as I can recall [smile] and as such unusual (/not possible [wink]
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #15 
Daniele reminded me  on this thread her  to  add some additional thoughts  to the discussion.
  I  would love  to have  sometimes  as well some feedback on some critical thoughts  on classical  views.  Certainly in this case.
 So here some  fun   sections.
 remember the   test. The confusing idea of  MLSS  which is  all over in the  lactate world. We have so many ideas on LT , anaerobic threshold aerobic threshold MLSS  and much more, that w often do not  talk anymore the same language. So here the   overall picture again  of the 6 min  step test.


bias all.jpg 

I like to show the biased  option  as a comparison  to Daniele's  SmO2  thb  version
I drew a yellow line as a sort of average SmO2 for each step.
We can clearly see that there is a drop of SmO2 at each increase while at the last step SmO2 is stable.

If we look the biased  verison O2Hb  and HHb  and tHb  we may see something  slightly different.
 Remember  SmO2 is the %  of tHb  of  O2Hb . So a  change in  tHB  may  show a  slightly different picture, if we look just  O2Hb HHb  or  we look just  SmO2.
  So  I did  the same idea  and was looking  biased  step  by step. (  may be some mistakes  slightly, as  I  have no  absolute clear markers  when he increase  load  but very close.
 The overall trend in O2Hb  reaction    would look like the one below.

bias all  wiht lac values.jpg 

You can see the change in biased  when we start at the   absolute start  or  when he may have started.

 Now  fascinating is the O2Hb trend   when we look at  lactate  values  every 3 min
Step 1   (1.2/1.3)  so no actual change  and see  flat  O2Hb . The   relative high  lactate value  is  an indication of a  delivery limitation at the start  with a  time lag of  lactate    after 4 - 3 / 6 min.
Step 2 slightly  increase on O2  so   the initial  1.2  lac  as a sign of again a short delivery limitation but than  kick in on delivery  and  lactate  can be used as   energy .
In a 3 min step this would not have been  the case  at all. Makes  sense. . Less clear the   step 3 but again a trend  toward s: More  time  in this intensity still an option of lactate   utilization form the initial   lactate need  to buffer H +  due to sudden start  and  delivery limitation temporarily.
Step  4. The increase in lactate would  suggest a  clear drop in O2Hb , but it does not happen. There is no  SmO2 BP  but there is a clear increase in lactate . In fact  if you are a 4 mmol believer  you just found LT. If you are a  1 mmol   in t  2 steps  after each other increase believer you may argue  wow the next  will be the  LT. ??? If you are  more towards  the  idea, that lactate is a  great energy source  and an indication of a  systemically  accumulation of lactate without  exact idea  who  or  from where it may come, how much we may have produced  and how much we have  possibly recycled  before we  end up  with a   higher level than  before, than this  step  would indicate, that the VL  really  not  may contribute that much to the lactate but there may be  other muscles involved not for this performance.
 Even more  trouble  shows up in the last step  with a  minimal trend in O2  drop  and in fact  we may even have a little bit  of an increase. in O2  2Hb
If we look at  biased of  each Individual step  we have a surprising   picture. The first step  was  no delivery limitation really   and the last step ???


so lets  diagebais   4 steps  incl last.jpg 

so let's  digest this  first  but will be back on this in combination  with Danieles  great RF  VL  and D  test.



Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net