Fortiori Design LLC
Registered: 1355349061 Posts: 1,530
I was watching a UCI world cup race on TV and some " expert" from the cycling world where helping the commentator to get an inside view in the cycling world and its problems.
So every second word during the ongoing sprint event was the explanation on how the lactic acid is slowing the guy down and why he would sit on the roller after the load to get rid of the lactic acid otherwise he will still have the lactic acid in his system the following day for the road race.???? Here some question. or speculations. If and only IF we may start to accept the fact, that lactate may not be the cause of fatigiue butjjust a great biomarker of some metabolic reactions during a load or even without a load ( see sepsis) and if we accept, that lactate could be recyceld and used for further energy supply than we at least have to discuss the possibility , that " cooling " down may have an other reason to be justyfied than reducing " lactcic acid." Yes if we " cool down" the post load lactate numbers are clearly lower. Why? how about the possibility , that moving may need further energy and the possibility , that this energy may come from recycling lactate ? So a drop in lactate after cool down is a sign that we used energy but most liklely not a sign of a better recovery. What causes the drop in performance and what has to be a part of recovery. ? If there is ( can be discussed) a peripheral metabolicc reason of some reduction in performance due to drop in motor units recruitment or due to vasoconstriction, than we can accept as a part of the idea, that H + could be a part of the reason of loss of performance with a feedback loop for " survival ".( pH balance) There are different ways we can get rid of H + and one of them is over respiration. The question is, whether active recovery in between sprints may in fact be beneficial or whether perhpas just trying to get rid of H + may be the way to go. Here what may happen. H + increase will increase CO2 levels and drop pH levels. This shifts the O2 Diss curve to the right allowing a better deoxygenation. So during an active recovery we will see a less optimal ability to get rid of CO2 as we still have to produce energy so we may see a bigger drop in SmO2 with active recovery versus passive recovery. When we add to passive recovery some additional respiratory interventions we may see a much faster SmO2 recovery and much more interesting reactions.. Here a nice study, who looks at SmO2 and the influence on active and passive recovery. It does not tell us the result of the performance after both and it does not combined respiratory reactions as a part of the balance of CO2 in the system. But it is one more interesting study you will be abel to do on your own and get the answers as soon you use MOXY for assessments as well as during workouts and for interval workout designs.
Int J Sports Med.
2009 Jun;30(6):418-25. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1105933. Epub 2009 May 12.
Muscle deoxygenation during repeated sprint running: Effect of active vs. passive recovery. Source
Faculté des sciences du sport, Laboratoire de Recherche: Adaptations Physiologiques à L'Exercice et Réadaptation à I'Effort, Amiens, France.
The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of active (AR) versus passive recovery (PR) on muscle deoxygenation during short repeated maximal running. Ten male team sport athletes (26.9+/-3.7y) performed 6 repeated maximal 4-s sprints interspersed with 21 s of either AR (2 m.s (-1)) or PR (standing) on a non-motorized treadmill. Mean running speed (AvSp (mean)), percentage speed decrement (Sp%Dec), oxygen uptake (V O (2)), deoxyhemoglobin (HHb) and blood lactate ([La] (b)) were computed for each recovery condition. Compared to PR, AvSp (mean) was lower (3.79+/-0.28 vs. 4.09+/-0.32m.s (-1); P<0.001) and Sp%Dec higher (7.2+/-3.7 vs. 3.2+/-0.1.3%; P<0.001) for AR. Mean V O (2) (3.64+/-0.44 vs. 2.91+/-0.47L.min (-1), P<0.001), HHb (94.4+/-16.8 vs. 83.4+/-4.8% of HHb during the first sprint, P=0.02) and [La] (b) (13.5+/-2.5 vs. 12.7+/-2.2 mmol.l (-1), P=0.03) were significantly higher during AR compared to PR. In conclusion, during run-based repeated sprinting, AR was associated with reduced repeated sprint ability and higher muscle deoxygenation.