Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #1 
Well as  so often the justification these  days  are getting hared  to come up with.
 There was a  a nice time  where the answer was  simple  and clear.
 You get rid  of lactic acid .

 As  the majority of  coaches  and  people  today accept the  fact, that there is no such thing  like to get rid  of lactic acid, as  even there is no need to get rid  of lactate.
 If  we accept the idea, that lactate is a great  and valuable  energy source,
 than why would you try to get rid of it in between  workouts and or in between intervals.
 Why would you " burn "  of  a great energy source, when it fact it would speed up  re-loading of  energy storage , when we  would not  burn it of.

 So a  " cool down"  for sure will drop lactate as we need  energy to cool down  and lactate is  nice  enough to support the energy demand.  And we though that is great but today we  could argue  that this is NOT  that smart , as we could use it  for the next workout,  if we  would store it.
 So  there is  an interesting  old  idea, that when lactate  disappears  faster  , than that is a good thing  .
 A good thing  for  what ?
 Here  an very fun  study  which will  add some  fuel to this  above  questions.
 

Abstract
CHOI, D., K. J. COLE, B. H. GOODPASTER, W. J. FINK, and D. L. COSTILL.

 Effect of passive and active recovery on the resynthesis of muscle glycogen.

Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 26, No. 8, pp. 992-996, 1994.

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the effect of passive and active recovery on the resynthesis of muscle glycogen after high-intensity cycle crgometer exercise in untrained subjects. In a cross-over design, six college-aged males performed three, 1-min exercise bouts at approximately 130% VO2max with a 4-min rest period between each work bout. The exercise protocol for each trial was identical, while the recovery following exercise was either active (30 min at 40-50% VO2max, 30-min seated rest) or passive (60-min seated rest). Initial muscle glycogen values averaged 144.2 +/- 3.8 mmol-kg-1 w.w. for the active trial and 158.7 +/- 8.0 mmol-kg1 w.w. for the passive trial.

 Corresponding immediate postexercise glycogen contents were 97.7 +/- 5.4 and 106.8 +/- 4.7 mmol-kg-1 w.w., respectively. These differences between treatments were not significant. However, mean muscle glycogen after 60 min of passive recovery increased 15.0 +/- 4.9 mmol-kg-1 w.w., whereas it decreased 6.3 +/- 3.7 mmol-kg-1 w.w., following the 60 min active recovery protocol (P < 0.05). Also, the decrease in blood lactate concentration during active recovery was greater than during passive recovery and significantly different at 10 and 30 min of the recovery period (P < 0.05). These data suggest that the use of passive recovery following intense exercise results in a greater amount of muscle glycogen resynthesis than active recovery over the same duration.

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net