Lactates Training

Isn't lactate the stuff that squirts out of mother's faucets? Your trainer is a real sicky.

Hey dumbass, this is a RUNNING newsgroup. Idiot...

Andrew said:

Hello,

Could you please help me ?

In my rowing club, we are 4 youngsters who come some 6-7 times per week to train at a competition
level and who have allready done some 4 years of it.

Every two months or so our trainer takes our lactates after 40minutes of rowing at a constant
strengh, and with that we determine if one should pull harder or not.

Our trainer told us that we should have our lactates at around 2 to 3 mm/l for endurance training
(90 minutes rowing).

I am 17, and trained nearly all the time a bit stronger that the lactates (I should pull at 2:07
minutes per 500m but I am usually at 2:05-2:04), and at each lactates test I have tu pull somewhat
harder. That is normal

Okay, up to there everything is (I think) normal, bt her comes something more special.

One team mate, who is also 17, but quite a bit skinnier, rowed all the time exactly at his lactates
but for allready about 1 year never lowered them.

A other one is 16, he is a bit roundish but physically much stronger than us, he allways pulled at
what he should pull (2:00-1:58) but now his lactates are higher and he has to pull at 2:05.

The last one, is also 16 (but about 10 months younger) but is quite tall. He should have pulled at
2:05, what he never did, he normally was allways at about 2:10 (not very serious, but at is not the
point). Now he has his lactates a huge way lower, so that he now has to pull at 1:59. That is not
quite logical, I forgot to tell you that a week before the test he was five days on the mountains
with some friends not doing any exercise.

Could you perhaps explain why is it like that, because if one follows jus what I told above, one
should pull really easy to do the best training.

Our trainer didn't manage to explain it to to us, that is why I am asking you, I am also asking
this question to the running and swimming newsgroups because I heard that it is the same sort of
effort, and that often principle who apply to these two sports also apply for rowing.

It would be great if you have a answer,

Thank you very much,

Andrew Cassels

nonSpazz said:

Andrew said:

Our trainer didn't manage to explain it to to us, that is why I am asking you, I am also asking
this question to the running and swimming newsgroups because I heard that it is the same sort of
effort, and that often principle who apply to these two sports also apply for rowing.

Hey dumbass, this is a RUNNING newsgroup. Idiot...

Dumbass, these are 3 newsgroups.

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Quoted message said:

Hey dumbass, this is a RUNNING newsgroup. Idiot...

Dumbass, these are 3 newsgroups.

No [censored]! So why include a running newsgroup you brain dead idiot?

"Andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hello,

Could you please help me ?

{snip for brevity}

Andrew - a great question. One that requires a lengthy answer, also.

the target velocity your trainer is trying to get you to hold (approximately 2-3 m/mol) is a
benchmark in exercise physiology that is 'supposed to' represent something called the anaerboic
threshold, (aka Onset of Blood Lactic Acid or OBLA).

AnThr represents the theoretical point where the body stops deriving energy (ATP) from aerobic
sources (fats) and starts to use anaerobic sources (glycogen). Fats provide a better yield of energy
than glycogen, but it takes longer. when you exercise at a high intensity, you need the ATP and you
need it fast - to do this, the body breaks down glycogen, which gives less energy per unit, but does
it faster - a side effect of this is that lactate is produced.

In 'theory' if you can train just below the anaerobic threshold, you're training at a high
intensity, but are not producing lactate, (which induces fatigue through acidosis), and therefore
can train longer without burning out. If you did a progressive step test for example, and monitored
lactates after every rep, you would see at a certain point the curve would rise steeply - you're
trying to train just below this rise. Obviously, not many clubs have the facility or the expertise
to conduct such tests. To combat this, a massive bank of data taken from the former eastern bloc
athletes (east germany, ussr etc) and examined - they determined that lactate concentrations of
approximately 2m/mol equated to AnThr. Thats why your trainer is telling you to train at that
intensity.

In your case, there are a few different reasons why your teammates changed as they did, and without
knowing the athlete, i can't even begin to guess. What may help is if i can tell you about lactate
and what affects it:

EVERYTHING.

Lactate as an index for exercise prescription has serious flaws in it. Diet, sickness, sleep
patterns, how much fatigue you're carrying, emotional state, air/water temperature, time of day,
color of your underwear (not quite but you get the picture)...they all can appreciably affect how
much lactate you produce when you exercise at a set intensity. Its a bench mark - a rough guide -
nothing more, nothing less. Perhaps on that day you tested someone had a late night the night before
- the guy who dropped time for a given lactate, maybe the week with his friends gave him a much
needed rest so he was fresher when he tested than the rest of you. The guy who is kinda slight of
build - chances are, due to his lack of musculature, the proportion of slow twitch fibres are
higher, and he won't ever be an anaerobic machine, thats why they don't change, the guy who is
slightly bigger, well, he has more muscle and therefore can generate more power and tolerate higher
concentrations of lactate - for each case, a dozen possible explanations.

Lactate testing has its uses, but they are far more limited than the general coaching/athlete body
believes them to be. I could go on longer on this subject, in as much as there is belief now that
the anaerobic threshold doesn't even exist as such, and training at that intensity is a waste of
time - a training black hole so to speak, (Normal Jones). i for one, only train my athletes either
at maximum effort (either sustained for VO2 Max, or shorter for power) or a very very low
intensity.anyway, i digress.

i hope you found at least some of this helpful - in a sentence, don't worry too much about what
others are doing, and don't believe that a lactate value at that time on that day in that situation
is a golden, unbreakable standard.

if you have any further specific questions, i'd love to help you out. just email me. 🙂

steve

"Andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Hello,

Could you please help me ?

In my rowing club, we are 4 youngsters who come some 6-7 times per week to train at a competition
level and who have allready done some 4 years of it.

Every two months or so our trainer takes our lactates after 40minutes of rowing at a constant
strengh, and with that we determine if one should pull harder or not.

Our trainer told us that we should have our lactates at around 2 to 3 mm/l for endurance training
(90 minutes rowing).

I am 17, and trained nearly all the time a bit stronger that the lactates (I should pull at 2:07
minutes per 500m but I am usually at 2:05-2:04), and at each lactates test I have tu pull somewhat
harder. That is normal

Okay, up to there everything is (I think) normal, bt her comes something more special.

One team mate, who is also 17, but quite a bit skinnier, rowed all the time exactly at his
lactates but for allready about 1 year never lowered them.

A other one is 16, he is a bit roundish but physically much stronger than us, he allways pulled at
what he should pull (2:00-1:58) but now his lactates are higher and he has to pull at 2:05.

The last one, is also 16 (but about 10 months younger) but is quite tall. He should have pulled at
2:05, what he never did, he normally was allways at about 2:10 (not very serious, but at is not
the point). Now he has his lactates a huge way lower, so that he now has to pull at 1:59. That is
not quite logical, I forgot to tell you that a week before the test he was five days on the
mountains with some friends not doing any exercise.

Could you perhaps explain why is it like that, because if one follows jus what I told above, one
should pull really easy to do the best training.

Our trainer didn't manage to explain it to to us, that is why I am asking you, I am also asking
this question to the running and swimming newsgroups because I heard that it is the same sort of
effort, and that often principle who apply to these two sports also apply for rowing.

It would be great if you have a answer,

Thank you very much,

Andrew Cassels

I'll give it a shot. Others with more knowledge will hopefully chime
in. It sounds, quite simply, that your coach is trying to establish a training pace for each rower
that is sub-lactate threshold. In other words, a pace at which lactate would not accumulate in
the rower's body, and eventually force them to slow down. As you say, he's establishing a base
speed for 90 minutes of exercise, which is quite a long time. It's generally accepted that 4
milli-moles of lactate per liter of blood is lactate threshold for most people.

When trying to do endurance, or aerobic sets, it's important to stay below the threshold because
lactate training is very hard on the body.

That's not to say that the lactate system shouldn't be trained. This so called "buffer" training
teaches the body to continue exercise with high lactate levels in the blood stream, with the
attendent relatively high levels of pain during such exercise. But it's important not to cross the
lactate threshold during endurance training because such training is very hard on the body and needs
to be metered out carefully.

Incidentally, you pointed out the physique of all the rowers, but I don't think that has any bearing
on lactate thesholds. Cellular bodies called mitochondria are responsible for allowing muscles to be
able to process lactate and actually burn it as fuel. So it's at the cellular level - fat, skinny,
tall, or short, it would be impossible to identify someone who had above number and size of
mitochondria in their muscles just by looking at them.

Hope this helps Eric

"diablo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hello,

Could you please help me ?

{snip for brevity}

Andrew - a great question. One that requires a lengthy answer, also.

the target velocity your trainer is trying to get you to hold

(approximately

Quoted message said:

2-3 m/mol) is a benchmark in exercise physiology that is 'supposed to' represent something called
the anaerboic threshold, (aka Onset of Blood Lactic Acid or OBLA).

Actually OBLA is 4 mmol/L. It is "anaerobic", and many sport scientists will contend
there is no such thing as an anaerobic threshold...

Quoted message said:

AnThr represents the theoretical point where the body stops deriving

energy

Quoted message said:

(ATP) from aerobic sources (fats) and starts to use anaerobic sources (glycogen). Fats provide a
better yield of energy than glycogen, but it takes longer. when you exercise at a high intensity,
you need the ATP and you need it fast - to do this, the body breaks down glycogen, which gives
less energy per unit, but does it faster - a side effect of this is that lactate is produced.

Above "AT" one does not stop deriving energy from fat at least until near maximal efforts. Even
then we continue to take in and use oxygen. Fat oxidation of 1 mole takes more oxygen than 1
mole of CHO, but as you note aerobic use of glycogen provides energy at a faster rate. Lactate
is produced all the time and serves as a source of energy; it is the acidity from the hydrogen
ion that causes more problems than the lactate itself.

Quoted message said:

In 'theory' if you can train just below the anaerobic threshold, you're training at a high
intensity, but are not producing lactate, (which

induces

Quoted message said:

fatigue through acidosis), and therefore can train longer without burning out. If you did a
progressive step test for example, and monitored

lactates

Quoted message said:

after every rep, you would see at a certain point the curve would rise steeply - you're trying to
train just below this rise. Obviously, not many clubs have the facility or the expertise to
conduct such tests. To combat this, a massive bank of data taken from the former eastern bloc
athletes (east germany, ussr etc) and examined - they determined that lactate concentrations of
approximately 2m/mol equated to AnThr. Thats why your trainer is telling you to train at that
intensity.

One is still producing lactate even while sitting at a desk typing on the computer. The levels
will be low (<2 mmol/L in most people), but lactate is still present in the blood. 2 mmol/L is
more often referred to as the "aerobic threshold"--a term that lends itself to more confusion
than anything else. The problem with using a fixed number is that it does not allow for
individualization. Of course the Eastern Bloc countries were not too concerned with this. They
tended to bring in people and whoever could hack it stayed, the others were sent home.

Quoted message said:

In your case, there are a few different reasons why your teammates changed as they did, and
without knowing the athlete, i can't even begin to guess. What may help is if i can tell you about
lactate and what affects it:

EVERYTHING.

Lactate as an index for exercise prescription has serious flaws in it.

Diet,

Quoted message said:

sickness, sleep patterns, how much fatigue you're carrying, emotional

state,

Quoted message said:

air/water temperature, time of day, color of your underwear (not quite but you get the
picture)...they all can appreciably affect how much lactate

you

Quoted message said:

produce when you exercise at a set intensity. Its a bench mark - a rough guide - nothing more,
nothing less. Perhaps on that day you tested someone had a late night the night before - the guy
who dropped time for a given lactate, maybe the week with his friends gave him a much needed rest
so he was fresher when he tested than the rest of you. The guy who is kinda

slight

Quoted message said:

of build - chances are, due to his lack of musculature, the proportion of slow twitch fibres are
higher, and he won't ever be an anaerobic machine, thats why they don't change, the guy who is
slightly bigger, well, he has more muscle and therefore can generate more power and tolerate
higher concentrations of lactate - for each case, a dozen possible explanations.

Excellent points on lactate and some of the issues surrounding using it for exercise
intensity. When testing athletes for "LT", I prefer to have them "max out". If the peak
lactate is lower than usual, it could be a sign of depleted glycogen stores (or reduced
actually). A common mistake is to assume that just because the lactate level at a given
intensity is lower that means the athlete has improved (reduced lactate at a given intensity
is a positive adaptation to training generally).

Quoted message said:

Lactate testing has its uses, but they are far more limited than the

general

Quoted message said:

coaching/athlete body believes them to be. I could go on longer on this subject, in as much as
there is belief now that the anaerobic threshold doesn't even exist as such, and training at that
intensity is a waste of time - a training black hole so to speak, (Normal Jones). i for one, only
train my athletes either at maximum effort (either sustained for VO2 Max,

or

Quoted message said:

shorter for power) or a very very low intensity.anyway, i digress.

Scientists consider AT to be a concept more than a point. I would be interested in seeing more
on the ideas that training around the "AT" is a waste of time. I have several studies showing
that training at about 90 to 105% of "AT" moves that curve to the right (improves power or
speed at LT). I know at one time Stephen Seiler was a proponent of such "extreme" training
(there is a term I heard once for this type of training and I cannot remember it right now).

Quoted message said:

i hope you found at least some of this helpful - in a sentence, don't

worry

Quoted message said:

too much about what others are doing, and don't believe that a lactate

value

Quoted message said:

at that time on that day in that situation is a golden, unbreakable standard.

if you have any further specific questions, i'd love to help you out. just email me. 🙂

steve

Because this sort of question and it's answers could be both generated by and of interest to members
of each of the three groups. Punk.

nonPlonking said:

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Quoted message said:

Hey dumbass, this is a RUNNING newsgroup. Idiot...

Dumbass, these are 3 newsgroups.

No [censored]! So why include a running newsgroup you brain dead idiot?

Idiot.

Warwick Chapman said:

Because this sort of question and it's answers could be both generated by and of interest to
members of each of the three groups. Punk.

But we were setting such a nice example of acceptable Usenet behaviour for the young person who
asked the question.

In light all the other wonderful post on how simple and useful this supposedly excellent scientific
method is, its no wonder so many people subscribe to the "row blue" philosophy.

s k harker said:

Is there ANY need for the juvinile [censored]? This post is relevant to all 3 sports on the newsgroup
regardless of which sport the guy asking for advice does, so unless you have something constructive
and relevant to say, keep quiet!

nonPok said:

Idiot.

Warwick Chapman said:

Because this sort of question and it's answers could be both generated by and of interest to
members of each of the three groups. Punk.

Is there ANY need for the juvinile [censored]? This post is relevant to all 3 sports on the newsgroup
regardless of which sport the guy asking for advice does, so unless you have something constructive
and relevant to say, keep quiet!

nonPok said:

Idiot.

Warwick Chapman said:

Because this sort of question and it's answers could be both generated by and of interest to
members of each of the three groups. Punk.

[censored].

s k harker said:

Is there ANY need for the juvinile [censored]? This post is relevant to all 3 sports on the newsgroup
regardless of which sport the guy asking for advice does, so unless you have something constructive
and relevant to say, keep quiet!

Shut up.

Quoted message said:

But we were setting such a nice example of acceptable Usenet behaviour for the young person who
asked the question.

In light all the other wonderful post on how simple and useful this supposedly excellent scientific
method is, its no wonder so many people subscribe to the "row blue" philosophy.

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Above "AT" one does not stop deriving energy from fat at least until near maximal efforts.
Even then we continue to take in and use oxygen. Fat oxidation of 1 mole takes more oxygen
than 1 mole of CHO, but

as

Quoted message said:

you note aerobic use of glycogen provides energy at a faster rate.

The whole point of disputing anaerobic threshold/aerobic
threshold/OBLA/current-fashionable-turn-of-phrase is exactly what you point out - its a continuum,
and not one that can be counted on to be the same everytime you try to measure it. In performance,
recycling lactate through the Cori cycle is not really an issue, as its so time consuming for what
it returns.

Quoted message said:

Lactate is produced all the time and serves as a source of energy; it is the acidity from the
hydrogen ion that causes more problems than the lactate itself.

Again, this covers a very salient point - lactate is not the major problem during performance, (and
yes, it is recycled in the liver and reusable, however, not during exercise to an influencial
degree). The increase in hydrogen ion concentration is the overriding factor in fatigue at the
muscle cell level. the change in pH affects not only the glycolytic enzymes, but also those of the
kreb's. Once that NaHCO buffer has gone, the pH gradient across the cell membrane is defunct.
Lactate still represents a problem in as much as being a contributor to DOMS.

Quoted message said:

The problem with using a fixed number is that it does not allow

for

Quoted message said:

individualization.

Not only does it not provide for inter-individualisation, but neither does it account for
intra-individualisation. Some people claim that using the lactate tables is preferable if you have
nothing else - i say, no matter what you have, they're erroneous to a damaging degree. the only
difference is whether you have the experience, the equipment and the knowledge to understand this,
and recognise it before it really ruins 2/3's of the athlete body.

Quoted message said:

Excellent points on lactate and some of the issues surrounding using it for exercise
intensity. When testing athletes for "LT", I prefer to

have

Quoted message said:

them "max out". If the peak lactate is lower than usual, it could be a

sign

Quoted message said:

of depleted glycogen stores (or reduced actually).

i've conducted wingate tests and vo2 max tests up the wazoo. i'm sure that along with what we both
suggested, we can both agree on this - athlete motivation is a key factor. i've tested age groupers,
undergrad guinea pigs and olympic trials swimmers...one thing they all do from time to time is just
decide they're done when they're not, and that, more than anything else has been the cause of
spurious results.

Quoted message said:

Scientists consider AT to be a concept more than a point. I would be interested in seeing
more on the ideas that training around the "AT" is a waste of time. I have several studies
showing that training at about 90

to

Quoted message said:

105% of "AT" moves that curve to the right (improves power or speed at

LT).

I have totally discarded the idea of training at AnThr, and now only train my swimmers at 10-5bbm
(approx. >90% VO2Max), or below 40bbm. I am very convinced by the work of Normal Jones and David
Salo. Interestingly enough Ernie Maglischo has come forward and apologised for preaching the
benefits of AnThr training in his previous works, shifting towards the idea of almost all or
nothing. i have yet to read the text myself yet, but its interesting none the less - i just wonder
how quickly swimming coaches will accept the idea. I've had excellent results with it however. The
use of HRMax as in index has its flaws, as much as lactate, but is infinately easier to administer
and interpret.

In rec.running diablo said:

"Andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hello,

Could you please help me ?

Quoted message said:

{snip for brevity}

Quoted message said:

Andrew - a great question. One that requires a lengthy answer, also.

Quoted message said:

the target velocity your trainer is trying to get you to hold (approximately 2-3 m/mol) is a
benchmark in exercise physiology that is 'supposed to' represent something called the anaerboic
threshold, (aka Onset of Blood Lactic Acid or OBLA).

Quoted message said:

AnThr represents the theoretical point where the body stops deriving energy (ATP) from aerobic
sources (fats) and starts to use anaerobic sources (glycogen). Fats provide a better yield of
energy than glycogen, but it takes longer. when you exercise at a high intensity, you need the ATP
and you need it fast - to do this, the body breaks down glycogen, which gives less energy per
unit, but does it faster - a side effect of this is that lactate is produced.

Quoted message said:

In 'theory' if you can train just below the anaerobic threshold, you're training at a high
intensity, but are not producing lactate, (which induces fatigue through acidosis), and therefore
can train longer without burning out. If you did a progressive step test for example, and
monitored lactates after every rep, you would see at a certain point the curve would rise steeply
- you're trying to train just below this rise. Obviously, not many clubs have the facility or the
expertise to conduct such tests. To combat this, a massive bank of data taken from the former
eastern bloc athletes (east germany, ussr etc) and examined - they determined that lactate
concentrations of approximately 2m/mol equated to AnThr. Thats why your trainer is telling you to
train at that intensity.

Quoted message said:

In your case, there are a few different reasons why your teammates changed as they did, and
without knowing the athlete, i can't even begin to guess. What may help is if i can tell you about
lactate and what affects it:

Quoted message said:

EVERYTHING.

Quoted message said:

Lactate as an index for exercise prescription has serious flaws in it. Diet, sickness, sleep
patterns, how much fatigue you're carrying, emotional state, air/water temperature, time of day,
color of your underwear (not quite but you get the picture)...they all can appreciably affect how
much lactate you produce when you exercise at a set intensity. Its a bench mark - a rough guide -
nothing more, nothing less. Perhaps on that day you tested someone had a late night the night
before - the guy who dropped time for a given lactate, maybe the week with his friends gave him a
much needed rest so he was fresher when he tested than the rest of you. The guy who is kinda
slight of build - chances are, due to his lack of musculature, the proportion of slow twitch
fibres are higher, and he won't ever be an anaerobic machine, thats why they don't change, the guy
who is slightly bigger, well, he has more muscle and therefore can generate more power and
tolerate higher concentrations of lactate - for each case, a dozen possible explanations.

Quoted message said:

Lactate testing has its uses, but they are far more limited than the general coaching/athlete body
believes them to be. I could go on longer on this subject, in as much as there is belief now that
the anaerobic threshold doesn't even exist as such, and training at that intensity is a waste of
time - a training black hole so to speak, (Normal Jones). i for one, only train my athletes either
at maximum effort (either sustained for VO2 Max, or shorter for power) or a very very low
intensity.anyway, i digress.

Quoted message said:

i hope you found at least some of this helpful - in a sentence, don't worry too much about what
others are doing, and don't believe that a lactate value at that time on that day in that
situation is a golden, unbreakable standard.

Quoted message said:

if you have any further specific questions, i'd love to help you out. just email me. 🙂

Quoted message said:

steve

---To expand upon Steve's comments in my own words... Training right at lactate threshhold is
thought to stimulate the body in such a way that, over time, the lactate threshhold is lower (ie you
can work harder without producing lactate). If you work too hard, you will not be able to sustain
the effort because lactate will accumulate. Also, your body will begin to concentrate on anaerobic
pathway training at the expense of aerobic development. While this could be useful for peaking for a
race, in everyday training damaging your aerobic ability is bad so you use this type of training
sparingly. Training at very easy efforts much slower than threshhold has lots of other benefits
(muscle development, cardiac/aerobic development, mitochondrial number increases, enzyme changes)
that can be gotten without hard effort... this is why this can form the majority of your training
and you can still get better. Andy Hass

"diablo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

lactate is not the major problem during performance, (and yes, it is recycled in the liver and
reusable, however, not during exercise to an influencial degree).

I thought that below OBLA the body was able to recycle the lactate at a rate equal to the rate of
production, providing a steady-state which can be maintained until you run out of glycogen (hitting
the wall, bonking, etc.). Is that not true?

Quoted message said:

Lactate still represents a problem in
as much as being a contributor to DOMS.

Hasn't this now been discredited?

Adrian.

In rec.running diablo said:

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Above "AT" one does not stop deriving energy from fat at least until near maximal efforts.
Even then we continue to take in and use oxygen. Fat oxidation of 1 mole takes more oxygen
than 1 mole of CHO, but

as

Quoted message said:

you note aerobic use of glycogen provides energy at a faster rate.

Quoted message said:

The whole point of disputing anaerobic threshold/aerobic
threshold/OBLA/current-fashionable-turn-of-phrase is exactly what you point out - its a continuum,
and not one that can be counted on to be the same everytime you try to measure it. In performance,
recycling lactate through the Cori cycle is not really an issue, as its so time consuming for what
it returns.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Lactate is produced all the time and serves as a source of energy; it is the acidity from the
hydrogen ion that causes more problems than the lactate itself.

Quoted message said:

Again, this covers a very salient point - lactate is not the major problem during performance,
(and yes, it is recycled in the liver and reusable, however, not during exercise to an influencial
degree). The increase in hydrogen ion concentration is the overriding factor in fatigue at the
muscle cell level. the change in pH affects not only the glycolytic enzymes, but also those of the
kreb's. Once that NaHCO buffer has gone, the pH gradient across the cell membrane is defunct.
Lactate still represents a problem in as much as being a contributor to DOMS.

--Could you please tell me what evidence you have seen that training hard can overcome the buffering
capacity of the body? This seems extremely far-fetched to me as a biochemist. Your body has
ENOURMOUS capacity to buffer acids. By the time you changed the pH enough to affect the things you
mention, you would be dead. I asked 2 MDs to make sure I wasn't blowing smoke replying...I'd be
interested where you got this to see how they justified this conclusion. Andy Hass

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In rec.running diablo <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

---To expand upon Steve's comments in my own words... Training right at lactate threshhold is
thought to stimulate the body in such a way that, over time, the lactate threshhold is lower (ie
you can work harder without producing lactate).

This is the old mainstay theory that has haunted training methodology for too long IMO. see below
for my thoughts.

If you work too hard, you will not

Quoted message said:

be able to sustain the effort because lactate will accumulate.

If the set is written well, ensuring an adequate warm up period for aerobic metabolism, (descend
slowly, thereby avoiding net fatigue at the start of the set), you can maintain HR's close to max
for a longer period of time. Regularly, i have swimmers maintain a pace that derives HR's at or
around 10BBM for over 20 minutes. With discipline and controlled intra-set recovery, you can train
over 90% VO2Max for an extended period of time.

Also, your

Quoted message said:

body will begin to concentrate on anaerobic pathway training at the

expense

Quoted message said:

of aerobic development. While this could be useful for peaking for a

race,

Quoted message said:

in everyday training damaging your aerobic ability is bad so you use this type of training
sparingly. Training at very easy efforts much slower than threshhold has lots of

other

Quoted message said:

benefits (muscle development, cardiac/aerobic development, mitochondrial number increases, enzyme
changes) that can be gotten without hard

effort...

Quoted message said:

this is why this can form the majority of your training and you can still get better. Andy Hass

This is very true, again however, if the set is written well, and your weekly cycle is constructed
to provide at least 36 hours between VO2Max sets this will not be the case. My swimmers perform
routinely, a 45-60min warm up (approx 3K yards) of base, 50-35BBM work every VO2 session, which
maintains the aerobic capacity you are talking about, even if the VO2 work isn't, which one would
assume it is. Every 36 hours, they perform VO2 sets again. I do not subscribe to the old school beat
them constantly into submission style.

This guaranteed, measured and considered rest is the problem with training at the supposed AnThr -
you're not training specifically at the pace you're going to compete at (swimmers, anyway) unless
you're a miler. So, sure you do increase aerobic capacity, but at the same rate as you do by
swimming below the AnThr, at about 40bbm (above the Ventilatroy Thr)....the only difference is, you
burn up more glycogen, and elongate the recovery period. Essentially, thats why its a black hole -
it doesn't give you race pace experience, doesn't afford any tolerance, but does rack up fatigue
faster. For my money, i'd rather train at VO2 and know i'm getting something for the damage i cause
the swimmer...but with the amount of rest thats built in, it doesn't happen.

I've had fantasitic results with this ever since i took the plunge and ditched AnThr from my box of
tricks. all i can say is Go Salo...

my two cents 🙂

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In rec.running diablo <[email hidden]> wrote:

--Could you please tell me what evidence you have seen that training hard can overcome the
buffering capacity of the body? This seems extremely far-fetched to me as a biochemist. Your body
has ENOURMOUS capacity to buffer acids. By the time you changed the pH enough to affect the things
you mention, you would be dead.

There is a great deal of literature about the subject of altering the acid base balance in order to
sustain high intensity exercise. The vast majority of this research has been done on sodium
bicarbonate loading, but also citric acid supplementation has been examined to a lesser extent. As
glycogen is partially metabolised through glycolysis, it results in net hydrogen ion accumulation
within the muscle cell. Bicarbonate, a naturally occuring buffer causes the H ions to cross the cell
membrane to balance this, thus neatralizing the pH levels within the cell and avoiding intracellular
acidosis. Bicarbonate cannot cross the cell membrane due to its size.

if the production of H ions is so great (in sustained maximal exercise for example), the discordant
proportions do cause net accumulation, and enzymatic function is impaired due to the ensuing pH drop
within the muscle cell. If you were correct, and the body did have a massive capacity to buffer pH
levels, fatigue would only occur when the relative fuel source was exhausted. anyone who has tried
to sustain maximal exercise can tell you this is not the case 🙂

if you'd like to discuss this matter further, or would like specific literature regarding this
topic, please email me. I did both my thesis and dissertation on this topic, and would love to help.
If you'd simply like to read more about it without personal correspondence, i would direct you to
the following studies:

Wilkes, Gledhill & Smyth (1983), Med Sci Sp Ex, 15 (4) McNaughton (1992). J Sp Sci 10, 415-423
Jones, Sutton, Taylor, Toewes (1977) J App Phys (43) 959-964 Jones, Sutton, Taylor, Toewes (1981) Cl
Sci (61) 331-338 McNaughton & Thompson (2001) J Sp Med Phys Fit (41) 456-462

These studies, including the seminal field-based study by Wilkes et al will provide you with
the physiological mechanism, as well as strategies and history of alkalinisers as a supplement
to improving exercise performance. Further literature may be found in the reference section as
you see fit.