CONCLUSION: Oral bovine colostrum supplementation at 20 g or 60 g/d provided a small but significant improvement in time trial >performance in cyclists after a 2-h ride at 65% VO2max
Kim Did the authors venture an explanation for this? Earlier I expressed unsubstantiated skepticism, but the results are fairly persuasive and the time difference is quite substantial. However, I would be interested to know HOW it works (and my skepticism lingers).
Donga
that is a good question, maybe there is an element or combination of elements that if mixed right could have the same result? I guess the study didnt actually investigate the how. read a few other studies from different sport disciplines and the majority of them had some sort of positive reaction.
CONCLUSION: Oral bovine colostrum supplementation at 20 g or 60 g/d provided a small but significant improvement in time trial >performance in cyclists after a 2-h ride at 65% VO2max
Kim Did the authors venture an explanation for this? Earlier I expressed unsubstantiated skepticism, but the results are fairly persuasive and the time difference is quite substantial. However, I would be interested to know HOW it works (and my skepticism lingers).
One of the problems of this test with nothing and test with something testing proceedure is that the subjects usually perform better on the seond test even of they just drank plain water.
I found it difficult to extract the degree of significance for the results, i.e. how significant was the difference.
I've just received the latest Bicycling Australia. The 'winning letter' criticises the mag for publishing a review of OxyShot, saying it does not help the author to teach his kids to get themselves over the line using good nutrition, rather than some secret ingredient (different to EPO only in that it is legal?). I totally agree. Train harder and smarter. No magic bullets or little pills.
I've just received the latest Bicycling Australia. The 'winning letter' criticises the mag for publishing a review of OxyShot, saying it does not help the author to teach his kids to get themselves over the line using good nutrition, rather than some secret ingredient
How times change. They ran an article on some other other magic ingredient more than a year back, and I wrote to the then editor making a similar point. I got a reply that was totally defensive.
I've just received the latest Bicycling Australia. The 'winning letter' criticises the mag for publishing a review of OxyShot, saying it does not help the author to teach his kids to get themselves over the line using good nutrition, rather than some secret ingredient (different to EPO only in that it is legal?). I totally agree. Train harder and smarter. No magic bullets or little pills.
Did the review state that these hyper-oxygenated drinks are a discredited hoax? If you hoped to cheat with this sort of rubbish you'd be sorely disappointed.
Did the review state that these hyper-oxygenated drinks are a discredited hoax? If you hoped to cheat with this sort of rubbish you'd be sorely disappointed.
No it didn't - but a.b. knows after a long thread on the topic. Second thoughts, the other difference is that EPO works. If it's legal, there's a pretty clear message it's a waste of dough.
I picked up a copy of Cycling Plus yesterday. It has a review of powdered deer antler in it. It's supposed to increase your strength. I wonder if you can mix it into a colostrum shake?
CONCLUSION: Oral bovine colostrum supplementation at 20 g or 60 g/d provided a small but significant improvement in time trial >performance in cyclists after a 2-h ride at 65% VO2max
Kim Did the authors venture an explanation for this? Earlier I expressed unsubstantiated skepticism, but the results are fairly persuasive and the time difference is quite substantial. However, I would be interested to know HOW it works (and my skepticism lingers).
Donga
65% of VO2Max is not race pace. So what kind of time trial performance were they looking at? Ability to sustain an aerodymanic position for 2 hrs?