Posts

Showing posts with the label vo2max

Popular topics

Show more

'Training Low[Carb]' Requires 0.12g/kg Extra-Protein | Fitbit Fitness Data Decently Reliable | Plus: Salt vs. Passin' Out

Written by | published on
Image
Mixed news about nutrition, exercise, and supplementation. In the absence of game-changing nutrition, exercise, and supplementation science I decided to post one of the recently rare installments of the good old " on short notice " column at the SuppVersity . This installment of the " short news " features two plus one papers from the latest issue of "Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise"  and their, as of yet, unpublished "ahead of print" articles. While we'll start with a short discussion of the latest investigation into the accuracy (or rather usefulness) of your (old) Fitbit Charge 2.0 , I suspect that most of you will be more interested in the "training low [carb/glycogen]" study which is the first to quantify the (to be expected) increase in protein/amino acid requirements in those who avoid carbs to maximize the mitochondrial response to exercise (see "Maximizing Training-Induced Cellular Adaptation: T...
Read full article »

'Survival of the Fittest!' Large-Scale Study Backs Classic Evolutionary Paradigm - Being Unfit Worse Than Smoking | Plus: Fit/Unfit - What are You + What Can You do About it?

Written by | published on
Image
Even the difference between having 'below ' vs. 'above average' fitness levels amounts to the same 1.4-fold increase in mortality risk the scientists calculated for smoking cigarettes. When I first read about the latest study from the  Cleveland Clinic and that it would demonstrate that "not working out" was "worse than smoking", I expected that a press-release writer had compared the reduction in mortality risk and physical fitness, which has been observed by a new medium-scale observational study from his employer, to the hazard ratio (HR) other scientists calculated for smoking in a completely different study (or meta-analysis) for publicity reasons. However, upon closer scrutiny, it turned out that both, the hazard ratio for smoking vs. non-smoking, which is 1.41 (p < 0.001), and the hazard ratio for elite vs. low fitness, which is 5.05 (p < 0.01) and hence 3.6 times higher, were based on analyses of the same dataset - cool! Bicar...
Read full article »

What's the Optimal HIIT Protocol for Trained Individuals? 48 x 10s or 8 x 60s for Conditioning + Improved Body Comp.?

Written by | published on
Image
Cycling and sprinting (running) are not your only options when doing HIIT. An intense plyometric  or other body-weight based workouts  can be done in an "80-95% for 10-60s" vs. "running on the spot for 20-120s" or with  kettle-bells workout, as well. Be creative... HIIT is "the hit" in the fitness world. And though it has been a hit for years, now, nobody seems to know how it is done "correctly", or, should I say, optimally!? How's that? Well, as in so many areas of this field, there's simply too little scientific data to make science-based recommendations that are "bulletproof" in the literal, not the new nutrition-and-fitness-craze sense of the word. With their latest paper, scientists from China are trying to change just that (Chia-Lun. 2016). They set out to compare the effects of a matched-volume HIIT protocols w/ 10s or 60s all-out exercise and identical work-to-rest ratios (1:2) on - a comparison that has, believe ...
Read full article »

Blood Flow Restricted LISS, but not HIIT, Will Boost VO2Max (5%), as Well as Strength (20%) - Perfect for Athletes' Rehab

Written by | published on
Image
I have to admit: Unless you're injured and in rehab or belong to any other group of athletes where high mechanical loading is contraindicated or impractical, BFR is not exactly something you "have" to do, because everything else was worse. If you want to improve both strength and conditioning, there is usually no way to train accordingly, i.e. do "cardio" (aerobic training) at high(er) intensities and lift weight (enough to make gains). But is this actually true? What about HIIT , for example? Could that help increase both, VO2max and strength at the same time? How intense do you have to train and does adding cuffs and blood flow restriction have a value of its own? In their latest study, a group of Brazilian scientists tried to answer these and related questions. In short: de Oliveira et al. (2016) tested the VO2max and strength response to both, low intensity blood flow restricted training, high intensity interval training (HIT) and regular low intensi...
Read full article »

Cardio Can BOOST Your Gains?! Do it Before Weights and be Rewarded With 28% Increased Fiber Size & VO2 Gains

Written by | published on
Image
It may be important that the subjects cycled, because a recent review of the potential interference of cardio w/ strength training shows that cycling is the least likely to affect your gains (Murach. 2016). In previous articles  at the SuppVersity, I have written about the still ubiquitous concern that cardio training (or aerobic training, in general) could hamper your size and strength gains - a fear that is, unless you overdo it, unwarranted (learn more  about HIIT &  "regular" cardio  training). Now, a recent study from the  Mid Sweden University  shows that the opposite could be the case, i.e. that the hypertrophy response to exercise can actually be stimulated by combining resistance training not just with "cardio", but with "cardio" (=continuous cycling) and HIIT - at least if it's done not after , but before resistance training. Are you looking for muscle builders for the year 2016? Find inspiration in these articles: Tri- or M...
Read full article »
Disclaimer:The information provided on this website is for informational purposes only. It is by no means intended as professional medical advice. Do not use any of the agents or freely available dietary supplements mentioned on this website without further consultation with your medical practitioner.