Respiratory observations during the FaCT tests so far...

[Robh]

Of all the 5 tests I've done so far, although one of the tests I didn't get a chance to ask the client how he breathes not one of them uses their diaphragm to breathe.

Whilst observing the respiratory rates on the Bioharness I can see when the persons resp rates increases as they approach their balance point the Bioharness starts to loose motion of the diaphragm and the resp rate drops. I believe this is due to the person shifting to a more pronounced "Chest out, shoulders up, stomach in technique" which restricts movement of the diapghragm which the Bioharness relies on.

Here's some text about diaphragm breathing :-

Tom Mount, president of the International Association of Nitrox and Technical Divers, recommends doing a t-ai chi breath exercise: breathing in for six to eight seconds, a natural two or three seconds pause, then exhaling for six to eight seconds. "While you're doing it," Mount says, "concentrate on breathing with your diaphragm. This is the way we were born breathing. But we lose it through bad habits and our cultural upbringing. You go to school and they say, 'Chest out, shoulders up, stomach in,' that destroys diaphragmatic breathing." Mount suggests this exercise: Lie on your back, putting one hand on your chest and the other on your stomach. As you breathe, make sure your stomach rises and not your chest. "Once you learn to breathe with your diaphragm," says Mount, "practice it all the time until it becomes a reflex."

Diaphragmatic breathing is the only way to get air into the lower third of your lungs, which is where two-thirds of the blood supply is. This breath technique will increase the efficiency of your lungs. It will enhance your ability to metabolize oxygen. Breathe with your diaphragm - and you'll improve your performance and endurance in any sport.

[Michelle]

What about pilates- style breathing Rob, where you are taught not to raise the ribs when you breath (because it puts your back and particularly your lower back into a compromised position), but to increase the girth of your rib cage.

[Robh]

[quote="Michelle"]What about pilates- style breathing Rob, where you are taught not to raise the ribs when you breath (because it puts your back and particularly your lower back into a compromised position), but to increase the girth of your rib cage.

[Robh]

Michelle,

I asked Juerg, here's his reply :-

Pilatus breathing. There are as many different " breathing " ideas out there , as Guru's or Guru followers , who believe we can breath in all different ways, I could give you at least 10 different names on breathing techniques. What it boils down is the simple situation :- there is one main inspiration muscle your diaphram and now you can move and posing in all different ways to work with that guy and if you find a new untested position you have your own breathing technique.

[Robh]

Step 1
First, determine whether you are a chest breather or a belly breather. Lie down and place one hand on your abdomen and the other hand on your chest. Inhale and watch to see whether the hand on your chest rises first or the hand on your abdomen.

Step 2
Next, focus on your breathing. Listen carefully to your body. Are you among the majority of people who breathe too fast? If you chest breathe during exercise, you probably tend to tire more quickly than individuals who breathe deeply from the belly. High breathing does not allow you to inhale enough oxygen or exhale an adequate amount of carbon dioxide.

Step 3
Concentrate on breathing deeply when you inhale through your nose, relaxing your belly so that it can move outward, expanding like a balloon. At the same time, your diaphragm should be expanding, as the air moves from your belly up into the chest. Remember, oxygen-rich blood will give you more energy.

Step 4
When you exhale through your mouth, breathe out slowly allowing your belly to pull in toward the spine. This helps the diaphragm to move upward as air empties from the lungs.

Step 5
Continue to breathe deeply in a steady rhythm, matching your movements with your breathing.

[Robh]

[quote="Sean Hogan - 何祥"]Step 6, whatever else you do, don't stop breathing.

[mrP(Boonen)VT]

You can always rely on Sean

[Robh]

[quote="mrP(Boonen)VT"]You can always rely on Sean

[quote="Robh"][quote="mrP(Boonen)VT"]You can always rely on Sean

[Robh]

I got some e-mails from VO2 equipment users, with the question :
Is the anaerobic threshold, the equipment softwear gives out really the anaerobic threshold ?
Short answer is : No it is not.
The VO2 equipment test exchanges of gas and in many cases it tests the O2 situation.
Simple put.
We test how much O2 is going in (inspiration ) and how much we breath out .
The difference is named FeO2 % or some use the term true O2.
The advantage of the term true O2 is , that if the numbers go up : ex 5 % O2 to 5.5 % O2 you know the O2 is now used to a higher % in the body.
The FeO2 values as a % of expiration of O2 is sometimes ( if not often used ) confuseing, as if the numbers go up , the O2 used actually is going down. Ex: 16.0 to 16.5 %. In some equipment you can test as well the CO2 ,in and out . The combination of O2 and CO2 is than often used to find the so called RQ (respiration quotient.)
.7 means fat burning/.85 means mixed fat /carb burning and 1.0 means just carb burning.
Now what sounds very clear cut is far of very clear cut.
There is no such thing like just fat burning or just carbs burning. There is no simple clear line and no simple to find thresholds, as the body is a very dynamic system adjusting steady to find the best solution to survive most economically if possible.
We will have always during exercises some areas on mainly fat as an energy source but they can switch to mixed and visa versa.
So this oversimplification lead to a believe, which is now burnt in many coaches brain.
Fat burning workout , carb burning workout aerob workout versus anaerob workout.
lacticid workout versus lacte acid workout and all the common words and names to sound pretty smart and impressive.
We make the same mistake in giving our ideas some zoning names as well , when in fact there is simply a possible trend and hope, that we work the main metabolic ideas in the suggested zone.
So when we now have all this nice toys and they "spit" out the anaerobic threshold, by only measuring gas exchange, than we simple are wrong.
The idea , that the VT ( ventilatory threshold )is identical with the anaerobic threshold is very appealing, as VO2 testing has the advantage of being noninvasive.
There are always some studies out there, who show a possible close correlation between aerobic threshold and VT , there are many studies out there, who show, that different conditions like training status , nutritional intervention and others can cause a clear change in the VT and AT even intra-individual.
We added to the classical lactate test a VO2 test and I will show as well , how the different intervention change the bodies respond very clearly.
So here just for the idea of talking from the same VT a short explanation what we understand as VT.

Ventilatory threshold:
In a progressive step test ( as in a FaCT and other tests) we will start to breath, lets' say first faster.( exactly would be we breath more air VE or TAV total air /min )
This so called ventilation will increase lineraly to the increase of performance ( classical way )
As now the intensity of the test is increasing further so does the ventilation, but we may reach a point where the ventilation may start to increase in a non-linear fashion..
This point, where the ventilation deflects from the progressive linear increase is called the VT.
In some cases the VT can , but must not correspond with the development of muscle and blood acidosis ( Brook 1985).
Blood ( hemoglobin) is a part of a buffer system to try to neutralize acidosis, to help to reduce a certain muscle azidosis. This processes can lead to an increase in CO2, which than acts as a very potent stimmulater to increase ventilation. ( Neary et al 1985 ).
Now because we see sometimes an increase in ventilation and at the same time an increase in blood lactate values and pH change , some scientists originally were sure, that this is an indication that the VT and the AT is the same but just measured different.
So there we were or are with the simple solution , that this is true and we can test "non-invasive " the anaerobic threshold.
Now if we go one step further in the story .
The term anaerobic threshold was introduced in sport in the early 1960 and is based on the 1920 idea ( Hill ) of the aerobic anaerobic model.
The basic idea was, that under high intensity the level of O2 will be very low ( hypoxia). So at that point to be able to continue the exercise the body had to do something and that something was to switch from aerobic energy system over to anaerobic energy systems.
The AT was born.

Today , they are many researcher under the impression, that AT does not exist., and the term is very missleading.. The argument against is clear, as they suggests that there is never an O2 supply problem during exercise to the working muscles.
There is rather a supply problem of "speed" in ATP production , and the body in an attempt to survive will look again for possibilities to produce the ATP faster, but not stopping the other production lines at all . That's where the terminology oxygen dependent and oxygen independent comes in.

Summary:
If we agree with this facts , than there is no AT.
Therefor the VT is not identical with VT and therefor we may have a point where the VT is to be found in a test, but we can't claim that as a metabolic infromation for energy trends, but rather as an information of a change in the linear breathing pattern.
Now last but not least , due to specfic training with the breathing system , the VT can be altered very clear .
How.
Instead of breathing faster ( as most would do ) you try to breath same RR but deeper.
This will alter the FeO2 , as well the shift in energy mobilization from a more O2 needed substrate to a less O2 needed substrate or visa versa.
So by increasing the True O2 or reducing the FeO2 we may be able to "shift" back from slightly more glucose to slightly morte FFA depending on what I try to achive.

1. I could save glucose
2. I could increase pCO2 ( change O2 curve)
3. I could decrease O2 sat ( hypoxia stimmulation) just to name some of the possible ideas.
I know this sounds crazy , but we could change a whole lot of stimmuly by just learn to "control" our respiration system somewhat better.
This may even carry over to , what the cardio system may actually do or not do.
Intitial test show a kind of a trend , that deeper breathing with diaphram may actually change the amount of EDV ( enddiastolic volume ) and therefor may have a direct effect on SV ( strokevolume and in combination with HR a direct impact on CO ( cardiac output.
Now watch again:

The definition of maximal O2 in a performance seems to be important for overall performance.
Again the max VO2 gives only the information on how much O2 is used in the body at a given workout. We still don't know , who uses the O2.
So the key is to find out , who uses the O2 and once we have that information we can see what training makes the usage of the O2 more efficient, so we can use more O2 for ATP production , and therefor improve overall performance.
VO2 max = max HMV x max arterio/venous O2 difference.
HMV is heart rate minute volume = max HR x max SV = max CO.
The a-v O2 difference is simply measured by O2 in and O2 out.
This will give some very different numbers in VO2 max if we measure the real CO.
Traditionally in any VO2 testing we assume , every body has the same CO ????
So people with the same VO2 may have therefor a completely different performance, as one may have a much bigger CO than the other, but a better muscle effciency and because we take the CO as everybody the same we have a problem to explain the different performance.
Hmm this wil be the 3 posters out tere.

1. Shift from "lactate threshold" to lactate trend as a metabolic biomarker.
2. Shift from VO2 max to VO2 trend as a respiratory biomarker
3. Shift from max HR to a trend in cardiac parameters as a way of using LBP in the field of average fitness people and health training.
This may close the cricle from LBP to LBP by showing the interconnection of the CGM and why lactate may increase close to the maximal CO.
We need some further investigations , but it is fun to play arround and see that many of our ideas on LBP are comming more and more to the forefront..
Our refusel to compare it with any classical concept of aerob and threshold may now show as a very clear and true answer to the use of lactate in the field and as tests. Cheers Juerg