FaCT clear and simple

[Juerg FaCT]

Toks I hope I am not promissing too much here, but give me a chance to try it anyway.
FaCT = Feldmann and Chlebek Test.
Goal :
Develop an assessment tool for athletes, coaches, research, where we use simple Bio-marker in the field to assess possible changes in energy demands.
Biomarkers:
- simple biomarkers : Heart rate, SpO2, respiration rate, ( cheap and easy to use)
- advanced Bio markers : Lactate, Glucose, ammonia ( more expensive and invasive )
- proand research Biomarkers : Stroke volume, Cardiac output, and other cardiac information ( very expensive and very new on the market. Will change the direction in research over the next few years)
Why Biomarkers in FaCT ?
Biomarkers give a unique individual information from your body and will tell you ,what your body is doing at a specific time during a workout .
You combine Bio-markers with physical performance ( watt ) and subjective feeling to learn , how the body interacts.
What is the difference on a FaCT zoning to other existing zonings.
1. We assess individual changes versus fixed % of a maximal performance
Example STF zone or ( fat burning zone ).
In a test idea of 220 - age we will use 65 % as Fat zone
In a test with Max wattage we ill use a % of max. wattage as a fat zone.
In a tests with FTP we will use a % of FTP and so on.
In FaCT we will not use a calculation , but use a "signal" from the body , when he shifts from using mainly one fuel source to now changing to another fuel source.
Example:
In an intensity where we use mainly fat we need to supply more O2 for energy production.
If the intensity is increasing we need a faster supply of ATP and the delivery for ATP over fat as an energy source is ,simply put, too slow. So the body will shift more to glucose. This is easier ( faster for covering the higher ATP demand ).
- result. Using more glucose will produce more CO2 ( RQ over .85 ).
-CO2 will produce different reactions.
2 of them can be picked up by simple biomarkers.
a) CO2 will shift the affinity of O2 ( O2 can be easier released from the red blood cells ) This can show a drop in SpO2 ( which shows the "loading" of O2 on the red blood cells )
b) CO2 is the most potent stimmulator for respiration rate increase ( Permissive hypercapnia during an operation )
So the increase in CO2 will increase the respiration rate.
By assessing the SpO2 and the respiration rate we will have an individual feedback to us, where we stand in metabolic energy delivery in the aerobic intensity zones.
By doing the same tests a few weeks later we can see, whether the training intensity ,we decide to do , will change this biomarkers ( higher wattage output by the same Respiration rate and the same SpO2 ) If we see an improvement, we know that the used training intensity at that time was the reason of the change.( or not )
So I assume the next step is :

Toks: can you explain the readers ,
1. what is LT ( lactate threshold ) in simple terms:
2. How do you find LT ( lactate threshold ) in a test ?
Conclusion : If LT is the same as LBP than we have based on Toks definition as well the definition of LBP ?
Or we have an open fair discussion , where the difference may be between LT and LBP.
Thanks for your ongoing support. Juerg


Summary:
FaCT is working on ideas to find simple and easy to use tools , so that an athlet, a person in rehabilitation and coaches can easy work more individually with their clients.

[MattI]

Hi Juerg,

Whilst I appreciate your enthusiasm and attempts at explaining FaCT and it's methodology, I'm still really struggling with your 'Swenglish'.
I, like Toks, am trying to get to the bottom of this FaCT stuff and really want a simple concise explanation of how it works and why it works.

Ok, here's the problem I have with all this FaCT stuff: Not only is it unintuitive but no one has really seen fit to write a good intelligible introduction to it.
At first I thought I know, I'll visit the FaCT Cananda web site and get a good understanding of what's what. But that's just as difficult to understand and doesn't really explain the whole idea of it all without lapsing into the unintelligible.

From a cursory read of all the pages and pages that have been copied and pasted here, it seems to be something about having some kind of test done in a lab that most people are very impressed by. Then after that you get a ridiculously low heart rate that you should be riding around at for your ‘training’ .This will necessitate you riding around very slowly but in a few years time one will be able to ride faster at the same heart rate.
I'm sure that's not it, but that's the impression I get.

Reading your post above Juerg, I'm with you up to point 1:
[quote]1. We assess individual changes versus fixed % of a maximal performance

[Robh]

Point 2 of Jeurg's post is about the Oxyhemoglobin Dissociation Curve.

http://www.answers.com/topic/bohr-effect

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXOBJEXx ... re=related

[Michelle]

I am going to try to translate from point 1.

I have written this in Juergs voice, hope that makes sense...


'What is the difference between training with FaCT zones and training with other zones?

FaCT assesses how an individual changes, as opposed to other trianing zones which only use a percentage of a maximal performance.

For example, lets look at using the slow twich fibres (STF) for burning fats as fuel.
In one type of test one might use 220 HR – age x 65% to get a HR that will give you your fat burning zone.
In another type of test one might use a percentage of maximum wattage as a fat burning zone.
In another type of test one might use a percentage of functional threshold power (FTP) as a fat burning zone.
In FaCT we do not use a ‘standardised’ percentage, but we use signals from your body which appear when you shift from using one type of fuel system (eg fats) to another (eg glucose).

To illustrate how this can be done, lets look more closely at fat burning. When we are metabolising mainly fats as fuel, we need to get more O2 to the muscles to aid this energy production.
But if the requirement for energy increases over a certain level (ie you start to pedal harder), the body will need a faster supply of Adenosine TriPhosphate (ATP – or energy), because fat cannot be changed to energy fast enough for the body when it is working this hard.
So when we are working this hard, the body will shift to using glucose as a supplier of energy as it is easier to convert and therefore faster.

When we start to use more glucose, we start to produce more CO2.

The production of CO2 leads to some different reactions in the body and we can spot these with two simple biomarkers.
1. CO2 ‘grabs’ blood cells better than oxygen does. So, if you are monitoring the amount of oxygen in the bloodstream (with an SpO2 meter), this shows up as a drop in the amount of O2 loading in the blood.
2. CO2 is the most potent stimulator of respiration around, and with more CO2 in the bloodstream, the respiration rate increases.

So from this we can see that in a change from using mainly fats as fuel, to using mainly glucose as fuel, if we know how to look the body will tell us where this change takes place. This is because it has lowered the amount of oxygen in the bloodstream and the respiration rate has gone up.

At the same time as this change has taken place, the HR and watts can be noted, because all this is taking place on a turbo trainer.

So in a few weeks time, we will be able to go back and retest and see if the training we are doing has affected any of the biomarkers, and whether we are reaching our training goals.

In this instance we would be looking for a higher wattage at the same SpO2 and same respiration rate. If we get it we would know that the training we are doing is working. '

Hope that makes a bit more sense. Personally I didn't know that CO2 has a greater affinity for haemoglobin than O2, though now that I think of it, it does make sense!

[Paul H]

[quote]When we are metabolising mainly fats as fuel, we need to get more O2 to the muscles to aid this energy production.

[Juerg FaCT]

I found an easy explanation of FaCT on here :[quote="Ramanujan"]Reading your post above Juerg, I'm with you up to point 1:
1. We assess individual changes versus fixed % of a maximal performance
That part I totally get.

[Juerg FaCT]

Michelle , Great job again.
One small change:
CO2 shifts the O2 Diss. Curve to the right, making the affinity of O2 ( release of O2 from red blood cells easier.) Another right shift will occure if we have a higher H+ ( lower pH ) as well. All to protect your O2 supply to the vital organs.

Paul . O2 is needed for aerobic workouts. The intensity will be crucial to decide , how the body acn maintain ATP supply and demand.
So produce enough ATP from Fat uses more O2 than from glucose.
But it produces less CO2.
All this changes are a part of the development of FaCT as a simple test for biomarkers.
All the feed backs we are getting from Forums like yours and others help us to understand the level of knowledge in the coaches level and the cyclists on the road.
So next up will be Toks explanation of LT in clear short and proper english and his explanation , how he will find LT ,.
Toks thanks so much for jumping in and provide a very positive feedback . I like your way of argueing and you are so right make it always short and simple.
So here next on this Forum :
Toks information on LT.

[Juerg FaCT]

[quote="Paul H"]If you need more 02, wouldnt that produce more C02?

[Juerg FaCT]

Recovery Zone
We tried above to explain the STF/FTF zone change ( Respiration rate and trends in SpO2)
Here now a very short explanation , how we try to find teh change from recovery zone to STF zone.
Again instead of using % we use some potential physiological biomarker.

Depending on the availability of equipment you can use simply HR and wattage or performance.
Or you can go further by using HR with a specific Polar model.
Here short what we look for as a start on thsi topic.
HRV = Heart rate variablitilty.
This is long know ( even in the 1970 east german ) but is in use in the grass root athletes since Polar offered a watch , where you can actually follow the HRV in a simple way.
What is HRV. In simple terms. The heart is not as regular as we think.
60 beats / min is not every second a beat. Wrong : if HRV is .004 we consider that as a regular heart beat.
In trained people the heart rate in rest is much more "irregular" than in untrained people. This situation is now used by many coaches to assess :
1. End of recovery zone ( resp . start of a minimal cardiac work )
2. Assess after a workout the stimmulation the workout had on the cardiac system.
So what rob is looking ( that's why he starts much slower , than many other tests ) is , where the HRV reaches a low level .004.
If we "warm " up for a test we will miss this info , as in most cases the actual test will start already with a very low HRV.
The info , where the recovery zones ends has some very nice implication for different training ideas and on the other side is a very simple tool to assess potential change in the cardiac system.
This is one field we are working on at this time. Assessing HRV and live Stroke volume and LVET reaction to try to understand functional and structural respond of different training ideas.

[Robh]

I have 2 ways of finding the HR for the recovery zone with my Polar CS600.

First method is the manual way which I use during the LBP test as the watch shows HRV live.

The 2nd method which most Polar watches have is Ownzone. The lower number of this Ownzone test gives your HR @ 4ms.

[Robh]

Juerg,

As you know or may not know I have also been recording people's Fit test scores.

This week you asked Sean, Mark and Michelle to forward their answers to your questions and LBP test data to you. One of the questions asked was if they had their Fit test number.

How do you use this number personally for designing workouts?

I record mine to track long term cardio changes.

Rob

[Robh]

Lactate threshold, Anaerobic threshold, Aerobic threshold, Onset of blood lactate accumulation (OBLA) & Maximal lactate steady state, not sure if I have missed any others have all been used to describe the shift from aerobic to anaerobic energy production (4mmol).

The intensity at the lactate threshold represents the maximal intensity at which steady-state exercise can be maintained.

So when you start to exercise and the intensity increases there is a point where your body begins to produce more lactate then it can eliminate sound familiar? Now scientists have identified this point to be where blood lactate is from 2.0 to 4.0 mmol.

From memory the standard test uses 4 minute intervals to take lactate samples. Now if you used a different interval lengths would you get the same results i.e 4mmol @ same HR?

Rob

[Juerg FaCT]

Rob , take Mark's FTP test over 40 min , check his lactate he had there. Move him down so he has only 4 mmol lactate ( if you can do that ) and now check his wattage. Now take Dr. Coggan's scale and zoning sheet.
( Zone 4 threshold which would be , where the FTP 100 % is located. Now compare the wattage he can push by having 4 mmol in the blood and what he pushes, where he was really on the FTP test.
2 and 4 mmol ( I remember somebody telling me , that we use 1970 east german ideas , Mader) I found that very interesting , as we are far away from the idea, that lactate with absolute numbers actually are usefull for any thing but using lactate strips. As much as we are far off the idea , that lactate threshold is still a term used. ( see Robergs , Brooks, Gladden , Kratz and more ).
Does step length will change the wattage and HR values by 2 or 4 mmol , Try it out and you will be surprised.

[Robh]

Shame I didn't take more lactate points for Mark on Wednesday this week. I know his lactate was 2.7 @ HR 135 and around 9mmol @ HR 173. The HR figure of 173 is suppose to be his LT HR according to Coggan from the literature I've read in the past.

If LBP as has been suggested to be the same as LT then Marky Mark's HR's for both should be very similar?

Mark's LBP = 145bpm and Mark's 45mins LT test = 173bpm.

Rob

[Marky Mark]

Did somebody mention my name?

You'll have to let the scars heal before I do that again Rob, only kidding.
As I mentioned to Juerg, I found I can do a really long turbo session (90 minutes) if I get off half way through to physically go and get water. It helps alot.

I can hear the words of Sylv ringing in my ears with his quote of, "I remember looking down and thinking, only another hour to go"

I'm still reading these posts, not that I understand most of it. I get the jist just (try saying that when you've had a drink )

I had a comfortable ride home in the rain on Saturday, I ignored the LBP-20 and just went home with a steady group.

M M