The S&C-related Studies Thread

[miaou]

Two studies

Intermittent versus constant aerobic exercise: effects on arterial stiffness.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21081799

The study was done on humans, with the conclusion that interval training lowers arterial stiffness better compared to constant state. Found it interesting if your goal is indeed circulatory system improvements and not just losing weight (which HIIT is also effective at).

Ibuprofen administration during endurance training cancels running-distance-dependent adaptations of skeletal muscle in mice.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21081799

As the title implies, it would appear that ibuprofen makes long distance running less effective. I found it interesting in the sense that some people will pop NSAIDs to allow them to train sooner or longer. The study implies(at least for rats) that this may be counter productive. (in before DUH)

Your first link is the same as your second link (both link to the study with ibuprofen).


Regarding NSAID use and myoskeletal adaptations, here is a relevant post from another thread a while back (I had included the study you just posted in that post):

The rational is really simple. Under normal circumstances (i.e. acute injury or tissue damage), inflammation is a beneficial mechanism and inhibiting it may reduce painful symptoms at the cost of losing some of the physiological adaptations that mechanism was triggered to produce (stuff like, I don't know, tissue repair and whatnot). In this case, taking anti-inflammatory drugs can be right-down detrimental. Under circumstances where injuries/pathologies have failed to heal and have become chronic (like all sorts of chronic and overuse syndromes), inflammation is ineffective at solving the problem, but routinely taking NSAIDs as a way to reduce pain and inflammation in order to continue training doesn't address the underlying issue and can result in further damage because the person can train with reduced pain while the damaging pathology is still at work. Of course, that doesn't mean there are no cases that may benefit from anti-inflammatory drug use (especially when it comes to degenerative inflammation like osteoarthritis).


There is literally tons of published studies relevant to NSAIDs and sports.

NSAIDs may inhibit muscle repair:
Rehabilitation of muscle after injury... [Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI

They may also inhibit adaptations in collagen tissues:
Effect of anti-inflammatory medication on the... [J Appl Physiol. 2011] - PubMed - NCBI
A cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor impairs... [Am J Sports Med. 2001 Nov-Dec] - PubMed - NCBI
Effects of cyclooxygenase inhibitors on ... [Niger J Med. 2007 Oct-Dec] - PubMed - NCBI

They may inhibit endurance training adaptations on the muscle cell level:
The influence of anti-inflammatory medication... [J Appl Physiol. 2007] - PubMed - NCBI
Ibuprofen administration during enduranc... [J Physiol Pharmacol. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI

They may also inhibit strength/hypertrophy adaptations:
Ibuprofen inhibits skeletal muscle hype... [Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006] - PubMed - NCBI
COX-2 inhibitor reduc... [Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2009] - PubMed - NCBI

There's a bunch of reviews on problems with frequent use of over-the-counter NSAIDs by athletes:
Analgesics and anti-inflammatory medic... [Pediatr Clin North Am. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs f... [Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI
Prophylactic use of NSAIDs by athletes: a ris... [Phys Sportsmed. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI


All that is without taking into account the possible side-effects of long-term NSAID use in other organic systems (digestive tracts, kidneys, etc). Btw, let me repeat I am not saying NSAIDs are evil and will kill you the moment you ingest them; they can be of use depending on the circumstances.

 

[tsukongk]

Your first link is the same as your second link (both link to the study with ibuprofen).


Regarding NSAID use and myoskeletal adaptations, here is a relevant post from another thread a while back (I had included the study you just posted in that post):

thanks!!

Here is the correct first link
Intermittent versus constant aerobic exercise: effects on arterial stiffness.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20187285

 

[RedNeckJiuJitsu]

So basically, looking at that stuff you posted, taking aspirin in a preWO stack (such as ECA) might really be counter productive?

 

[miaou]

^ entirely off the top of my head, I don't recall seeing any relevant studies using aspirin in particular as a NSAID.

The concept is that the acute inflammatory responses to exercise are involved in training-induced adaptations and anything that blunts those acute inflammatory responses may also blunt the adaptations to training. I'm not really sure about it as I haven't really looked into it (never used pre-wo ECA), but I'm under the impression that aspirin as part of an ECA stack is not about its anti-inflammatory effects, but rather about its blood thinning effects. In other words, I'm not sure if and to what degree aspirin would affect training adaptations and if that would be more significant than any benefits you may get from using ECA pre-wo.

 

[RedNeckJiuJitsu]

You're correct that aspirin isn't in the ECA stack for anti-inflamatory effects. IIRC, it's there to extend the half-life of the ephedrine and caffeine in your system. At least, I remember reading that somewhere in F13 or F15...

 

[Aleks Sytsevich]

You're correct that aspirin isn't in the ECA stack for anti-inflamatory effects. IIRC, it's there to extend the half-life of the ephedrine and caffeine in your system. At least, I remember reading that somewhere in F13 or F15...

I remember reading that in DS's log a few years ago.

 

[miaou]

This is an interesting study published last year that just came under my attention.

7-year longitudinal study of Oklahoma State University football payers, examining how their size, strength, power and speed evolved through their 4 years of collegiate training.

Here is the abstract:

Longitudinal morphological and performance profiles for American, NCAA Division I football players.

The aim of this study was to determine the changes in anthropomorphism and performance over a 4-year eligibility career of American football players. A total of 92 offensive and defensive linemen and 64 skill (wide receivers and defensive backs) player observations were included in the analysis. Data from preseason testing over a 7-year period were compiled, sorted, and analyzed by players' year in school. Assessments of strength included 1 repetition maximum bench press, squat, power clean, and a 225-lb maximum repetition muscle endurance test. Power and speed measures included vertical jump (VJ) and 40-yd (36.6-m) sprint. All strength measures improved significantly (p < 0.05) over the years of training. Skill players demonstrated a significant increase in power between years 1 and 2 but at no other time. Linemen did not demonstrate significant changes in VJ. Speed did not change significantly for either group over the 4 years of training. These data provide a theoretically predictable 4-year rate of change in anthropometric, strength, and power variables for Division I football players. By having a longitudinal assessment of expected physical improvement, it may be possible for strength training personnel to determine those who may need additional attention in an area to more closely improve as expected. Additionally, it is suggested that elite athletes may possess genetically superior attributes and therefore, when selecting athletes, particular attention should be paid to the selection of those who have previously demonstrated superior speed and power.

And here is the press release: http://www.wolterskluwerhealth.com/...Football-Players-Gain-Strength-and-Size-.aspx


Basically, size and strength increased all across the board (they got more muscular but also leaner and all the strength markers increased), but power (vertical jump) and speed (40-yd dash) did not increase at all (only exception being that players in "skill positions" improved their vertical but only during their first year at college).



In my opinion, what this study shows is one of two things: either speed and power are almost entirely depended on genetics (or pre-existing conditions that cannot be affected by the time you are 18 years old), or the training they did (which apparently involved a lot of heavy weight training) isn't well-suited to increase power (vertical jumping) and speed.

 

[CarbonFistprint]

This is an interesting study published last year that just came under my attention.

7-year longitudinal study of Oklahoma State University football payers, examining how their size, strength, power and speed evolved through their 4 years of collegiate training.

Here is the abstract:



And here is the press release: http://www.wolterskluwerhealth.com/...Football-Players-Gain-Strength-and-Size-.aspx


Basically, size and strength increased all across the board (they got more muscular but also leaner and all the strength markers increased), but power (vertical jump) and speed (40-yd dash) did not increase at all (only exception being that players in "skill positions" improved their vertical but only during their first year at college).



In my opinion, what this study shows is one of two things: either speed and power are almost entirely depended on genetics (or pre-existing conditions that cannot be affected by the time you are 18 years old), or the training they did (which apparently involved a lot of heavy weight training) isn't well-suited to increase power (vertical jumping) and speed.

When I was in track in college, I took an interesting elective class called "Speed Improvement." We read a lot of studies and did a lot of research on ways to improve speed: Increase strength, increase endurance, increase mobility (stride length), increase stride frequency, improve form, and a few minor factors.

Once of the assumptions that seems to bear out is that there's only a small increase in sprinting speed from an untrained to an optimally trained person. Don't remember the exact number but let's say 10-20% is about all the faster a person can get by training speed.

Strength, however, has a massive improvement range over time. An untrained individual can often double their strength, given time and attention to strength training. So anyway I'm not surprised that this study shows similar findings.

 

[Tosa]

Once of the assumptions that seems to bear out is that there's only a small increase in sprinting speed from an untrained to an optimally trained person. Don't remember the exact number but let's say 10-20% is about all the faster a person can get by training speed.

And none of these athletes were initially untrained, so the room for improvement would be even smaller.

There's also a time issue - speed and power peak and decline at a much younger age than strength, leaving less time to try and tease out statistically significant improvement. So you're left with a combination of potential factors that make it difficult to show a statistically significant improvement in speed and power.

Which is still a valuable finding.

 

[Eric Brown]

^ entirely off the top of my head, I don't recall seeing any relevant studies using aspirin in particular as a NSAID.

The concept is that the acute inflammatory responses to exercise are involved in training-induced adaptations and anything that blunts those acute inflammatory responses may also blunt the adaptations to training. I'm not really sure about it as I haven't really looked into it (never used pre-wo ECA), but I'm under the impression that aspirin as part of an ECA stack is not about its anti-inflammatory effects, but rather about its blood thinning effects. In other words, I'm not sure if and to what degree aspirin would affect training adaptations and if that would be more significant than any benefits you may get from using ECA pre-wo.

Prostaglandin inhibitor, IIRC.

Will look for some shit on it on my day off (tomorrow).

 

[Eric Brown]

This is an interesting study published last year that just came under my attention.

7-year longitudinal study of Oklahoma State University football payers, examining how their size, strength, power and speed evolved through their 4 years of collegiate training.

Here is the abstract:



And here is the press release: http://www.wolterskluwerhealth.com/...Football-Players-Gain-Strength-and-Size-.aspx


Basically, size and strength increased all across the board (they got more muscular but also leaner and all the strength markers increased), but power (vertical jump) and speed (40-yd dash) did not increase at all (only exception being that players in "skill positions" improved their vertical but only during their first year at college).



In my opinion, what this study shows is one of two things: either speed and power are almost entirely depended on genetics (or pre-existing conditions that cannot be affected by the time you are 18 years old), or the training they did (which apparently involved a lot of heavy weight training) isn't well-suited to increase power (vertical jumping) and speed.

Well, speed is also heavily influenced by the mass of the individual, so while there may not have been any net increase in speed, given that they all got larger, they were all able to move greater mass at the same speed, which is a fairly significant training effect.

 

[miaou]

When I was in track in college, I took an interesting elective class called "Speed Improvement." We read a lot of studies and did a lot of research on ways to improve speed: Increase strength, increase endurance, increase mobility (stride length), increase stride frequency, improve form, and a few minor factors.

Once of the assumptions that seems to bear out is that there's only a small increase in sprinting speed from an untrained to an optimally trained person. Don't remember the exact number but let's say 10-20% is about all the faster a person can get by training speed.

Strength, however, has a massive improvement range over time. An untrained individual can often double their strength, given time and attention to strength training. So anyway I'm not surprised that this study shows similar findings.

"Pure speed" (how fast a person can move his limbs) is generally said to be almost completely unaffected by training. As an extrapolation of that, max sprinting speed (the one you are obviously referring to) is not easily affected, and as you mentioned has as much to do with form and mobility improvements as much as anything else.

Having said that, the marker for "speed" in this study was 40-yd dash time, which is more about acceleration and not max speed (and this speed/acceleration over short distances is what really counts as "speed" in most sports, like football/soccer/basketball/etc.). This attribute is much more "pliable" than max speed.

And none of these athletes were initially untrained, so the room for improvement would be even smaller.

There's also a time issue - speed and power peak and decline at a much younger age than strength, leaving less time to try and tease out statistically significant improvement. So you're left with a combination of potential factors that make it difficult to show a statistically significant improvement in speed and power.

Which is still a valuable finding.

These are collegiate athletes.

There is no neurological decline at that age. Sprinters and other power athletes reach their peak in their mid twenties.

Well, speed is also heavily influenced by the mass of the individual, so while there may not have been any net increase in speed, given that they all got larger, they were all able to move greater mass at the same speed, which is a fairly significant training effect.

This is a good point, and one I thought of myself. The same goes for the marker used for "power" (the vertical jump), that's why I included that in parenthesis in my comments. If an athlete has gown in size with no significant changes in his vertical jump, then that means he produces more power in order to jump to the same height (so it's really "relative power" and not absolute power we're talking about here).

Still, speed and jumping ability are two very important performance factors and it's meaningful to note that they didn't go anywhere after 4 years of training. I wonder if a coach offered with a theoretical choice wouldn't prefer his "skill players" to be a bit smaller while being faster.

Do you have access to the full text? It would be interesting to see if their relative strength (squat vs bodyweight) increased without affecting their acceleration/vertical.

 

[Eric Brown]

This is a good point, and one I thought of myself. The same goes for the marker used for "power" (the vertical jump), that's why I included that in parenthesis in my comments. If an athlete has gown in size with no significant changes in his vertical jump, then that means he produces more power in order to jump to the same height (so it's really "relative power" and not absolute power we're talking about here).

Yes, so peak power output has increased. Significant measures of performance, however, have not in an easily visible sense. By easily visible, I mean marketable/ones that the general public can easily understand in a four-second sound bite.

Still, speed and jumping ability are two very important performance factors and it's meaningful to note that they didn't go anywhere after 4 years of training. I wonder if a coach offered with a theoretical choice wouldn't prefer his "skill players" to be a bit smaller while being faster.

Most I know would, yes.

Do you have access to the full text? It would be interesting to see if their relative strength (squat vs bodyweight) increased without affecting their acceleration/vertical.

Yes. PM me an e-mail addy and I will send it to you tomorrow.

 

[Squat More]

Eric, do you own or have you read anything by Dr Stuart McGill as it pertains to the spine, hips, abdominal training / pressure, squatting etc?

 

[Obscure Terror]

I have Low Back Disorders. Trying to get my hands on Ultimate Back Performance FWIW.

 

[Squat More]

Yeah, I have issues too and I figured I'd ask Eric what he would recommend buying/reading first. I know guys like Chris Duffin and Blaine Sumner have both mentioned him in the past. A friend of mine who is online coached by Sumner introduced me to McGill about a month back. The books and Dvds are pricey so I wanted Eric's input first.

 

[Eric Brown]

Yeah, I have issues too and I figured I'd ask Eric what he would recommend buying/reading first. I know guys like Chris Duffin and Blaine Sumner have both mentioned him in the past. A friend of mine who is online coached by Sumner introduced me to McGill about a month back. The books and Dvds are pricey so I wanted Eric's input first.

His stuff is pretty good. Very cautious sort of guy, but then he has to be.

 

[selfcritical]

^ entirely off the top of my head, I don't recall seeing any relevant studies using aspirin in particular as a NSAID.

The concept is that the acute inflammatory responses to exercise are involved in training-induced adaptations and anything that blunts those acute inflammatory responses may also blunt the adaptations to training. I'm not really sure about it as I haven't really looked into it (never used pre-wo ECA), but I'm under the impression that aspirin as part of an ECA stack is not about its anti-inflammatory effects, but rather about its blood thinning effects. In other words, I'm not sure if and to what degree aspirin would affect training adaptations and if that would be more significant than any benefits you may get from using ECA pre-wo.

This has also been replicated for acute loads of antioxidants. Release of free radicals, much like inflammation, plays some role in aerobic adaptations.

 

[Seriously-Dead]

I'm interested in looking into to see if Aspirin would have the same inhibitory properties as other NSAIDs. Aspirin's breakdown products and mechanism of action are particularly unique among the COX-2 inhibitors/non specific NSAIDs.

Ephedrine might be muscle-sparing as well, so there might be some net-neutral interaction between aspirin and ephedrine.

 

[FlexLuthor]

This should be stickied.