Ryan

This article was originally posted by Ryan at the original HillRunner.com Blogs.

I’m leaning heavily on one of my favorite blogs this week. Alex Hutchinson’s Sweat Science blog is always a good one. This week, two of my favorite reads came from there.

Protein before bed

We’ve known for some time that it’s best to spread your protein intake out across the day. Your body can only process around 20-25 grams at one time. If you take more, it doesn’t really do anything for you.

So, would getting an extra dose of protein right before bed be beneficial or do things change as we go to sleep?

We now have the answer.

More generally, think in terms of getting four to six distinct doses of protein throughout the day and evening.

To me, that’s the key. Is the timing of that before bed dose of protein significant? Probably not. The key is that it was an extra dose of protein spaced out from the others throughout the day. Whether it comes at bedtime, when you first wake up or some other time during the day probably doesn’t matter. What matters is that it does come.

Compression socks

Do you believe compression socks will help you recover? If so, good news. If not, bad news.

That’s what a recent study tells us.

So for the believers, there was a tiny (and non-significant) speed-up in the second trial, while the skeptics had a significant (and unsurprising) slow-down. The error bars here are +/- ~20 seconds, but the difference is still striking.

This was a test of two 5K time trials with an hour between the two. The question was whether wearing the compression socks between the trials would affect the second. As it turns out, those who believed the compression socks would help them ran about 3 seconds faster on the second time trial. Those who didn’t believe ran about 17-18 seconds slower on the second time trial.

While this result is within the margin of error so we can’t say this result is conclusive, that’s a pretty amazing spread.

That’s the likely power of the placebo. Our minds are amazing things.

This article was originally posted by Ryan at the original HillRunner.com Blogs.

A long lasting debate and an important reminder this week.

Antioxidants

First, the reminder.

Back when I was a relatively new runner, everyone believed antioxidants were very good for runners. The belief was the more, the better. Antioxidants would help you recover from your training faster, which would allow you to train harder.

Conceptually, this makes great sense. In fact, upon a recommendation from a doctor who was also a good runner, I took mega doses of antioxidants for many years. I have to wonder now, though, in the face of more recent evidence how much those mega doses of antioxidants may have harmed my fitness.

Well, here’s more to get me thinking:

On the basis of vitamin E and NAC studies, acute intake of antioxidants is likely to be beneficial. However, chronic intakes of most antioxidants have a harmful effect on performance.

So short term supplementation may make sense. Long term? Forget it. It’s likely to do more harm than good.

Fitness vs. efficiency

There’s been a long debate over whether increased fitness decreases one’s efficiency. On one hand, it wouldn’t seem that one would directly affect the other. On the other hand, it seems that the people with the best fitness as measured by VO2max are not those with the best running economy. Even the elites tend to be great in one or the other but not both.

There is some new research that took a look at two questions:

1) If you have a high VO2max, are you more likely to have a lower running economy?

…there is an inverse relationship between VO2 max and running economy: those who are good in one are less likely to be good in the other. But it’s a pretty scattered relationship. Overall, knowing someone’s VO2 max accounts for only seven percent of the variance in their running economy. The rest is determined by other factors.

So the answer is yes but not by a significant margin.

2) If you improve your VO2max, does that mean you’re more likely to make your economy worse?

Again, those who improved VO2 max were slightly less likely to improve running economy. In this case, knowing the change in VO2 max explained 12 percent of the variance in running economy changes.

Again, yes but not by much.

So it’s true that a better VO2max apparently is associated with worse running economy but the relationship is weak. It’s not a death knell. You can improve both at the same time and you can do well in both measures.