Low HR Training

1

Lactate (Read 376 times)

DrPhil


    Jimmy, your lactate discussion in the other thread was great, as was your short story.
    I was in the middle of writing some odds and ends about lactate when I read it. Allow me to dump off this rough piece here in a new thread (it will go on my website when it’s finished).

    A Short Lactate Story
    Lactate is a normal and important component of our body chemistry. It provides an important energy source, helping to restore glycogen when it’s partially depleted (which actually occurs during all training and racing to some degree).
    Lactic acid is what’s produced in the muscles. When it goes into the blood it’s converted to lactate. The word lactate is usually used in these discussions.

     

    Lactate plays an important role in muscles, providing energy to maintain a certain level of glycogen. Lactate accomplishes this by converting to glucose, which is used to 1) maintain energy directly, and 2) help maintain fat-burning for energy.

     

    Lactate conversion to glucose occurs through two main pathways; one is in the muscles, and the other in the liver.

    Like other animals, humans can quickly restore depleted glycogen stores in aerobic and anaerobic muscle fibers, even in the absence of food. This is an important part of the “fight or flight” mechanism. Lactate, along with fat and protein, serves as important sources of energy to help replace depleted glycogen stores.

     

    Lactate is not our only contributor to muscle glycogen. The more immediate (less than 30 minutes) repletion of glycogen following exercise, especially hard training, is from lactate (and a food source if we consume something quickly after a workout or race). Completing the repletion of glycogen stores during recovery (over the next 90 minutes and beyond) is more dependent upon the breakdown of fat (the glycerol molecule) and protein.


    Up to half of the total energy for glycogen repletion comes from lactate, and 50% or more from the breakdown of fat and protein. However, new research shows these levels may be conservative and that fat and protein contributes significantly more to glycogen replacement.

    The process of active recovery – the cool down – following exercise is important for a variety of reasons, one of which is glycogen repletion. This occurs quickly in the anaerobic muscle fibers with the contribution of glycogen from the aerobic fibers. Glycogen, lactate, fat and protein all provide significant contributions to this process.

     

    Lactate is also an important energy source for the heart. While fat is the major fuel for the heart at rest, during exercise, lactate serves as a key source of energy (increasing proportionately with the heart rate).

    Poor lactate regulation is associated with various types of heart disease and diabetes, and similar reductions in lactate metabolism in the heart are seen in so-called normal aging.

     

    The Cori cycle helps regulate and recycle lactate (and pyruvate) to glucose for use as energy. Here’s a simple drawing:  www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=stryer.figgrp.2287

     

    Lactate does not necessarily increase fatigue during racing long endurance runs. No one really knows what factors do this, and it’s probably a mix of several (or many) structural and chemical factors. And, lactate (or lactic acid) is not directly associated with muscle soreness.

     

    Phil Maffetone

    BeeRunB


      Thank you for posting this, Phil.

       

      I've read that the lactic acid clears the muscles rather quickly, and the soreness after a hard race is micro-tears in the muscles. My understanding though is that a high lactate level (I'm not really sure of the concentration) in the blood is usually present when you hit the wall, or suddenly begin to slow, or if you run at speeds above your lactate threshold heart rate. It's not that the lactate is causing the slowing, but for some reason the level gets high. It's associated.

       

      I'm not sure if you are aware of the Hadd Training. This coach bases his training on improving lactate threshold. Not sure how well it works. I tried it 5 years ago when I first started dabbling in HRM training and didn't do very well, but that could have been overtraining on my part.

       

      This gets me thinking about RQ. We've had a discussion (here's one) or two here about RQ and the MAF. Some of have had the Vo2 max test and received the RQ results and were trying to figure out what exactly would be the MAF. Dave (RER), has posted often, and had done a lot of work with MAF, and said it was just below  the 50/50 fat/sugar ratio. A deflection point just below.

       

      I understand that 100% sugar on the scale is the anaerobic threshold, but I wonder how lactate levels relate to RQ. I wonder how improved RQ relates to improved lactate threshold, and if there is a specific point in the RQ results that indicates where the LT is.

       

      I haven't been tested yet, but plan to do one. I think there are a few places in Atlanta here that do the test. I want to test while my MAF tests are slow, then later on when they have improved. I also want to see how my true MAF (based on the actual test) relates to the way I am using the formula. Right now, I'm using 180-age minus 5 beats because of overtraining last fall (and hitting the wall). There was a time when I used PLUS 5 beats and that worked fine. It will be interesting to see if, after a year or so of improvement, how the RQ improves. An observation of LT improvement would also be interesting.

       

      --Jimmy

       

       

       

       

      DrPhil


        Hi Jimmy,
        lots of good questions. Lactate levels range widely in different runners, and there is always some lactate in the blood of healthy people. The amount in the blood is the combination of the amount produced and the amount removed. Long ago I measured lactate in many athletes. While it gives you a fairly accurate number, it tells you nothing about production or removal, just the net result of both.  

         

        In general the amount of lactate production during a run varies with heart rate--the higher the HR, as a reflection of metabolism, the more lactate. This can also vary with one’s overall health, one’s overall fitness, altitude and other factors. The same holds true for lactate removal. Some athletes do it better than others.

         

        An example of a common health issue affecting lactate is vitamin B1 (thiamin) status. A simple diet analysis will reveal that many runners have below RDA levels of B1. In this situation, lactate will often be higher than it should be (usually because removal is slow). Slow removal of lactate may mean glycogen stores will not be replaced adequately.

         

        I agree that exercise-related muscle soreness is associated with muscle micro tears (this often is due to pre-existing muscle imbalance) and not lactate. And you’re correct in that higher levels of lactate are found in athletes when they hit the wall or even start significant fatigue. However, this does not mean lactate is the cause even though it’s associated. Athletes who don’t fatigue at a similar time and intensity may have even higher lactate levels.

         

        I’m not familiar enough with Hadd to comment. But improving lactate threshold should occur in a healthy runner during the course of normal training. I’ve seen it occur in many athletes during a few months of base building (where some lactate and glycogen activity is “trained”).

         

        Lactate production (theoretically) would parallel RQ--as fat burning diminishes lactate production increases. (To get accurate information on lactic acid production in the muscles, a biopsy is needed.)

         

        Regarding the MAF, it’s somewhere around that RQ of 0.85 (50:50 fat and sugar) but varies a bit with the individual. There is almost always a deflection point, and the 180-Formula would usually put you right before that deflection point.

        I would not say that an RQ of 1.0 (theoretically, 100% sugar) is the anaerobic threshold. Both AT and RQ depend to a great degree on the fitness and health of the individual, and separately on the pre-test meal. An RQ of 1.0 is closer to max HR. Anaerobic threshold is closer to lactate threshold. As RQ is reduced at the same HR (increased fat burning), lactate metabolism can also improve.

         

        In order to find the lactate threshold, you would have to measure blood lactate several times during a treadmill test. I’ve done many of these, along with testing other factors. This, along with many other findings, led me to the 180-Formula long ago.

         

        I think it’s important to understand that I’m a clinician. My goal is the help people get more fit and healthy, including better performance. Many of the formulas, philosophies and things I’ve developed came from my clinical work, which is outcome-based. I use the medical literature to scientifically explain why the things I do work well.

         

        Many people use the medical literature to coach athletes. Many magazine article attempt to do the same. But the literature is often conflicting, which is not to say it’s less important. It’s very important. But if we base things on only the research, we risk forgetting about the person. Many people will read a study and follow the conclusion; but we can’t apply the results of a large population study to one person.

         

        I read a recent study showing that men perform better if they wear leg stockings (Kemmler W, et al. Effect of compression stockings on running performance in men runners. J Strength Cond Res. 2009;23(1):101-5). I’m waiting to see some guy out there running with stocking.

         

        One more thing, a lot of the measurements I took through the years were done on athletes who were relatively fit and healthy. The average athlete, unfortunately, is not fit or healthy (the reason for the different categories in the 180-Formula). I’ve read discussions here about people not progressing or not progressing quickly enough (well, it’s never quick enough). The answer is often to get healthy, and that will enable the body to improve fitness very quickly. It also appears that many people choose too high a HR when following the 180-Formula (which is not uncommon, especially after the first run).

         

        I’m doing a blog with the LA Times editor who ran the LA marathon in 8 hours and decided there had to be a better way. Check out her blog and tell the folks there about this great Running Ahead blog: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/outposts/2009/07/the-lazy-marathoner-dr-phil-is-on-my-case.html

         

        Sorry to ramble on so long.

         

        Phil Maffetone

        BeeRunB


          Thanks, Phil. I think I'll stop running in pantyhose now--I believed the study and took it a step further.

           

          Good point about not running according to the latest studies, ignoring the reality and state of your individual body. I usually suggest to people who are experimenting with different HR zones, above or below their MAF, is to keep track of their MAF tests. That one simple thing can let you know how your body is responding aerobically, and an indicator of running health so-to-speak. I learned about this last fall in hindsight, like Moe slapping my Larry Fine  head with a frying pan. I was using my usual 180-age +5 beats, running my usual 60-70 miles per week regardless of time on feet, and as the marathon drew near, did my usal race pace runs and a bit of fartlek. For the first time, my MAF tests didn't move an inch in a positive direction, and began to regress a bit. My race pace runs, which I always do at a certain HR, were fine. I ignored the MAF regression, and probably out of denial I locked on to the race-pace runs and told myself everything was fine. During this training period my life-stress went through the roof. I hit the wall at mile 16 in the marathon--the frying pan in the head.  I needed that dose of reality to come to a deeper understanding of MAF training and your chapters on MAF tests, over-training, and stress. Keeping track of MAF tests could help during race season and an anaerobic training period. There is an excellent blurb about Mark Allen in The Lore of Running that talks about how he would monitor his MAF throughout his phases. During his speedwork phases, he would return to MAF base training when his MAF tests began to regress (this is also an example that your training doesn't exclude speed work).

           

          The MAF test is the number one indicator for me now for measuring aerobic fitness and zeroing in on a pace for the race. The tests don't lie.

           

          You might find this interesting,  as a musician. I actually use the the same principles when practicing guitar, and when teaching students. Obviously, I don't strap a HRM on or tell my students to, and  make practicing under MAF a rule.

          Nor do I do MAF testing! Let's say I'm working on a new bluegrass piece or just jamming. I can try to play so fast that you can actually feel that lactic acid burn and buildup in the muscles, going anaerobic, and the over-strain on the tendons. The idea is to play at a speed where it feels easy on the muscles, a speed where it feels like could play for hours, and of course where the music is comprehensible. In essence, an aerobic playing speed. Eventually that aerobic speed builds in the fingers, hands, wrists, and forearms. Playing faster, but it still feels easy. Guitar players can get over-use injuries as well. The aerobic approach works well. This isn't new, piano teachers used to always advocate slow scale work, building speed naturally.

           

          --Jimmy

           

          ymmv



             

             

            You might find this interesting,  as a musician. I actually use the the same principles when practicing guitar, and when teaching students. Obviously, I don't strap a HRM on or tell my students to, and  make practicing under MAF a rule.

            Nor do I do MAF testing! Let's say I'm working on a new bluegrass piece or just jamming. I can try to play so fast that you can actually feel that lactic acid burn and buildup in the muscles, going anaerobic, and the over-strain on the tendons. The idea is to play at a speed where it feels easy on the muscles, a speed where it feels like could play for hours, and of course where the music is comprehensible. In essence, an aerobic playing speed. Eventually that aerobic speed builds in the fingers, hands, wrists, and forearms. Playing faster, but it still feels easy. Guitar players can get over-use injuries as well. The aerobic approach works well. This isn't new, piano teachers used to always advocate slow scale work, building speed naturally.

             

            --Jimmy

             

             

            Just recently, I was wondering about something very similar. I want to practice flatpicking guitar for many more hours at a very slow speed, not for muscular development, but to make my playing more 'clean'. I've often heard that practicing too fast ony results in your 'practicing your mistakes'. Only after seeing results with slow training while running did I get this thought that something similar really does apply to music, even if its only learning the self-discipline to go slow and clean, trusting that your speed will develop naturally.

            DrPhil


              Yes, learning any physical movement, especially those involving precision, is repetition-based. Piano, guitar, knitting...

               

              The nerves from the brain to the muscles are really the part that's being trained (the neuromuscular system). Starting slow to be sure of the best accuracy is the place to begin, and understanding just what it is you're trying to do. Shorter more frequent sessions, rather than longer ones, usually work best.

               

              Helpful factors include watching what you're doing, then visualizing it, then performing it with your eyes closed.

               

              Running is similar, and the downhill and other aerobic speed workouts are great for this during base building (but avoid overstriding), or anytime. I don't suggest doing this with your eyes closed.Smile

               

              Phil Maffetone

              C-R


                This is a great discussion and as usual I had to read it a couple of times to better understand. It would really help me if you would do this type of thing in crayon so I can better follow along. And by the way, the pantyhose/stocking thing seemed to work out for Joe Namath although he wasn't really a runner.  

                 

                Seriously though, I have a couple of small comments and a couple of follow-up questions.

                 

                Comment 1) I agree with you and Jimmy on the micro tears being the major source of soreness. This seems backed by science and my gut tells me the lactate reasoning still lies with "old school" wives tales from back in the day. The serious runners I've had the chance to ask regard soreness as micro tears.

                 

                Comment 2) most everything published (Hadd, Daniels, Pfitzinger, Noakes, Hudson, etc.) seem to indicate that being able to balance lactacte production with dissipation is what allows for peak performance during a run but none of these folks address other body stresses as a contributing factor. I would agree that lactate clearing during a run/race is also affected by things other than running

                 

                Comment 3) I fully agree about the wanting improvement now idea. I like to call it "instant gratification running" and I am as guilty as the next person. Patience is a challenge especially when you get passed by a runner during training that you know is not as fast as you. The Mark Allen training stories just enhance my opinion of his tenacity and discipline.

                 

                Question 1) You mentioned people training at an elevated MAF number. I am currently training via Van Aaken (<150 but more like <145) which is my MAF +7. My thought was that improvements would still come but that the pace of these improvements may not be as quick as MAF - 5. Does this approach hinder lactate clearance or is the added stress an impact on lactate clearing?

                 

                Question 2) What is the definition of a fit runner? In your books you mention 3 years of consisten and un-injured activity but it does not indicate a performance level such as an improvement of MAF tests by x% over a certain period. This links with question 1 in selecting the proper MAF level.

                 

                Question 3) Did you have a correlation of MAF test improvements in percentages based on a runners level of activity (miles per week, hours exercising, etc.)?

                 

                Question 4) If lactate helps with glycogen repletion, it seems that the cool down is a major component of getting your body readjusted after a run. Did any of your research provide a correlation of cool down times required?

                 

                Sorry for the longish post but I find this fascinating and it isn't everyday we can talk to the subject matter expert. Thanks again for posting on the forum.


                "He conquers who endures" - Persius
                "Every workout should have a purpose. Every purpose should link back to achieving a training objective." - Spaniel

                http://ncstake.blogspot.com/