Options
20%? Really?
Britspin
Posts: 1,655
in General Chat
This I meant to post at the time, but forgot.
Refer to last months 220 (or the month before, I can't check as I am at work) something on the advice page about breathing & powerbreathe thingys a quote about respiration taking up to 20% of your energy.
Really? 20%? seems a touch high to me, can anyone justify this figure or find some research that may back it up as a viable reliable figure rather than a sales pitch figure?
Refer to last months 220 (or the month before, I can't check as I am at work) something on the advice page about breathing & powerbreathe thingys a quote about respiration taking up to 20% of your energy.
Really? 20%? seems a touch high to me, can anyone justify this figure or find some research that may back it up as a viable reliable figure rather than a sales pitch figure?
0
Comments
They've probably picked that figure up, then taken it out of context.
As I said, that's just my current hunch...
But respiration covers a lot more than just the lungs... transport of oxygen to the cells, then what happens at a cellular level with ATP, oxidisation etc... which makes a figure of 20% while resting seem more credible. i.e. my hunch is more reinforced than not.
Take a device that may well have a positive effect on the performance of a few - i.e. a subset of elites. But to take it to market (i.e. sell in volume to justify costs of production), you have to increase the market share way beyond those that would really derive a significant benefit. How to do that? Take some figures and somehow let them be applied out of context so that you can flog the device to a much bigger group than otherwise...
From what I have read in my research into respiration, that lung volume/strength is the factor that is hardest to change in training - i.e. the benefits are all to be had in different areas (cellular adaptation etc. etc.).
Ho hum.
All this is just my opinion of course!
I find it annoying that the press in general & in this case 220 trot out these PR/marketing 'statistics' without any checking or quoted reference to back it up, advise not advertise...