doo doo wrote:
actually... wrote:From the review "First, and most obviously, more volume improves aerobic capacity"
But that's just not true, it's a popular myth. Not that you are really interested, just thought I would point it out anyway.
If your measurement of aerobic capacity is vo2 max, you're right. If your measurement factors in extra capillarization, blood changes, mitochondrial changes etc, you will find you are dead wrong, which you are.
Not quite, since vo2 max does factor in those things. vo2 max, simply stated, is the maximum amount of oxygen consumed. Fitzgerald cites Radcliffe as an example of an athlete with a high vo2 max at an early age, yet much faster years later without much increase (if at all) of vo2 max (aerobic capacity). Without reading his reasons, you can conclude: (a) she got more efficient using the oxygen consumed; and (b) overall energy efficiency was also improved by reducing the amount of waste buildup and reducing the negative effects of waste buildup.