I'd say large lungs would offer more of a breathing advantage than a genetic advantage.
You're welcome.
I'd say large lungs would offer more of a breathing advantage than a genetic advantage.
You're welcome.
Nice logic, indeed wrote:
SMJO wrote:Nice logic. Smaller will hurt but larger won't help?
More surface area for 02 exchange helps. I'm surprised this has to be explained.
Why would more surface area for O2 help if you are already able to exchange more O2 than you need? Are you being purposefully obtuse, here?
If could could already exchange more O2 than you need, why would your breathing rate ever increase?
Bad Wigins wrote:
If could could already exchange more O2 than you need, why would your breathing rate ever increase?
Nonsensical question. This is like saying, "if you are able to produce enough bile to digest the food you eat, why does your bile production ever increase?"
No one said that your resting breathing rate is sufficient to exchange all of the oxygen needed when running.
okidoki wrote:
SMJO wrote:For those who say lung size doesn't matter, take one of your lungs out or remove a piece of each one and see how well you do.
If I had one of my arms removed or had half of one chopped off it would negatively affect my running.
That doesn't mean that having bigger arms would help my running.
Use that same logic for your heart..
If you chop off an arm you would get faster. Chop off a lung you would be slower. Chop off your heart you'd be dead. Winner is heart.