[alisonG]

alisonG on April 23, 2022 at 4:50 pm · in reply to: Stregth training for Achilles tendon #66082

PT here- and, one piece of advice I have for you is to be consistent over time with your strength work for the Achilles.

In general, you get Achilles tendon degeneration/injury when there is a mismatch between the load you are applying to the tendon and your ability to deal with that load.

You use specific loading exercise (and recovery) as a positive stimulus to improve the quality and structure of the tendon. Additionally, with running and other plyometrics- the load on the tendon is rate-dependent, meaning that fast loading causes high load magnitudes. This is why a large component of Achilles tendon rehab utilizes heavy, slow loading.

How long does this take? Mild cases can improve with 12-16 weeks. I’ve seen severe cases take 6-12 month, and from what I can tell in the literature, with consistent, heavy loading- you get subtle improvements in the tendon quality at 12 weeks and more significant changes after 6 months of consistency. Plyometrics are appropriate at the end phase of rehab, but they don’t substitute for the base work, much like aerobic base building can’t be shortcut by doing sprints.

There really is no shortcut, and your commitment needs to be towards the regeneration process and not as much running during that time period, otherwise you run the risk of falling in the same hole, repeatedly. How much running you can do varies from person to person, and it should all be pain-free. You can use that time well, however, and one suggestion I’d have is finding a PT that specializes in running and gait mechanics to see if there’s anything about your running technique that is contributing to the issue, especially if your pain is on one side only.

Pete may have more to say or a different viewpoint- but this is just my two cents! Good luck and stay consistent!

[alisonG]

alisonG on December 7, 2019 at 3:45 pm · in reply to: Lab test #33894

First thought- your test a year ago was running on a flat treadmill. The test this year was at 15% grade and you didn’t specify whether you used poles- but the tests were performed under different conditions and the demand on your body is different. It might be hard to directly compare them.

For instance- My husband and I compared values for each of us for these two conditions (flat run vs steep uphill hike) and no big surprise- he has a much larger capacity for steep uphills in terms of AeT and much less for running on flat ground, and I’m the opposite. Guess which one of us has been a runner forever and which one of use hikes uphill for a living?

Second thought- if you repeated the drift test under the same condition as the first test (flat, running)- what do you get? And if your zones are the same as the year before, are you faster at that heart rate? Are you more durable, handle a higher volume, etc after a year of base work? Look at the whole picture 🙂

You aren’t that far apart in terms of AeT and AnT- 16bpm. And I wouldn’t sweat a 2 beat test difference in terms of AeT at 155 vs 153- that is well within variance for any given day.

[alisonG]

alisonG on December 4, 2019 at 3:02 pm · in reply to: Knee instability doing box step ups, foot issue #33668

That sounds like a really good observation- that you note instability on one leg and also some odd foot function. It’s definitely worth a check – but make sure to find a PT that has specific focus with this – not all are created equal. Where do you live, generally? Might be able to recommend someone to you!

If you want to do a little more self-assessement or background reading, a PT wrote a book that can be quite useful for this- check out Jay DiCharry’s “Running Rewired”, specifically pg 77-88 that talks about foot function and single leg control. (I’m a PT too, disclaimer). Info in there translates nicely to mountain sports and compliments much of the strength and movement patterning work that Uphill Athlete folks have put together here.

[alisonG]

alisonG on July 7, 2019 at 2:30 pm · in reply to: Vertical Oscillation #24644

From my experience with wearable tech- you can’t really rely on the Garmin to adequately measure your vertical oscillation in a way that can reveal much about your running technique, especially when trail running. It’s sort of similar to how the Stryd pod only approximates power during running based on an equation.

The main reason to care about vertical oscillation is that it’s one of many metrics that describe an individual’s running economy- along with cadence, stride length, ground reaction forces and overstride/understride (think shin angle right after initial contact and maximum hip flexion angle during mid to late swing).

The absolute vertical oscillation might vary by height, running speed and terrain- but in general, think back to high school physics. Remember the problem where you had to figure out the maximum distance to shoot a cannonball? Too much “y” (vertical) and your cannonball goes really high but not far. Too much “x” (horizontal) and again, your cannonball doesn’t go that far. The perfect mix of horizontal and vertical and your cannonball travels the maximum distance.

It’s not a perfect analogy, but running works in a similar fashion. You need the right mix of the ability to produce both vertical and horizontal power and in a coordinated way in order to run with good running economy- ie run with good performance. This is proceeded by the need to be strong enough to absorb the impact and loading of running.

Too much vertical oscillation- and that’s the runner “bouncing” down the road but not going very far very fast. It’s also associated with the same factors that can cause overstriding- which is- a lack of the ability to produce horizontal forces such that the body’s center of mass travels forward fast enough that it’s over the foot by the time initial contact and weight acceptance occurs.

Too little vertical oscillation- and that’s the runner that “shuffles” down the road, with very little spring to the step and a lot of wasted energy trying to actively swing the limbs forward. Often co-occurs with a higher stride rate, sometimes because the runner read about cadence and tried to increase turnover without having the leg strength, power and coordination to back it up.

Both situations cause poor running economy, or too much energy used for the pace. I’m curious to know how much that affects the AeT and Ant thresholds…..

If you want to know where you fall on this spectrum, getting a good quality videogait analysis can be well worth it! Depending on where you live, there’s some people who are really good at this. 🙂

[alisonG]

alisonG on May 24, 2019 at 12:36 pm · in reply to: Gas Exchange Test Result – Confusion #22455

1.) Re: warmup- yeah, following Scott’s instructions are key here. I think he had a PDF to bring to appointments explaining what a warmup consists of – because there’s a lot of variations in protocol among many testing locations.

2.) I got that result by playing with diet in that I wanted to see what my response was to a higher fat diet- and I should also say that I didn’t actually keep that going as I got into my training. I worked with an actual RD for my “real” diet that was sustainable and worked well – and this is where individual results vary. But I still had a fairly significant input from fat and not nearly so carb-heavy as the 1:1 idea. I mean, you could eat cans of tuna fish and eat fruit/veggies and you definitely aren’t going to get much fat with that- so I do think paying some attention to all three macros is good. As my training progressed, I did end up getting a crossover point at a fairly high HR and I was also better able to do higher intensity things- so it all depends what you are aiming for!

3.) Exactly. If you are training for mountaineering, there really aren’t times where you are pushing the anaerobic zones and if you are, it better be because an angry marmot is chasing you across the snowfield or something 🙂 So think back to your goals, your primary limitations (aerobic base, strength, etc) where you are in your training cycle and then ask if adding 1 min intervals every week makes sense given that. For some people it might and for some people not. I think you are asking the right questions.

4.) Yeah- I mean, you did the test in a fasted state and clearly can burn fat.

[alisonG]

alisonG on May 24, 2019 at 1:09 am · in reply to: Gas Exchange Test Result – Confusion #22447

I think Scott might have more insight than I do- but here’s my two cents. I’ve spent some time playing around with these concepts and training and noticed a few things- I was lucky enough to test myself on the same lab equipment that Real Rehab has a few times.

a.) This might vary from person to person, but I find that from measuring myself and from seeing a few other people’s results- my aerobic system takes a little longer than 10 minutes to fully “boot up” and I had the most accurate results after a good long 20-25 min warm up at really easy intensities. The fact that your fat burning goes up after a few minutes at the lower end of your HR range makes me wonder if your warmup was too short.

b.) I was able to push my fat burning ability all the way to max HR effort without getting a crossover point mostly due to playing with my diet (I did this out of curiosity). But I was pretty slow because my training volume was on the lower end at that point- so the lab results didn’t correlate well to what my treadmill testing results were (using a HR monitor and looking for the 5% HR drift w pace)- which did line up nicely with the nose breathing results.

c.) Unless the tech took into account your current training goals and training history, I wouldn’t pay too much attention to the suggestion to add 1 min intervals- that seems kind of random unless there’s a really good rationale.

d.) As for your body going into “starvation mode”, I’m not aware of anything that supports that training in a fasted mode will cause that. Maybe if you were living all the time in a fasted mode it would… but you are just fine going for a hour jog in the morning before breakfast. 🙂

[alisonG]

alisonG on April 21, 2019 at 8:47 am · in reply to: Conserving energy to High Camp #20804

I just returned from the Khumbu, and found that I didn’t exceed a HR of 120 even during some higher-output efforts (ie watch for yaks!) and at Everest Base Camp, didn’t get above 110. Sometimes my exercising HR was at or below my resting HR, which was curious- but often happened after a night of poor sleep or when battling respiratory irritation due to cold dry air. I also followed the 16 week mountain training plan and found that I acclimated well (with proper ascent timing), felt strong and had the energy to go all day for multiple days on end. I was really thankful for the amount of time I spent training at the lower end of my aerobic zone- as I think it was a major factor in feeling good up there.

[alisonG]

alisonG on September 7, 2018 at 12:32 pm · in reply to: Knee and Ankle Problems from Slow Runs #13337

A few additional thoughts on this- (I’m a PT in Seattle who specializes in treating runners/endurance athletes and working with gait/movement issues)- I agree with Scott that changing your running speed can dramatically shift your running technique, and slowing down takes some time to get used to. It takes some effort to learn how to run slowly well but definitely can be achieved- I experienced this while training for a 50 mile ultra. It’s hard to say over the internet without seeing you in person, but a common problem I see with runners who have ankle and knee pain during slower paces is lack of a.) calf strength (can you do 25 single leg calf raises consecutively and without form loss?) and b.) decreased Achilles tendon elasticity. Not decreased range of motion- but decreased “bounce” if that makes sense. Hip and core strength are also key, and an often overlooked but crucial factor is often torso and hip posture as well- all of these things can affect the forces going through your knees and ankles and overload those tissues. I like the suggestion of training by hiking uphill instead of trying to run on flat ground – and alternating run/walk technique.