The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
so I guess the question then becomes which one of these do you think well you've already answered part of the question which is we're really defining Zone 2 as the place where maximum fat oxidation occurs but I guess this would suggest that using a lactate level of two is maybe overestimating where that is and should we be using a lower level of lactate such as uh you know 1.5 or something like that
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
so that's why looking at blood lactates might not mean the same I'm not saying that the parties are huge by no means right but as you very well said those two milles might not correspond in an elite athlete with a fat Max but might be more maybe towards 1.5 whereas maybe in someone with a more recreational or metabolic syndrome it might correspond there