Ricardo Borges Viana

Revisiting Tabata's Protocol: Does It Even Exist?

In a recent study, Logan et al. (4) tested the effects of an adaptation of the ‘‘Tabata protocol’’ on the cardiometabolic parameters of low-active male adolescents. The authors stated that the participants performed one to five sets of four repetitions of ‘‘all-out’’ maximum effort exercises lasting 20 s, interspaced with 10 s of passive rest periods. According to the article, participants had the choice of completing the training using different exercises, including cycle ergometers and cross-trainers (a type of elliptical trainer). Although the study yielded interesting results, we would like to make some observations about its methods and practical applications. Twenty years ago, Tabata et al. (8) impressed the scientific community by suggesting that a training protocol lasting 4 min was as, or more, efficient in increasing aerobic power and anaerobic capacity than 1 h of moderately intense activities. Although it is commonly suggested that the original protocol was performed at 170% of V̇O2max (1), the original study used the load necessary to perform seven to nine repetitions of 20 s with a minimum velocity of 85 rpm (8), without reporting any specific intensity. The study that used 170% of V̇O2max used five to six repetitions and was published in 1997 (7). Apparently, both studies were merged to form the recommendations that subsequently become popular. Our laboratories independently tried to replicate the ‘‘Tabata protocol’’ using 170% of the intensity associated with the achievement of maximal oxygen uptake (iV̇O2max) on a cycle ergometer, with most subjects interrupting the exercise by the second or third bout. It appears that using 170% of iV̇O2max is unfeasible, because this intensity is equivalent to running 400 m in 52 s (6). Therefore, it would be unrealistic to propose that it is possible to accumulate 160 s of work at this same rate of intensity by using 20 s:10 s intervals, especially if we consider that cycling elicits a higher peripheral fatigue than running (2). Perhaps due to difficulties in establishing the adequate intensity and consequently replicating the original protocol, there has been an increase in use of the ‘‘Tabata protocols’’ to perform generic forms of ‘‘all-out’’ efforts, as done by Logan et al. (4). Although this has brought interesting results, the physiological responses of these variations do not resemble the original proposition, and they seem to be only feasible in calisthenics, but not replicable on ergometers. When we attempted to use 20 s:10 s with all-out efforts on a cycle ergometer, the participants could barely handle the second bout due to peripheral fatigue and discomfort, even with significant load reduction. In fact, protocols that use 20 s of all-out efforts on cycle ergometers usually use rest intervals of 2 min with only three bouts per session (3). Therefore, given our practical experience and theoretical evidence presented, the inclusion of cycle ergometers in the study of Logan et al. seems to be unrealistic, especially if we consider that the study involved low-active male adolescents. This limitation may also apply to other exercises presented in the study protocol, especially the cross-trainer, because elliptical trainers provide higher stress on the anaerobic metabolism than cycle ergometers (5), which would accentuate peripheral fatigue and discomfort. We think that it is important to address these issues, because other researchers and health professionals may become frustrated when attempting to replicate the study protocol. Moreover, we must use a more critical approach regarding the reproducibility and feasibility of the ‘‘Tabata protocol,’’ and make a special effort to address the undeniable gap that exists between the original protocol and its adaptations.

Comment on: Volume for Muscle Hypertrophy and Health Outcomes: The Most Effective Variable in Resistance Training

We read with interest the manuscript by Figueiredo et al. [1]. Whilst the authors should be commended for attempting to evaluate this area, and although increasing volume showed to be an interesting strategy in selected studies, we believe it is unwise to state that this is categorically the most effective variable in resistance training (RT). The following discussion raises a few notable issues in the manuscript. The first is that intensity of load as proposed by the authors might be inadequate for controlling RT intensity of effort [2]. Performing the same number of repetitions at a given load does not represent parity in intensity of effort, since the number of repetitions possible differs between exercises, sex and physical conditioning [3]. Additionally, it is not necessarily true that the similar adaptations between heavier and lighter loads, when performed to momentary failure (MF), are a result of the increased volume. Rather, evidence suggests that exercising to a high intensity of effort (e.g. MF) produces similar results even when work volume is different [4, 5], as is the case with vascular occlusion [6, 7]. Furthermore, protocols with similar volumes but not to MF result in reduced muscle hypertrophy [6]. For this reason, training to MF (as previously defined [8]) has been proposed for standardizing RT interventions [9]. Figueiredo et al. [1] highlight three meta-analyses [10–12] to justify the dose-response to muscle hypertrophy. However, Schoenfeld et al. [10] showed no difference between different volumes when classified as a three-level categorical variable (5, 5–9 and 10? sets per muscle). Moreover, the practical advantage of increasing volume is questionable, as each additional set would result in a gain of only 0.37%! Krieger [11] found no significant difference between 2–3 sets and 4–6 sets per exercise, therefore no clear dose–response relationship can be inferred. Peterson et al. [12] do indeed report that increased volume results in greater gains in lean body mass; however, Fig. 4 in their article did not show a clear dose–response relationship in increasing volume. Moreover, total volume was calculated as the number of sets performed for all muscles. Therefore, using 10 sets for upper body and 4 for lower body would be considered the same as using 4 sets for upper and 10 for lower body. Another problem is calculating sets per session, which can be misleading when the studies have different weekly frequencies. Although Figueiredo et al. [1] cited Wernbom et al. [13] at one point in their article, they seemed to neglect it as evidence for an upper limit of resistance training volume. This is the letter to the original article available at https://doi.org/10. 1007/s40279-017-0793-0

Commentary: The Effects of High Intensity Interval Training vs Steady State Training on Aerobic and Anaerobic Capacity

The research article by Foster et al. (2015) aimed to compare high intensity interval training (HIIT) protocols with steady state exercise and conclude that HIIT protocols are not superior to conventional exercise training in sedentary young adults. We would like to compliment the authors for the interesting work and findings, however, it is necessary to point out some relevant issues, especially regarding protocols configuration and interpretation of the results.

Tabata protocol: a review of its application, variations and outcomes

The great popularity of the Tabata Protocol is accompanied by an uncomfortable lack of consistency and criteria in its use, which results in many controversies in the results obtained from its utilization. The purpose of this study was to analyse the studies that based their interventions on the Tabata Protocol and to provide a critical analysis of its use.

Can We Draw General Conclusions from Interval Training Studies

Interval training (IT) has been used for many decades with the purpose of increasing performance and promoting health benefits while demanding a relatively small amount of time. IT can be defined as intermittent periods of intense exercise separated by periods of recovery and has been divided into high-intensity interval training (HIIT), sprint interval training (SIT), and repeated sprint training (RST). IT use has resulted in the publication of many studies and many of them with conflicting results and positions. The aim of this article was to move forward and understand the studies’ protocols in order to draw accurate conclusions, as well as to avoid previous mistakes and effectively reproduce previous protocols. When analyzing the literature, we found many inconsistencies, such as the controversial concept of ‘supramaximal’ effort, a misunderstanding with regard to the term ‘high intensity,’ and the use of different strategies to control intensity. The adequate definition and interpretation of training intensity seems to be vital, since the results of IT are largely dependent on it. These observations are only a few examples of the complexity involved in IT prescription, and are discussed to illustrate some problems with the current literature regarding IT. Therefore, it is our opinion that it is not possible to draw general conclusions about IT without considering all variables used in IT prescription, such as exercise modality, intensity, effort and rest times, and participants’ characteristics. In order to help guide researchers and health professionals in their practices it is important that experimental studies report their methods in as much detail as possible and future reviews and meta-analyses should critically discuss the articles included in the light of their methods to avoid inappropriate generalizations.

Defining the number of bouts and oxygen uptake during the “Tabata protocol” performed at different intensities

It is usually reported that the Tabata protocol (TP) is performed with eight bouts of 20:10 intervals at a load equivalent to 170% of i V̇ O2max. However, the feasibility of accumulating 160u202fs of work at 170% i V̇ O2max has been questioned. This article tested the intensity that would allow the performance of the original TP on a cycle ergometer, and measured the highest value of oxygen consumption (V̇ O2) obtained during the TP and the time spent above 90% of the maximal oxygen uptake (V̇ O2max) during the TP performed at different intensities. Thirteen young active males (25.9u202f±u202f5.5u202fyears, 67.9u202f±u202f9.2u202fkg, 1.70u202f±u202f0.06u202fm, 23.6u202f±u202f3.1u202fkg·m-2) participated in the study. Participants performed a graded exertion test (GXT) on a cycle ergometer to obtain maximum oxygen consumption (V̇ O2max) and the intensity associated with V̇ O2max (i V̇ O2max). V̇ O2, maximal heart rate (HRmax), and number of bouts performed were evaluated during the TP performed at 115%, 130%, and 170% of i V̇ O2max. V̇ O2max, HRmax, and iV̇ O2max were 51.8u202f±u202f8.0u202fmL.kg-1·min-1, 186u202f±u202f10u202fbpm, and 204u202f±u202f26u202fW, respectively. The number of bouts performed at 115% (7u202f±u202f1 bouts) was higher than at 130% (5u202f±u202f1 bouts) and 170% (4u202f±u202f1 bouts) (pu202f< .0001). The highest V̇ O2 achieved at 115%, 130%, and 170% of iV̇ O2max was 54.2u202f±u202f7.9u202fmL·kg-1·min-1, 52.5u202f±u202f8.1u202fmL·kg-1·min-1, and 49.6u202f±u202f7.5u202fmL·kg-1·min-1, respectively. Non significant difference was found between the highest V̇ O2 achieved at different intensities, however qualitative magnitude-inference indicate a likely small effect between 115% and 170% of iV̇ O2max. Time spent above 90% of the V̇ O2max during the TP at 115% (50u202f±u202f48u202fs) was higher than 170% (23u202f±u202f21u202fs; pu202f<u202f0.044) with a probably small effect. In conclusion, our data suggest that the adequate intensity to perform a similar number of bouts in the original TP is lower than previously proposed, and equivalent to 115% of the iV̇ O2max. In addition, intensities between 115 and 130% of the iV̇ O2max should be used to raise the time spent above 90% V̇O2max.

Identifying the predisposing factors, signs and symptoms of overreaching and overtraining in physical education professionals

Background It is possible that physical education professionals, especially those who participate in aerobic activities, have predisposing factors, signs and symptoms of overreaching (OVR) and overtraining (OVT) due to a high load and volume of exercise followed by suboptimal recovery time. The present study aimed to identify the predisposing factors, signs and symptoms of OVR and OVT in physical education professionals. Methods A questionnaire consisting of 42 questions (10 questions group) about predisposing factors and signs/symptoms was answered by 132 physical education professionals from both sexes (83 men and 49 women) who were allocated into a resistance training group (RG, n = 74), aerobic training group (AG, n = 20) and resistance and aerobic training group (RAG, n = 38). A mean score was calculated ranging from 1 (completely absent) to 5 (severe) for each question group. A low occurrence of predisposing factors and signs and symptoms of OVR and OVT was considered to be a question group score 4 or lower. Profile of Mood State Questionnaire (POMS) was also applied. Results A mean score of 2.5 ± 0.7, 2.7 ± 0.7 and 2.7 ± 0.8 was found for all question groups for RG, AG and RAG, respectively. Of the total sample, 40.6% trained at least five times/week. The POMS revealed that 67.5% of the RG (n = 50), 80% of the AG (n = 16) and 60.5% of the RAG (n = 23) were classified as having no mood disorders and a standard graphic iceberg was presented. There were no statistical differences (p > 0.05) in the total mood disorders among RG (13.9 ± 24.5), AG (10.3 ± 25.1) and RAG (14.6 ± 27.9) groups. Conclusion Despite the volume of training/body working performed by the physical education professionals surveyed being greater than the recommended to achieve improvements on physical fitness, they did not show predisposing factors, signs or symptoms of OVR and OVT.

Profiling exercise intensity during the exergame Hollywood Workout on XBOX 360 Kinect

Background Despite the increasing popularity of exergame practice and its promising benefits in counteracting physical inactivity, limited research has been performed to document the physiological responses during an exergame session. This study aims (i) to investigate the responses of heart rate (HR) and oxygen uptake (documentclass[12pt]{minimal} usepackage{amsmath} usepackage{wasysym} usepackage{amsfonts} usepackage{amssymb} usepackage{amsbsy} usepackage{upgreek} usepackage{mathrsfs} setlength{oddsidemargin}{-69pt} begin{document} }{}

Profiling the Use of Dietary Supplements by Brazilian Physical Education Professionals

{dot{rm V}}{{rm{O}}_{rm{2}}}

Improving academic performance of sport and exercise science undergraduate students in gross anatomy using a near-peer teaching program: Near-Peer Teaching Program and Academic Performance

end{document}V˙O2) during an exergame session and to compare with HR and documentclass[12pt]{minimal} usepackage{amsmath} usepackage{wasysym} usepackage{amsfonts} usepackage{amssymb} usepackage{amsbsy} usepackage{upgreek} usepackage{mathrsfs} setlength{oddsidemargin}{-69pt} begin{document} }{}