Of course, that doesn't include my co-authors' time

I feel like I will want to delete this post when submitting my CV anywhere in the near future 😅

I'm seeing on the order of 300+ and 400+ hrs for a couple of my completed first authors projects over 1-2 yrs. Let's say that's >75% accurate recording. My final PhD project is over 500 hrs already with data collection not quite complete, and poor recording over the past ~4 mo, so... 😬

Pushing my sport science social media sleuthing to the limits here 😂

Ah, good point. I've been told it may be a mixing chamber. Appears to be this system, but he has a (quite long) hose on his face, not sampling lines?
www.ntnu.edu/documents/22...

Hard to tell from the video edit, but it seems to not be updating on-screen values at BxB frequency, so maybe binned?

Incredible, thanks Jamie. How do we even validate numbers in his range then? Break out the sled dog equipment?

Pointed at from elsewhere, this is the calibration device they are using

Valid to 6 L/min gas exchange and 240 L/min VE. So Kristian is reporting ~25% higher than that. It's too bad, he's clearly pushing limits of human physiology, we just don't have tools to accurately capture it?

Around 16:00 they talk about some fancy metabolic sim calibration. Again I don't know anything about it. What are the chances that accuracy systematically falls off at 70 brpm and 250 L/min? 😅
youtu.be/AQm254ktjPY?...

Turns out he was on a treadmill and we all missed it!

Ignore all the obsolete cycling economy estimates! 🥲

Does that change our interpretation of RERpeak?

I think you're right Alex. In the last video a couple years ago he was at 70 brpm. I wish we knew more about the system to say more about validity

Thanks Jamie. Wow, yeah that's good perspective. So. Where are the other 2 L VO2 going? 🤷‍♂️

I've started to upload my #sportscience #rstats #datavis plots to github to improve reproducibility. Double check my work!

github.com/jemarnold/da...

We don't have to go on vibes when we have data! And we can make quantitative predictions from historical literature

In conclusion, we shouldn't naively take the 101 ml/kg/min value as valid, like many uncritical media headlines I've seen already

Instead, we should ask *how* could one achieve that value? Either through measurement error, protocol manipulations, or social media trolling 😄

From these rough estimates, we can draw his potential cycling economy (W/L/min O2; blue line)

And compare this range to other published data points in World Tour cyclists and a XC-skier turned Junior TT World Champ

Interesting, it's quite low, but not entirely implausible? 😮

More interesting to me is what what Kristian's peak power at VO2peak?

We can sleuth through the video frames to see the vertical progress bar mid-way through the ramp

Digitising the last image, we can estimate Wpeak was around 440 W

Others have said 0.93 RER at VO2peak is not plausible

But after what appears to be 2-hrs threshold intervals, we would expect RER to be depressed to some extent

Although still maybe not that low? 🤔 There might be other interventions going on. Dietary? Environmental? 🤷

VO2peak is usually measured over 30 sec. My assumption is that 101 might be the highest single sample

Given pseudo-breath-by-breath recording from a mixing chamber, the variance below this value might be 2-5%

If true, this would estimate his actual VO2peak to be ~92-97 ml/kg/min, still very high

Thanks for the call out. Do we need a good 'endurance sport science' starter pack on here?

www.bmj.com/content/1/46...

Found hiding in the references of a 2013 Brazilian review paper as Martijn is reviewing the literature for an important upcoming consensus study on #FLIA #endofibrosis in cycling