Rappster, I don't think you have a complete understanding of what Recovery Pump is, which is understandable considering you don't work with them.
Recovery Pump was not built as a CONSUMER product. It is a rebranded version of Lymphapress, which is also a DME product designed for rehabilitative medicine. I've heard that medical patients find it's actually much more effective than NormaTec, because it does more than just mimic the natural flushing of your legs. I have not heard of any comparisons by athletes though.
What I lacked, at least in this case, was control over my vocabulary. My apologies for an inartfully worded reply. What I meant by my reference to NormaTec being DME is that it was designed for use in a rehabilitative/post-surgical environment. NormaTec specifically was designed for this. The "consumer" version - the MVP - is virtually identical to the "regular" (medical) NormaTec. Dr. Jacobs designed the system based on what she saw as limitations/failings with traditional lymphedema pumps. That was genesis of NormaTec. The consumer version came about because there were numerous athletes, usually recovering from ACL/MCL/other typical leg injuries that felt so good using the NormaTec during rehab that they continued to use it just to recover from normal training. The Recovery Pump is "old" technology - lymphedema pumps - that has been re-packaged as a recovery aid. My *opinion* is that they saw the success that NormaTec has had, so the "creators" (using the term loosely) of Recovery Pump simply took the technology that NormaTec was designed to supplant, and made a consumer product version of it. I.e., NormaTec is a new technology that happened to be applied to a consumer product. Recovery Pump is a specific consumer version of an old technology. Hopefully that's more effectively worded. To analogize, NormaTec is like the original QR wetsuit - a similar, but distinct, product designed specifically for a given application (swimming). Recovery Pump would be like O'Neill deciding to push their surfing wetsuits to triathletes for triathlon.
Also, Recovery Pump is not like a really tight compression tight. It compresses from the foot and grows the compression up the legs and then releases all at one time. It then repeats this process. Just holding tight like a compression tight would be ineffective. I could understand your "old tech" comment if you thought that was what it did. That's not the case though. The studies that I have seen say that this is more effective at flushing your legs than what NormaTec does.
My reference to it being "like a compression tight" was meant to highlight that both are simply graduated compression. One is obviously active and the other is obviously passive, and yes, that is certainly a big difference. But compression garments are designed to provide graduated compression, which is what the Recovery Pump also does. Of course the pumping action makes a difference. But likewise if you are active in your compression tights, it's perhaps not so dissimilar. My point was, simply, that both compression tights and Recovery Pump offer ONLY graduated compression, not the peristaltic pumping action of the NormaTec. As far as "effectiveness at flushing your legs," do you have links to the studies to which you refer? I'll see if I can get copies of the studies. In my own conversations with Dr. Jacobs and the NormaTec team, I have heard the exact opposite, though the specifics were with regards to blood flow (Dr. Jacobs' current theory is that the pulsing appears to stimulate the release of nitric oxide, which is a vasodilator). And there was a study (not published that I'm aware of) undertaken at the USOC that examined muscle elasticity after various recovery modalities and found NormaTec superior to all, including massage.
In regards to your Lance, NFL and NBA comment, Recovery Pump just entered the sports market in 2011. These athletes have been with NormaTec longer than that and were never give the choice between the two boots. NormaTec had no competitors last year so what athlete wouldn't take a sponsorship by them? I don't believe Recovery Pump has even started to pursue the big sport pro athletes.
That's true. But lymphedema pumps have been around for a long time. That hearkens back to my earlier point. NormaTec was a medical tool that ATHLETES took into sports, and NormaTec basically shrugged and said, "well, if they think it helps, then we probably should consider that." So the choice has been around. You think these athletes couldn't have gotten a DME prescription for a lymphedema pump? Or that if they felt that a lymphedema pump helped more than just post-surgery, that they wouldn't have continued to use it?
I respect that you are defending your sponsor, but I just want to make sure the everyone is clear on the facts here.
I agree. And I apologize for my poorly written reply earlier. But I don't believe that your "correction" of my post was entirely accurate.
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | Facebook - Rappstar Racing | @rappstar | I work @ Zwift
Ask me about: DiamondBack Bikes | Zipp | 1st Endurance | Normatec - $100 off RAPP2017 | Quarq | SRAM | MatchRider | Kiwami | ROKA