Thomas Gerlach wrote:
MrTri123 wrote:
Tom_hampton wrote:
Is there any scientific evidence to suggest that these recovery boots are benefitial to performance improvement? In light of the quote below: xtrapickles wrote:
I do not think a conversation about recovery is complete without the interaction of Recovery / "Signal for Adaptation" / Performance improvement.
Wonder this as well
This has come up numerous times over the years on here and on the various threads. There are some studies showing some benefit, for things like range of motion, I can link if you want. IMHO you would really need to do a longer term study to find the benefits including possibly injury prevention. The bottom line I tell everyone is recovery boots are easily the most used recovery tool that athletes utilize outside of food and sleep. They are just so easy and so convenient. The experience is incredibly passive. Over the years I have had numerous athletes tell me about how it calms then down before bed while others say it keeps them out of the kitchen, keeps them still and focused. Live in house with a group of athletes and only one pair and you will find they will fight for them at the end of the day. I don't see anyone ever fighting over ice baths, compex, foam rolling, stretching etc.
I didn't ask about range of motion. that's not a performance parameter except for certain specific sports.
Just because people use them a lot doesn't mean they are effective for PERFORMANCE gain. why all the non-sequitors?
People fight over ice baths, foam rolling, and stretching too. Ice baths have been shown to decrease the inflamatory response and the "signal for adaptation". Ie you feel better at the expense of decreased performance gain. As far as I know foam rolling hasn't been shown to do anything at all (other than a bunch of placebo, anecdotal crap). Stretching has been shown to decrease performance and/or increase injury depending on how and when its done.
But, that's irrelevant to the question that I asked. Is there ANY reliable, unbiased, peer reviewed study showing that using IPC improves PERFORMANCE---not, recovery (ie, I feel better)...but, performance (ie, I'm faster). Or is it like Ice Baths, you kill the signaling that causes both soreness AND improvement.
The article linked by Valhala really doesn't say anything at all. Its not exactly unbiased, and the studies linked are tenuously linked to athletics...if at all. This paragraph from the article sums it up for me:
Quote:
For me, the discomfort of DOMS is enough for athletes to want to skip leg workouts, so managing the swelling is worth it. Just a small amount of swelling is very uncomfortable for athletes, and getting movement passively is essential when the body is broken down. Simply managing light edema, even if it’s barely perceptible, could be the difference between having an athlete train that week or not. To a strength coach always luring athletes back into the weight room, having NormaTec in your corner is worth it.
I mean, any program that REGULARLY leaves an athlete in a state of DOMS, or with edema sufficient to be very unformfortable and not wanting to train on any give WEEK is a crap plan. What if some mild DOMS and/or edema are NECESSARY signalling for the body to improve?
Quote:
To a strength coach always luring athletes back into the weight room, having NormaTec in your corner is worth it.
Really? Even if the faster recovery is at the expence of any strength gains? If I'm not going to get stronger, why lift? Show me a peer-reviewed study of trained athletes that says I can recover faster AND get stronger.
Last edited by:
Tom_hampton: Apr 22, 20 15:34