Steve Palladino has a good take on the article here:
https://m.facebook.com/...tif_t=group_activity

What's really sad, though, is the way that people who should really know better (e.g., Alex Hutchinson of sweatscience, a Kiwi sports physiologist on Twitter) have accepted the article without question. Does no one read carefully and think critically anymore?

Sports science at its finest...

Case in point: first Hutchinson tweets that the paper undermines running power as a surrogate for VO2, then admits he only read the abstract:

https://mobile.twitter.com/.../1008820950576422912

https://mobile.twitter.com/.../1008857214323265536

(My haters out there can label this a rant if they wish, because that is exactly what it is. In that regard it is no different from the opinions Ron Maughan shared with me at ACSM about the poor quality of numerous papers he sees as editor of the International Journal of Sports Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism. Apparently many people are too busy pumping up their k index these days to actually do things the way they should be done.)

   
As of 21 /11/ 2016, Andrew Coggan was a consultant for Stryd. Now I don't know when he stopped being a consultant, or if he was a paid consultant or not, but whichever way you look at it, his comments concerning Stryd are hardly independent or unbiased.

11-21-16, 07:53 AM #51
Andrew Coggan
Senior Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetBadger
Andrew Coggan (of TrainingPeaks) consults for stride.
Just an FYI: I don't work for TrainingPeaks, and never have. You are correct, however, in stating that I am a consultant for Stryd.


11-21-16, 07:59 AM #52


https://www.bikeforums.net/...meter-help-me-3.html

You're late to the party, Trev. I already pointed out that I was once a consultant for Stryd (and Adidas, and the English Institute of Sport, and Velicious Software, and possibly some other companies that I don't remember).