Other than cost, any reason not to get a blood lactate meter (like this one) for personal testing?
I’ve considered having lactate threshold testing done before but never pulled the trigger, in large part because I figured one test would only give me data under one set of conditions on a certain day. Then I realized I could buy a lactate meter for about the cost of two LT testing sessions. The meter looks as easy to use as a glucose meter and would allow for testing on the trainer, at the track, in the field, etc. Anyone else doing this? Anything obvious I’m missing?
Exactly what will you do with the data? Maybe something fun like seeing how high your lactate spikes 30 minutes after breakfast? Or seeing the reality that your blood lactate returns to normal shortly after stopping exercise?
Over than the dangerous science assumptions by correlation without consideration of causation, I have not seen any convincing studies that lactate levels effect performance.
So, for the simple ability to gain a better perspective of that aspect of physiology, it can be fun. If you want to improve performance spend more time improvising your recovery between training
I’m not going to question the utility of lactate testing, just the process. As you mentioned, the meters are not all that hard to use in theory, but in practice you typically need someone to help you extract the blood as sweat contamination is ever present. You also have to taper into a test so that can be annoying. I know that LvL and now the Norwegians test throughout sessions but this requires a deeper constant analysis of training/lifestyle/effort, and this is more of an art than a science I expect (i.e. how can you equate one reading with another? Are you looking at effort or fatigue?). For the unsupervised, the idea is to help you flatten the curve, push both ‘thresholds’ (in whatever taxonomy you’ll be using) to the right so as to improve performance. However the training required to do this doesn’t need these tests, standard time trials in each sport along with good insight will give you almost the same data, the blood lactate is there to help you triangulate, and possibly see progress over time. You cannot get out of doing the miles, alas.
I have been working with lactate meter on personal basis since early April and can give you some insights:
It is easy to use and maintain, the only learning curve to measure lactate comes in “pointing the strip” correctly, so you get the proper blood, without sweat etc… This usually takes some adjusting and few tests, which will go wrong (aka provide unusable data);
I use it during some of the training sessions as well, to confirm/deny the hypothesis from the lactate testing. For example I have done lactate measurement tests on the bike in a controlled environment, then after a month or so, I had a session planned according to the results from that testing. After the intervals, I took my lactate measurement to check if there were any adaptations, if it staled or if the measurements were wrong and in the field - it’s different. During that session I confirmed that the measurements in the test were correct, however no adaptations (even slightest) happened. Therefore came back to the drawing board and re-designed my sessions a bit. Will review the progress in a week.
My main learning from when I switched to basing my training session on the lactate measurements + HR, rather than paces and watts - was that the former combination seems to provide more “objective” results to your body’s response and ability to work, than the latter. For example, you can maintain N amount of watts on bike, but until you confirm which systems do you engage, while maintaining it - you can not be sure whether you are in aerobic or anaerobic state. And having this as a guesstimate - might be detrimental to your ability to perform in races, depending on the duration of it.
The way you build up around it, or use it to your advantage - can be read on different papers available on the internet (Jan Olbrecht, Dan Lorang, Inigo San Millan). Patrik’s new coach Bjorn was advocating the same information in his recent podcast - https://scientifictriathlon.com/ttst/. Feel free to PM me and I can provide more insights on it.
As an example, I include my first lactate test on the run done in April and after 3+ months, when I trained according to the studies that Jan Olbrecht and Inigo San Millan have done, which I mentioned above (apologies for the formatting)
From the above comparison, you can notice that my lactate threshold (a breaking point, where lactate stops being dissolved and starts accumulating) has moved from 4:20 min/km pace to roughly 3:50 min/km, while allowing me to effectively dissolve lactate up until 4min/km pace, when previously my “safe” pace was 4:20 min/km. In addition to that, I manage to push my upper anaerobic threshold to 3 min/km, when previous limit was at 3:20 min/km.
Hope this gives some insights and feel free to PM me if you have any questions.
Awesome account of your experience, thanks. Testing every three months is pretty standard from what I’ve gathered. In some ways you have collaborated my reply, namely that this approach requires dedication and discipline. Many triathletes are deeply tied to the social side of the sport or the hammer-every-session side. They love the long coffee rides and masters swim sessions, what you’re describing is highly personalised and not for everyone. Ignoring watts and focusing on the first threshold for extended intervals is counter to how many first progressed in the sport, and this is tough to renounce.
Thank you very much for sharing your experience, this is right along the lines of what I was thinking. Also thanks for the link to Inigo’s paper. If you have other recommendations for go-to resources from the people you mentioned (Olbrecht, Lorang, Inigo, Bjorn) I would be happy to read through them. I figure it’s probably better for me to make sure I have a solid understanding of the testing protocols, time frames, interpretations of results, possible sources of error, etc. before I go in on purchasing a meter. Thanks again!
Awesome account of your experience, thanks. Testing every three months is pretty standard from what I’ve gathered. In some ways you have collaborated my reply, namely that this approach requires dedication and discipline. Many triathletes are deeply tied to the social side of the sport or the hammer-every-session side. They love the long coffee rides and masters swim sessions, what you’re describing is highly personalised and not for everyone. Ignoring watts and focusing on the first threshold for extended intervals is counter to how many first progressed in the sport, and this is tough to renounce.
I’ve never been tied to the social “coffee shop” rides or even group rides in general. If I’m remembering correctly I’ve done the local group ride a total of 3 times over the past decade. I’m not antisocial, it’s more of a scheduling thing (my wife and I just had kid number 4, hence my recent post in one of the vasectomy threads
I did used to be a hammer-(almost)every-session rider though. Then a few years ago I started working with a coach and finally learned the benefits of keeping the easy days easy and hard sessions hard, and that those hard sessions only need to account for a relatively small percentage of total training. That got me interested in having a general idea of where my LT1 and LT2 are as a way to set up general, appropriate ranges for easy days and hard sessions, and to monitor whether/how my training is progressing. That all lead me to the realization that buying a meter for myself is more economical and flexible over time than going in for testing a few times per year.
I’m also a scientist and am more than happy to set up consistent testing protocols, tease out confounding factors, etc. Pretty sure I can use some of my available research funds for the meter and strips too. I suspect comparing tests in very controlled environments (trainer, track) with testing in the field (I have a few climbs of different lengths nearby that I periodically use for repeats to gauge where I’m at) could be very interesting. After all, we don’t race in the same exact controlled environment each time.
