Thanks for watching. If you'd like to go on a deeper dive, here are a couple resources. I cover a lot of the research in this free article I wrote years ago on VO2max and performance: www.scienceofrunning.com/2009/12/fallacy-of-vo2max-and-vo2max.html I also cover it in my previous book: The Science of Running. If you want to go deeper into the practice of endurance training for performance or health, I write about it frequently in my newsletter: thegrowtheq.ck.page/steve And...if you'd like to support my work, I've got a new book coming out soon called WIN THE INSIDE GAME. Check it out: www.stevemagness.com/win-the-inside-game/ Thanks for watching. I put out new videos on the science of performance every week! Consider subscribing.
Interesting, Im doing a cooper test tomorrow. As an older middle distance runner, keeping my vo2 max higher is important as I have seen that it correlates with a faster time. I hit all the work outs for this, speed, races and with a longer time in zone 2
Long before this VO2 max means longevity became a thing I heard that quad strength was the best predictor. For multitude of reasons, like you're less likely to fall and hurt yourself.
With all of these measurements, it's missing the forest for the trees if you don't remember consistency. Being in great shape for 3 months every year and sedentary the other 9 is not as good for longevity as being in good shape all the time. Walk every day. Practice laying down and standing up, pretending one leg is broken. Do pullups and pushups. Swim. A little variety will boost confidence, keep you interested, and even improve your running.
The late George Sheehan MD and running guru points out..."You might suspect from the emphasis on cardiopulmonary fitness that major effect of training is on the heart and lungs. Guess again. Exercise does nothing for the lungs: that has been amply proved...Nor does it especially benefit your heart. Running, no matter what you've been told, primarily trains and conditions the muscles. Also "fit" does not mean healthy. Jim Fixx died from a heart attack while jogging at fifty-two. Certainly he was fit. But was he healthy? No, his autopsy revealed coronary arteriosclerosis He ran 37,000 miles and completed several marathons, ran 60 miles per week. Compare jim Fixx to Winston Churchill, who was obese, smoked, overate, and drank excessively yet lived to 91,. No one would describe Churchill as fit, but he was certainly healthy. jim Fixx could run circles around Churchill, but Churchill lived 40 years longer. Health is a state in which all components of the body are functioning properly and there is an absence of disease. Fitness is the ability to perform strenuous work or exercise. Clearly, it is possible to be healthy without being fit and vice versa
Tadej Pogacar, on a recent interview with Attia, said he didn’t know his VO2 max and hasn’t tested it in quite sometime but he guessed it was probably “pretty high”. 😂
The people in the studies with the good vo2 and good longevity were just normal athletes training for performance. I don’t get why the conclusion wasn’t “be an athlete at a healthy weight”
Great video - during my lab test (inreasibg inclune and speed) my VO2 peaked, then fell, then the technician ended the lab test, not me. Heart rate was 95% of Max HR, not 100%. I really like the combo of sports science and running - just subscribed.
Hi, enjoying your content here👍 Can you please make a video of how mortal non elite adulst (30 to 50 years old) can improve running performance. One week for example with key structure workouts (for 5km race)🙏 Speed: key workouts for 5km Lt: key workouts... Long runs and anything else as main part of such program?
Thinking holistically...Right on! The ultimate question is how well we use that O2 that we consume, and that involves ALL the components of our muscles' aerobic engine and its drive-train.
I agree VO2 max is over emphasised but important to note it is the maximum oxygen that the body can use. Ie the definition includes usage not just collection and transmission of oxygen. This is why prolonged Z2 workouts that target muscle take-up and usage of oxygen can improve VO2 max as well as Z5 which primarily targets the central system. That said it seems some athletes can sustain output at higher % of.VO2 max and some can get more power out for a given VO2 max. Which is why some pro athletes can compete well with relatively low VO2 maxes (though still much higher than the general population).
It isn't about running or general fitness. It's about preventing the age related loss of your micro vascular architecture. Working yourself into hypoxia to stimulate HIF1a and VEGF .... Microvascular disease effects 5% of people age 50 and 100% of people by the age of 90... It also catches the blamb for 45% of dementia ...
Thanks you for putting into context the relative importance of V02 Max, which I agree is often over enthusised has a matker of health far beyond other measurable factors and considerations by longevity experts.
Fascinating stuff! I am subscribing and going to check out your other stuff. A few thoughts: 1) I did not know the thing about the thing about some people not plateauing. Presumably that 47% of pro cyclists had trained the aerobic function of their muscles to the point where they could use more oxygen than their heart and lungs could deliver. 2) I would have thought LT would have been much more important to Paula for the marathon. I would be interested to know if the same study looked at this, although LT seems like an even more slippery concept the more I look into it. 3) Even if they were testing actual V̇O2 max in the longevity studies, teasing out all the presumed correlations between longevity, biological age, functional performance, comorbidities, and all the possible measures of fitness would be next to impossible in what I presume were observational studies. Very similar to the findings that (off the top of my head) strength/lean muscle is associated with longevity, but spending more than 40 minutes a week on resistance training is negatively correlated.
Greg Lemond, who had a super high VO2 max, said it remained very high years after his career ended. He got old, gained weight but still had a high max, interesting. The right physiology coupled with excellent lactate clearing ability and just raw grit and competitive spirit allow the elites to push up such high VO2 max levels. Longevity? Does that mean per event, or career, or years of quality living? I have your book and it's great, nice to put a face to the name- I'm subscribed.
I've been skeptical about vo2 max, but I'd say the fitness tracker VO2 max numbers are even worse if you play sports or hike with your fitness tracker for the majority of your workouts.
I want to plan out a base running/cycling block for the winter and had a weekly vo2max session planned, but instinctively i just want to ride endurance or tempo, and a lot of volume of it… i dont need to perform for an event, just really enjoy the training. Feel like that session will just hinder my recovery and not really benefit me in this block
Studies prove that a higher vo2 max correlates to longevity as we lose 10% every decade so keeping it higher when younger has it slow down slower when older. Higher vo2 max means more oxygen, better metabolic efficiency, less disease. Its good to know thou that my running can improve at my plateaued VO2 max
It's not VO2max that is the best correlate to longevity...it's the speed we reach at the end of the test...in other words studies show it's aerobic PERFORMANCE that correlates with VO2max. What this means is it's not just maximum oxygen consumption, it's our running economy, lactate threshold, critical power, and on and on that all add up to contribute. And that's good news. Because while performance declines with age...we can greatly slow the decline with training. Vo2max you can slow too, but it's more fixed than performance.
once I heard the claim that high vo2max is a causal factor for longevity my skeptic alarms went off. first, why do women generally live longer than men, when women also generally have lower VO2maxes? And secondly when you compare animals by VO2max and longevity, it almost seems like an inverse correlation. Also the correlation in these studies doesn't necessarily mean causation. Maybe there is some other factor that contributes to both longevity and high VO2max.
No one said VO2 max is the strongest and single causal factor. What determines women’s longevity is confounded by factors unrelated to VO2 max. And you can’t bring the animal argument here as it doesn’t pertain to humans. What leads to longevity in animals is different to humans as they’re killed by acute triggers whereas most humans today die by chronic diseases
But everyone is different. It takes forever for me to truly warm up. 6 to 7 km for me. If I tried before this I would peak early. Note: I'm a total novice and trying to get super fit. I run about 55km a week and I'm a heart patient (cleared by my doctor). All my times are slow but I don't know if I'm training right. I feel ok. 😊
That's a big question! I think the main thing that has changed is the shoes. Both from a racing and training standpoint, it's shifted performance a bit.
It's actually not. Depending on what you mean by muscle... Of course we need a baseline of strength to prevent falls, etc. while older. It's important. But cardiovascular fitness is a better predictor.
Vo2peak isn't that important in the grand scheme of things, for reasons outlined in the video. It's fine to have the #. But it makes little difference in your training or preparation. Fractional utilization is more useful. But I'd argue you can get the same or better info simply by comparing race distances, or a lactate test. It's even what researchers have moved to when looking at velocity curves/critical velocity testing.
I'm explaining what the data, science, and practice says. I wrote a book on it, if you'd like to go more in depth. My expertise? I'm an exercise physiologist with both my undergrad and graduate degrees in the field, and wrote the book The Science of Running. I've also coached for nearly two decades, including over two dozen Olympic Trials qualifiers and people who have made the Olympics, world championships, etc. I've had runners finish top 10 at Boston, NYC, Chicago, and the world champs marathons. And lastly, I was a solid runner myself. I could go on. But I can pretty dang confidently say that I've got more expertise than any of the podcasters out there telling you the opposite.
I've been running for 16 years and have devoured tons of running info. Can't recommend Steve enough. One of the great thinkers in our sport. Have learned so much from his articles, podcasts, videos and his book Science of Running. I've referred to my copy so often it's gotten pretty worn and dog eared (well loved). Please make the second edition a hard cover, Steve ;) thanks for everything, man. You're a legend.
Thanks for watching. If you'd like to go on a deeper dive, here are a couple resources.
I cover a lot of the research in this free article I wrote years ago on VO2max and performance: www.scienceofrunning.com/2009/12/fallacy-of-vo2max-and-vo2max.html
I also cover it in my previous book: The Science of Running.
If you want to go deeper into the practice of endurance training for performance or health, I write about it frequently in my newsletter: thegrowtheq.ck.page/steve
And...if you'd like to support my work, I've got a new book coming out soon called WIN THE INSIDE GAME. Check it out: www.stevemagness.com/win-the-inside-game/
Thanks for watching. I put out new videos on the science of performance every week! Consider subscribing.
Interesting, Im doing a cooper test tomorrow. As an older middle distance runner, keeping my vo2 max higher is important as I have seen that it correlates with a faster time. I hit all the work outs for this, speed, races and with a longer time in zone 2
Long before this VO2 max means longevity became a thing I heard that quad strength was the best predictor. For multitude of reasons, like you're less likely to fall and hurt yourself.
The same with grip strength.
With all of these measurements, it's missing the forest for the trees if you don't remember consistency. Being in great shape for 3 months every year and sedentary the other 9 is not as good for longevity as being in good shape all the time. Walk every day. Practice laying down and standing up, pretending one leg is broken. Do pullups and pushups. Swim. A little variety will boost confidence, keep you interested, and even improve your running.
And also Vo2max depends on weight, and weight is correlated with longevity
Great point.
Correlation vs causation
The late George Sheehan MD and running guru points out..."You might suspect from the emphasis on cardiopulmonary fitness that major effect of training is on the heart and lungs. Guess again. Exercise does nothing for the lungs: that has been amply proved...Nor does it especially benefit your heart. Running, no matter what you've been told, primarily trains and conditions the muscles.
Also "fit" does not mean healthy. Jim Fixx died from a heart attack while jogging at fifty-two. Certainly he was fit. But was he healthy? No, his autopsy revealed coronary arteriosclerosis
He ran 37,000 miles and completed several marathons, ran 60 miles per week.
Compare jim Fixx to Winston Churchill, who was obese, smoked, overate, and drank excessively yet lived to 91,. No one would describe Churchill as fit, but he was certainly healthy. jim Fixx could run circles around Churchill, but Churchill lived 40 years longer. Health is a state in which all components of the body are functioning properly and there is an absence of disease. Fitness is the ability to perform strenuous work or exercise. Clearly, it is possible to be healthy without being fit and vice versa
Tadej Pogacar, on a recent interview with Attia, said he didn’t know his VO2 max and hasn’t tested it in quite sometime but he guessed it was probably “pretty high”. 😂
The algorithm was strong with this one.
Started "Do Hard Things" recently. Amazing book. It has put a voice to things ive been feeling for years but have not quite been able to pin down.
Thanks so much. So thrilled that you found it valuable!
Thanks again Steve.
Really enjoying this recent series of videos.
Glad you like them!
The people in the studies with the good vo2 and good longevity were just normal athletes training for performance. I don’t get why the conclusion wasn’t “be an athlete at a healthy weight”
Great video - during my lab test (inreasibg inclune and speed) my VO2 peaked, then fell, then the technician ended the lab test, not me. Heart rate was 95% of Max HR, not 100%.
I really like the combo of sports science and running - just subscribed.
Everyone is still overthinking it….. You may have high Vo2, but how well can the rest of the engine use what’s available?
Hi, enjoying your content here👍
Can you please make a video of how mortal non elite adulst (30 to 50 years old) can improve running performance.
One week for example with key structure workouts (for 5km race)🙏
Speed: key workouts for 5km
Lt: key workouts...
Long runs and anything else as main part of such program?
Thinking holistically...Right on! The ultimate question is how well we use that O2 that we consume, and that involves ALL the components of our muscles' aerobic engine and its drive-train.
Exactly!
I agree VO2 max is over emphasised but important to note it is the maximum oxygen that the body can use. Ie the definition includes usage not just collection and transmission of oxygen. This is why prolonged Z2 workouts that target muscle take-up and usage of oxygen can improve VO2 max as well as Z5 which primarily targets the central system. That said it seems some athletes can sustain output at higher % of.VO2 max and some can get more power out for a given VO2 max. Which is why some pro athletes can compete well with relatively low VO2 maxes (though still much higher than the general population).
Oh boy, Peter Attia going to have discussions with you!😅
Ha! I'd welcome a conversation.
@@SteveMagnessgreat
Do it
It isn't about running or general fitness. It's about preventing the age related loss of your micro vascular architecture. Working yourself into hypoxia to stimulate HIF1a and VEGF .... Microvascular disease effects 5% of people age 50 and 100% of people by the age of 90... It also catches the blamb for 45% of dementia ...
Thanks you for putting into context the relative importance of V02 Max, which I agree is often over enthusised has a matker of health far beyond other measurable factors and considerations by longevity experts.
Thanks! Glad you found it useful.
Fascinating stuff! I am subscribing and going to check out your other stuff.
A few thoughts:
1) I did not know the thing about the thing about some people not plateauing. Presumably that 47% of pro cyclists had trained the aerobic function of their muscles to the point where they could use more oxygen than their heart and lungs could deliver.
2) I would have thought LT would have been much more important to Paula for the marathon. I would be interested to know if the same study looked at this, although LT seems like an even more slippery concept the more I look into it.
3) Even if they were testing actual V̇O2 max in the longevity studies, teasing out all the presumed correlations between longevity, biological age, functional performance, comorbidities, and all the possible measures of fitness would be next to impossible in what I presume were observational studies. Very similar to the findings that (off the top of my head) strength/lean muscle is associated with longevity, but spending more than 40 minutes a week on resistance training is negatively correlated.
Greg Lemond, who had a super high VO2 max, said it remained very high years after his career ended. He got old, gained weight but still had a high max, interesting. The right physiology coupled with excellent lactate clearing ability and just raw grit and competitive spirit allow the elites to push up such high VO2 max levels. Longevity? Does that mean per event, or career, or years of quality living? I have your book and it's great, nice to put a face to the name- I'm subscribed.
absolutely enriched as all i am hearing from you :)
Wow, thank you!
Home run, Steve! The best measure of performance is performance itself.
Thanks a lot!
always super clear Steve , thanks
Glad you think so!
I've been skeptical about vo2 max, but I'd say the fitness tracker VO2 max numbers are even worse if you play sports or hike with your fitness tracker for the majority of your workouts.
So ironic I've just dug out Tim Noakes book Lore of running again and are upto that point about V02 max .
Great insight as usual. I also like the light effect from the blinds.
Awesome, thanks a lot!
Patrick, Attia, Land, Huberman all beat the VO2 horse all the time. Now they will have to come up with a new magic longevity rule
I want to plan out a base running/cycling block for the winter and had a weekly vo2max session planned, but instinctively i just want to ride endurance or tempo, and a lot of volume of it… i dont need to perform for an event, just really enjoy the training. Feel like that session will just hinder my recovery and not really benefit me in this block
So, Im competive so will focus on vo2 max training…
Simland does look at the number in his book, Longevity
Studies prove that a higher vo2 max correlates to longevity as we lose 10% every decade so keeping it higher when younger has it slow down slower when older. Higher vo2 max means more oxygen, better metabolic efficiency, less disease. Its good to know thou that my running can improve at my plateaued VO2 max
It's not VO2max that is the best correlate to longevity...it's the speed we reach at the end of the test...in other words studies show it's aerobic PERFORMANCE that correlates with VO2max. What this means is it's not just maximum oxygen consumption, it's our running economy, lactate threshold, critical power, and on and on that all add up to contribute.
And that's good news. Because while performance declines with age...we can greatly slow the decline with training. Vo2max you can slow too, but it's more fixed than performance.
once I heard the claim that high vo2max is a causal factor for longevity my skeptic alarms went off. first, why do women generally live longer than men, when women also generally have lower VO2maxes? And secondly when you compare animals by VO2max and longevity, it almost seems like an inverse correlation. Also the correlation in these studies doesn't necessarily mean causation. Maybe there is some other factor that contributes to both longevity and high VO2max.
No one said VO2 max is the strongest and single causal factor. What determines women’s longevity is confounded by factors unrelated to VO2 max. And you can’t bring the animal argument here as it doesn’t pertain to humans. What leads to longevity in animals is different to humans as they’re killed by acute triggers whereas most humans today die by chronic diseases
@@radmehrabdolahi1346 Yes. And women live longer in part due to not engaging in risky activities vs men.
Think workplace accidents etc
@@radmehrabdolahi1346especially the jabbed
But everyone is different.
It takes forever for me to truly warm up. 6 to 7 km for me.
If I tried before this I would peak early.
Note: I'm a total novice and trying to get super fit. I run about 55km a week and I'm a heart patient (cleared by my doctor).
All my times are slow but I don't know if I'm training right. I feel ok. 😊
Wouldn't LT1 and LT2 correlate better with health benefits?
Yea and how many studies really test 70 + year olds for MVO2 max if you want to test for "longevity"??
100% having a huge engine is great but it’s not everything.
As an aside, I wonder how do you view running performance nowadays compared to when you wrote Science of Running?
That's a big question! I think the main thing that has changed is the shoes. Both from a racing and training standpoint, it's shifted performance a bit.
Muscle is a better predictor of longevity. Muscle is medicine
It's actually not. Depending on what you mean by muscle...
Of course we need a baseline of strength to prevent falls, etc. while older. It's important. But cardiovascular fitness is a better predictor.
vo2 peak (not max) and fractional utilization are very important
Vo2peak isn't that important in the grand scheme of things, for reasons outlined in the video. It's fine to have the #. But it makes little difference in your training or preparation.
Fractional utilization is more useful. But I'd argue you can get the same or better info simply by comparing race distances, or a lactate test. It's even what researchers have moved to when looking at velocity curves/critical velocity testing.
I see advice that before a race it’s good to do some VO2 max workouts once a week, 6-4 weeks before a race
Is this basically just peaking?
Pull
I’m going to trust the data. What is your level of expertise?
I'm explaining what the data, science, and practice says. I wrote a book on it, if you'd like to go more in depth.
My expertise? I'm an exercise physiologist with both my undergrad and graduate degrees in the field, and wrote the book The Science of Running. I've also coached for nearly two decades, including over two dozen Olympic Trials qualifiers and people who have made the Olympics, world championships, etc. I've had runners finish top 10 at Boston, NYC, Chicago, and the world champs marathons. And lastly, I was a solid runner myself. I could go on. But I can pretty dang confidently say that I've got more expertise than any of the podcasters out there telling you the opposite.
I've been running for 16 years and have devoured tons of running info. Can't recommend Steve enough. One of the great thinkers in our sport. Have learned so much from his articles, podcasts, videos and his book Science of Running. I've referred to my copy so often it's gotten pretty worn and dog eared (well loved). Please make the second edition a hard cover, Steve ;) thanks for everything, man. You're a legend.
@@brendandunn6331+1