High &OV0312;O2max with no history of training is primarily due to high blood volume
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the high VO2max observed occasionally in young men who have no history of training. METHODS: VO2max, blood volume (BV), maximal stroke volume (SVmax), maximal cardiac output (Qmax), and related measurements (reported as mean +/- SEM) were studied in six men (mean age 20.0 +/- 0.5 yr) with no history of training, who all had a VO2max below 49 mL.kg-1.min-1 (LO group) and six age- and weight-matched men (mean age 19.5 +/- 0.5 yr) with no history of training, who all had a VO2max above 62.5 mL.kg-1.min-1 (HI group). RESULTS: Compared with the LO group, the HI group had a higher SVmax (149 +/- 5 vs 102 +/- 5 mL), higher Qmax (28.9 +/- 0.9 vs 20.0 +/- 1.0 L.min-1) and higher BV (88.1 +/- 3.8 vs 76.7 +/- 0.9 mL.kg-1). The BV of four participants in the HI group (mean = 92.3 +/- 4.3 mL.kg-1) was substantially higher than the BV of all participants in the LO group, but two participants in the HI group had a BV (mean = 79.7 +/- 0.8 mL.kg-1) that was similar to the mean BV of the LO group. CONCLUSION: The primary explanation for the high VO2max observed occasionally in young men who have no history of training is a naturally occurring (perhaps genetically determined) high BV that brings about a high SVmax and Qmax. However, some young men with no history of training have a high VO2max, SVmax, and Qmax possibly because a greater portion of their BV is hemodynamically active.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".