In fairly recent times, fitness as well as health and wellness has become rather popular. Along with this popularity has come methods and tools to provide for individuals who may not have access to the items or locations in which are prime for training. One particular training methodology is called “high altitude training”, and it is literally what it sounds like: training at high altitudes. The “official” ranges of altitude that are accepted are: sea level (0 to 500m), low altitude (>500 to 2000m), moderate altitude (>2000 to 3000m), high altitude (>3000 to 5500m), and extreme altitude (>5500m) (Gore). What high altitude training essentially does, is increase the volume of red blood cells in the body. Basically, …show more content…
What cannot be disputed, however, is the red blood cell count being raised, leading to greater oxygen capacities within the bodies of individuals who live at high altitude. This has led to four scenarios of study: “live high – train high”, “live low – train low”, “live high – train low”, and “live low – train high” (Christiansen). The most popular choice of these is the “live high – train low” method (Gore). This allows the body to be and maintain acclimatization to the higher altitude, resulting in a higher base level VO2Max. By training at lower altitudes, the individual is able to “perform” more work per session, thus having greater “gains” and being able to improve quicker. This, elite level training methodology, does not detract from the benefits of high altitude training, as it utilized the core concept of being at high …show more content…
Your body is able to utilize oxygen in a very efficient manner, thus requiring you to intake less oxygen. Individuals with higher VO2Max levels tend to have a lower heartrate, which leads to lower blood pressure. Their bodies are typically in “better shape” (at least cardiovascularly) and tend to have less problems. This creates less stress both internal and external on the body. The incredible thing about VO2Max is that the “smallest worthwhile change” in performance to effect race results is as low as 0.5% (Gore)! If a change for a runner is that low, imagine what a change for your average individual would