Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

instructables.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 112 posts

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#31

Post by gameswithgo »

trentnix wrote: post #18

This is really great. For those who aren't familiar with what these machines can do, the calculation of an athlete's Vo2 max really isn't all that useful. However, a breakdown of the fat and carbohydrate calories burned at various efforts can be incredibly useful for helping an athlete learn how to fuel correctly for performance over distance. I'm not a physiologist or physician (and I'm sure what I'm about to say ma…

The idea that fat efficiency can be improved via diet or training is often said, but the people I have known who both tried it and carefully measured it couldn’t.

Also there are perfectly ordinary ways to figure out you need to eat more, Ive coached some pro cyclists and done a decent amount of my own triathlon and cycling adventures and if someone gave me a free vo2 machine I don’t think I would ever use it.

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#32

Post by newaccount74 »

guelo wrote: post #30
complexworld wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work on a handheld ultrasound device that attached to a phone or a tablet. It is much easier to use than traditional ultrasound machines, because of the attention paid to the UX off the app, and the familiar smartphone UI. That being said I will haven't learned how to use it in a meaningful way myself. Getting a good image, and then interpreting the 2d video stream requires training! Making ultrasound easy enough f…

Why can't ultrasounds produce 3D?

They can, but since the data is very noisy the 3D reconstruction is usually not very good.

If you actually need to measure something, analysing the 2D images is much more precise.

EDIT: Also, it's really hard to visualise density in a 3D view.

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#33

Post by newaccount74 »

jacquesm wrote: post #20
hourislate wrote: post #5

First comment on page. >My wife is an Ironman as well (Muskoka, Tremblant and Penticton). . She's been using Zwift since last year. Great way to train btw and great idea but. My concern would be a collapsed lung(s) if this wasn't calibrated correctly. To each their own, but stressing your lungs and diaphragm this much isn't a great idea. In a lab they can at least make sure you don't hurt yourself.

I see where you're coming from I assume that you are talking about the device resistance when breathing in and you're worried that the adhesion between the lung sac and the cavity wall breaks. You can pull a pretty good vacuum with just your lungs, so I'm not overly worried about that. And pressure is not a problem unless you have a weak spot in your lung. But still, it's a good point to make and maybe the author cou…

But the device resistance won't be very big, would it? If I understand correctly, you are just breathing through a tube, and this device measures the flow through the tube. Or is there something in the tube that would cause a lot of resistance?

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#34

Post by csdvrx »

nexuist wrote: post #25
csdvrx wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need a currently "missing" network effect that cheap 3d printer supporting everything from more flexible plastics to metal will eventually provide.

Wake me up when we can 3D print pills and I can craft the perfect Tylenol or 5 hour energy from some React app. Now that'll be a medical revolution!

Once this is done, printing chemicals might be achievable too (thanks to the network effect of lots of people already having 3d printer to produce the required hardware), but maybe not immediately :)

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#35

Post by danielheath »

newaccount74 wrote: post #33
jacquesm wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see where you're coming from I assume that you are talking about the device resistance when breathing in and you're worried that the adhesion between the lung sac and the cavity wall breaks. You can pull a pretty good vacuum with just your lungs, so I'm not overly worried about that. And pressure is not a problem unless you have a weak spot in your lung. But still, it's a good point to make and maybe the author cou…

But the device resistance won't be very big, would it? If I understand correctly, you are just breathing through a tube, and this device measures the flow through the tube. Or is there something in the tube that would cause a lot of resistance?

Adding some resistance is typically how you measure flow.

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#36

Post by Karunamon »

hprotagonist wrote: post #15
pkaye wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the insane aspects of the regulations?

Most of them are written in blood.

I don't think I can accept that, especially with regard to items like hearing aids. There's a fundamental difference between things like implants and surgical tools and relatively simple devices like CPAP machines and hearing aids; things where the harm of a failure scenario is extremely limited.

This is a government at the end of the day. It would be imprudent to not consider the effects of regulatory capture, cronyism, and so forth.

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#37

Post by hprotagonist »

Karunamon wrote: post #36
hprotagonist wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of them are written in blood.

I don't think I can accept that, especially with regard to items like hearing aids. There's a fundamental difference between things like implants and surgical tools and relatively simple devices like CPAP machines and hearing aids; things where the harm of a failure scenario is extremely limited. This is a government at the end of the day. It would be imprudent to not consider the effects of regulatory capture, crony…

do you have experience in the discipline? It doesn’t sound like you do.

I have some experience, and i can think of about a half dozen ways cpap machines and hearing aids could cause serious harm as a result of design flaws or lack of QA that would be de rigeur if not for regulatory pressure.

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#38

Post by Karunamon »

hprotagonist wrote: post #37
Karunamon wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I can accept that, especially with regard to items like hearing aids. There's a fundamental difference between things like implants and surgical tools and relatively simple devices like CPAP machines and hearing aids; things where the harm of a failure scenario is extremely limited. This is a government at the end of the day. It would be imprudent to not consider the effects of regulatory capture, crony…

do you have experience in the discipline? It doesn’t sound like you do. I have some experience, and i can think of about a half dozen ways cpap machines and hearing aids could cause serious harm as a result of design flaws or lack of QA that would be de rigeur if not for regulatory pressure.

What are some of those ways that are not addressed by regular old (non-medical-specific) electronics/safety regulation?

Most of the ways I can think of a CPAP failing would be extremely obvious with equally obvious and relatively low-impact effects (I get a crappy night's sleep or wake up in the middle of the night).

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#39

Post by jonah »

One refinement would be to split the device in to two parts = the mask/tube/sensors and the electronics and battery. Then, the a large portion of the weight could be moved to the back of the headband or a fanny pack reducing the load/torque/etc. on the face.

A lot of headlamps do this for example. https://www.petzl.com/US/en/Sport/SPECIALIZED-headlamps/DUO-...

Re: Portable replacement for a $60k VO2 Max machine

#40

Post by aix1 »

ssl232 wrote: post #19
trentnix wrote: post #18

This is really great. For those who aren't familiar with what these machines can do, the calculation of an athlete's Vo2 max really isn't all that useful. However, a breakdown of the fat and carbohydrate calories burned at various efforts can be incredibly useful for helping an athlete learn how to fuel correctly for performance over distance. I'm not a physiologist or physician (and I'm sure what I'm about to say ma…

A friend of mine does keto and after running a marathon reported that they did not experience "the wall". Presumably this is because they were using fat to begin with, not after mile 15 or whatever.

It all has to do with intensity. We obviously can't tell from the information provided, but if they ran at a slow pace, that would also skew the fueling towards fat.
Post reply on HN