{"id":6099,"date":"2014-12-10T15:33:53","date_gmt":"2014-12-10T15:33:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fitproblog.mysites.io\/tony-lycholat-fitness-word\/"},"modified":"2014-12-10T15:33:53","modified_gmt":"2014-12-10T15:33:53","slug":"tony-lycholat-fitness-word","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/tony-lycholat-fitness-word\/","title":{"rendered":"The fitness word with Tony Lycholat"},"content":{"rendered":"
Part 1:\u00a0The fitness word: Dietary myth and fantasy in modern Paleo-land Click here <\/a>to read the full feature<\/strong><\/h5>\n

Sport and exercise science: Just opinion after all?<\/h2>\n

Two rather big questions were asked recently by the House of Lords\u2019 Select Committee on Science and Technology: 1. How robust is the research and evidence base for improving the performance of elite and non-elite athletes (in a wide range of sports)? and 2. How can this knowledge be translated into treatments and preventative interventions to improve the nation\u2019s health?1<\/sup> The backdrop to these questions \u2013 somewhat obviously \u2013 was the London 2012 Olympics and the quite remarkable claims for a \u2018legacy\u2019, most of which now appear to have been nothing more than an extravagant sales pitch. Given its title \u2013 Sport and exercise science<\/em> and medicine: Building on the Olympic<\/em> legacy to improve the nation\u2019s health <\/em>\u2013 you\u2019d think that organisations like UK Sport, the English Institute of Sport (EIS) and perhaps even the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES) would have been keen to promote and discuss its content. Until, of course, you read it. No wonder they\u2019ve all kept quiet. I\u2019ll quote some of the Select Committee\u2019s key findings:<\/p>\n

\u201cDuring the course of this short inquiry we were presented with little evidence to suggest that the enhancement of the performance of elite athletes is generally based on strong biomedical science.\u201d (p. 13)<\/p>\n

\u201cThe evidence we received has led us to the view that the latest advances in relevant areas of biomedical research are not being consistently applied to improving the performance of elite athletes.\u201d (p. 14)<\/p>\n

\u201cWe recommend that the DCMS [Department for Culture, Media and Sport] and UK Sport take steps to ensure that the biomedical science UK Sport applies to improving the performance of elite athletes is of the highest quality and meets international peer-review standards that would be applicable in other areas of science.\u201d (p. 15)<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026 sports scientists and sport medical professionals must demonstrate that they can undertake research of the same quality as (other) fundamental disciplines.\u201d (p. 23)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I could go on but you get the picture. One of the problems is that the research that tends to go on in the sport and exercise sciences is often methodologically flawed, involves small sample sizes and tends to be observational and not experimental. Some readers will recall that I\u2019ve written about this previously in Fitpro<\/em>2<\/sup>, noting the view of statisticians Young and Carr that \u201cany claim coming from an observational study is most likely to be wrong\u201d3<\/sup>. Poor observational studies give rise to everything that is annoying about nutritional advice in sport and exercise, for example, and why it is probably best to view anyone who calls themselves a \u2018nutritionist\u2019 with a high index of suspicion. You know the thing: eat this \u2018superfood\u2019 because (insert nonsense here). Invariably, when you look at the \u2018research\u2019, it\u2019s poor. Imagine if you went for a cycle ride and it took two hours. You then took a short break, ate half a pork pie and cycled back following exactly the same route, yet you took 30 minutes less for the journey.<\/p>\n

The claim you might make is that eating half a pork pie improves cycling performance dramatically \u2013 and that\u2019s exactly the way some people appear to go about research related to performance and fluid\/carbohydrate replacement4<\/sup>, arguably for personal gain5<\/sup>. What might have been left out of the cycling\/pork pie story, of course, is the fierce headwind on the outward leg and the similarly strong tailwind on the return. In short, all those tricky confounding (and causal) factors are often ignored. The other big problem is that of personal bias. If you\u2019ve had a passion for any of the sports science disciplines since your youth, then studied this at university, it\u2019s highly likely you\u2019ve now developed and permanently ring-fenced your bias towards this discipline such that you are unable to see its flaws and contradictions, let alone be prepared to acknowledge and critically evaluate other valid explanations and contested knowledge positions. Look at the poor guy who wrote the much ridiculed (at the time and even more so after) 82-page nutritional guidelines for the England cricket team\u2019s disastrous 2013 Ashes tour in Australia.<\/strong><\/p>\n

I won\u2019t add to his eternal misery by naming him. Somewhat comically, his boss \u2013 the head of nutrition at EIS \u2013 in that typically promotional \u2018aren\u2019t we great\u2019 corporate fashion tweeted at the time that, with his approach, he was \u201cpushing the boundaries of cricketing performance\u201d. You couldn\u2019t make this up. And wasn\u2019t the sports psychiatrist Steve Peters meant to have been working with England\u2019s footballers so that they\u2019d win the World Cup? That went well, too. Of course, nutritionists are an easy target since this discipline is unregulated (i.e., anyone can call themselves one) and has its \u2018complementary\u2019 (i.e., all beliefs and no evidence) spin-offs, such as nutritional therapy. However, after over 30 years of working in science and medicine, I\u2019ve got plenty of examples from biomechanics, podiatry, physiology, and strength and conditioning.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s no need to comment further on the inherent problems with sports psychology; the profession\u2019s own Mark Andersen has already done this, arguing (with evidence) that \u201csport psychology seems to attract an inordinate number of self-promoters and charlatans\u201d6<\/sup>. Perhaps it\u2019s best just to say that \u201cextraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence\u201d7<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Clearly, the performance benefit accredited to any of the sports science disciplines is context dependent and invariably cannot be evaluated anyway since there are far too many variables all interacting at the same time in performance sport. What we now hear coming from cricket is that the complete set-up in the 5-0 thrashing was dysfunctional8<\/sup> and no amount of goji berries, chia seeds or magic beans swapped for a kangaroo on the way to market would have made a difference.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And let\u2019s comment no further on England\u2019s football team, their talent, preparation or indeed their manager. Throw in some rather poor science generally (as described in the House of Lords\u2019 report) and there you have it: sports science existing largely as the biased, often non-evidence-based opinions of those who practice it, whether individually or collectively. In the collective case, this becomes a dominant discourse, a way of talking about \u2018sports science\u2019 with its importance being emphasised and validated primarily by those organisations who have a vested interest in selling it to the trusting and less critical consumer, whether athlete, coach, fitness professional or recreational exerciser: shameful.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0Tony Lycholat<\/h5>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

<\/h5>\n
Tony Lycholat\u00a0is a coach, coach educator\u00a0and high performance scientist, with\u00a0degrees in sport science and sports\u00a0medicine. He has worked with Olympic and\u00a0elite professional sportsmen and women for\u00a0over 25 years and has been the technical\u00a0editor at FitPro since 1993.<\/h5>\n
<\/h5>\n
References<\/strong><\/h5>\n
    \n
  1. HL Paper 33 (2012-13),\u00a0Sport and exercise science and medicine: Building on the Olympic legacy to improve the nation’s health<\/em>, The Stationery Office Ltd.<\/li>\n
  2. Lycholat T (Summer 2014), Evidence-based fitness?\u00a0Fitpro<\/em>, 13.<\/li>\n
  3. Young S, Karr A (September 2011), Deming, data and observational studies,\u00a0Significance<\/em>, The Royal Statistical Society, 116-120.<\/li>\n
  4. Heneghan C\u00a0et al<\/em>(July 2012), Forty years of sports performance research and little insight gained,\u00a0BMJ<\/em>, 345:e4797 doi:10.1136\/bmj.e4797.<\/li>\n
  5. Noakes T (2011), Changes in body mass alone explain almost all of the variance in the serum sodium concentrations during prolonged exercise. Has commercial influence impeded scientific endeavour?\u00a0BJSM<\/em>, 45: 475-477.<\/li>\n
  6. Andersen MB (2009), Performance enhancement as a bad start and a dead end: A parenthetical comment on Mellalieu and Lane,\u00a0The Sport and Exercise Scientists<\/em>, 20: 12-14.<\/li>\n
  7. http:\/\/www.senseaboutscience.org\/blog.php\/103\/extraordinary-claims-need-extraordinary-evidence-the-importance-of-skepticism<\/a>, accessed on 5\u00a0December\u00a02014. NB: The phrase itself was popularised by scientist and advocate of critical thinking Carl Sagan in the 1970s.<\/li>\n
  8. http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/sport\/cricket\/kevinpietersen\/11147103\/Kevin-Pietersen-ECB-document-into-batsmans-behaviour-during-Englands-Ashes-tour-leaked.html<\/a>, accessed on 5\u00a0December\u00a02014.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

     <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Part 1:\u00a0The fitness word: Dietary myth and fantasy in modern Paleo-land Click here to read…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6101,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[40],"tags":[133,185,186],"class_list":{"0":"post-6099","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-news-features","8":"tag-fitpro-magazine","9":"tag-sport-science","10":"tag-tony-lycholat"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6099"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6099"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6099\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6101"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6099"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6099"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fitpro.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6099"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}