Does harder training move the lactate threshold more?
20 elite skiers, 5 months: training at 80-90% of VO2max raised speed at the threshold 3.2%, at 60-70% it did not, and the groups differed. Allocation not stated; abstract only.
Evertsen, Medbø and Bonen (Norwegian University of Sport and Physical Education) followed 20 elite cross-country skiers who trained hard for 5 months at either moderate (MIG, 60-70% of VO2max) or high intensity (HIG, 80-90%).
Lactate threshold, several performance parameters, blood lactate after exhausting treadmill running, and vastus lateralis MCT1, MCT4, fibre types and six enzymes were measured. MCT1 did not change for HIG (P = 0.3) and fell for MIG (−12 ± 3%, P = 0.01), with a different response between groups (P = 0.05); MCT4 did not change.
Running speed at the lactate threshold rose for HIG (+3.2 ± 0.9%, P = 0.003), not for MIG (P = 0.54), again with a different response (P = 0.04). Lactate after long exhausting running correlated with MCT1 (rs = 0.69, P = 0.002), not MCT4. The authors conclude high-intensity training "may be more effective for cross-country skiers".
Our reading: one of the few intensity trials in the base with women in numbers, and it has a real between-group result, unlike many in this literature. It supports "training at 80-90% of VO2max moved the threshold more than training at 60-70%, in elite athletes"; that the upper band sits near the threshold is our inference.
It does not test whether that holds when easy volume has stopped working, and the abstract describes no control group on habitual training. Neither the volume nor the share of total training in these bands is stated, so "trained at 60-70%" cannot be read as all their training.
Protocol
Key Results
| Outcome | MIG (60-70% VO2max) | HIG (80-90% VO2max) | Between groups |
|---|---|---|---|
| Running speed at lactate threshold | no change (P = 0.54) | +3.2 ± 0.9% (P = 0.003) | P = 0.04 |
| Muscle MCT1 | −12 ± 3% (P = 0.01) | no change (P = 0.3) | P = 0.05 |
| Muscle MCT4 | no change (P > 0.10) | no change (P > 0.10) | not given |
Mechanisms
Practical Application
Limitations
How this entry was checked and changed
(from the abstract) — the rubric's B for a small parallel study, lowered a step on the same ground as REF-1451: an abstract-only small study whose key methods (allocation, arm sizes, training content and dose) are missing; the between-group test in elite athletes, including women, is its strength, and the full paper could lift the level