REF-170 · Binder et al., 2008 · European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation, · Paper

Methodological Approach to the First and Second Lactate Threshold in Incremental CPET

B+moderate evidenceMeasured on a mixed groupWritten before October 2026, being re-checked

Binder et al. order the terminology and concepts around the "anaerobic threshold" in incremental cardiopulmonary exercise testing.

Two lactate thresholds are discerned during CPET and used for fitness estimation and training prescription; the literature uses a multitude of terms for them, and "anaerobic threshold" is applied to both the first and the second threshold — a great potential for confusion.

The review orders terms, presents threshold concepts, and describes methods for lactate threshold determination using a three-phase model, with reference to the historical and physiological background, to make the term "anaerobic threshold" usable in practice.

Key Findings

Two thresholds, not one: a first lactate threshold (onset of the sustained rise of blood lactate above baseline) and a second lactate threshold (the point of prominent lactate accumulation) — "anaerobic threshold" in the literature can mean either
Three-phase model: phase I below the first threshold, phase II between the two thresholds, phase III above the second threshold; the review describes the determination methods within this model
Purpose: standardised terminology and methods for fitness estimation and training prescription from an incremental test

Practical Application

Methodological review: incremental exercise shows two lactate thresholds, both called "anaerobic threshold" somewhere in the literature; the review orders the terms and describes determination methods in a three-phase model (below LT1 / between LT1 and LT2 / above LT2) for fitness estimation and training prescription. Always ask which threshold a number refers to before using it.
Mapping the three-phase model onto training zones (Inference, consistent with the model): phase I = below LT1 = the base's Zone 2 / moderate domain; phase II = between LT1 and LT2 = heavy domain; phase III = above LT2 = severe domain.
Not from this paper: where LT1 and LT2 fall as a percentage of VO2max or of FTP differs by athlete and training status — the abstract gives no percentages; determine them from the athlete's own test rather than from a table.
Not from this paper; the base's own practice: a step test needs enough stages below, between and above the two thresholds to place them; for non-invasive identification from gas exchange see REF-171.

Limitations

Methodological/terminology review from a cardiology-rehabilitation context; no data, no validation of one method against another in the abstract; percentages of VO2max at the thresholds are not given.

How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level

(consensus methodology paper)

Content correction 2026-09-27
"LT1 ≈ 50-60% VO2max untrained, 70-80% trained; LT2 ≈ 75-85% untrained, 85-95% trained" -> not in the abstract; deleted (twice: Key Figures and Practical block).
"LT2 = compensatory ventilation rise point (=RCP)", "phase II isocapnic buffering / phase III respiratory compensation" -> not in the abstract (it describes lactate thresholds and a three-phase model, not ventilatory equivalents); reworded to the abstract.
"≥3 points in each phase" -> house rule; relabelled base practice without a number.
Tier "mixed→Tier 1" -> mixed (review across CPET populations).