Re: Massage Impairs Postexercise Muscle Blood Flow and Lacti...

[Guest guest]

I've never really used massage as a recovery tool. I have been to my

sports medicine doctor when something is injured or hurting. Most of the time

my sports medicine doctor sends me to a physical therapist for some

chiropractic and physical therapy to get me back to lifting shape. I wouldn't

know if sports massage is helpful or not but a lot of professional athletes

use sports massage. Powerlifters have to keep their bodies tight. Yoga

bodies don't do well in powerlifting. Too much flexibility and powerlifters

can't lift well. There is a book by Pavel Tsatuoline(spelling?) that offers

a stretching program for powerlifters who are concerned with increasing

their squat, deadlift, and bench press while remaining injury free.

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

San Francisco, USA

In a message dated 6/15/2010 10:34:50 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

deadliftdiva@... writes:

My initial response here is they've taken a poor subject for evaluation in

forearm with 40 percent of voluntary max grip - how often do we stand

there and hold onto something, statically??

Unless I see something along the lines of massage inhibiting recovery in

max lifts with say, hamstrings, quads, or erectors/traps/lats, I really

don't think it's worth the read. I also can't believe they're measuring " lactic

acid " removal as a standard either - haven't we already been over this

myth of " lactic acid removal " to the point of exhaustion and the reality that

we don't really WANT " removal " - and that it's lactate and energy systems,

not " waste " ?

Depending on how deep the massage is by the way, effleurage/petrissage can

be very light and superficial or you can go deeper and yes, increase

inflammation and that would increase the circulation... hmmm.

anyway, that's my take on this one. my own experience is that massage

helps considerably.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Massage Impairs Postexercise Muscle Blood Flow

and " Lactic Acid " Removal

Supertraining

Date: Sunday, June 13, 2010, 3:42 AM

The below may be of interest:

Massage Impairs Postexercise Muscle Blood Flow and " Lactic Acid " Removal

WILTSHIRE, E. VICTORIA; POITRAS, VERONICA; PAK, MELISSA; HONG, TERENCE;

RAYNER, JAY; TSCHAKOVSKY, MICHAEL E.

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise:

June 2010 - Volume 42 - Issue 6 - pp 1062-1071

doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181c9214f

Abstract

Purpose: This study tested the hypothesis that one of the ways sports

massage aids muscle recovery from exercise is by increasing muscle blood flow

to improve " lactic acid " removal.

Methods: Twelve subjects performed 2 min of strenuous isometric handgrip

(IHG) exercise at 40% maximum voluntary contraction to elevate forearm

muscle lactic acid. Forearm blood flow (FBF; Doppler and Echo ultrasound of the

brachial artery) and deep venous forearm blood lactate and H+ concentration

([La & #8722;], [H+]) were measured every minute for 10 min post-IHG under

three conditions: passive (passive rest), active (rhythmic exercise at 10%

maximum voluntary contraction), and massage (effleurage and pétrissage).

Arterialized [La & #8722;] and [H+] from a superficial heated hand vein was

measured at baseline.

Results: Data are presented as mean ± SE. Venoarterial [La & #8722;]

difference ([La & #8722;]v & #8722;a) at 30 s of post-IHG was the same across

conditions (passive = 6.1 ± 0.6 mmol·L & #8722;1, active = 5.7 ± 0.6

mmol·L & #8722;1,

massage = 5.5 ± 0.6 mmol·L & #8722;1, NS), whereas FBF was greater in

passive (766 ± 101 mL·min & #8722;1) versus active (614 ± 62 mL·min & #8722;1, P =

0.003) versus massage (540 ± 60 mL·min & #8722;1, P < 0.0001). Total FBF area

under the curve (AUC) for 10 min after handgrip was significantly higher in

passive versus massage (4203 ± 531 vs 3178 ± 304 mL, P = 0.024) but not

versus active (3584 ± 284 mL, P = 0.217). La & #8722; efflux (FBF ×

[La & #8722;]v & #8722;a) AUC mirrored FBF AUC (passive = 20.5 ± 2.8 mmol vs

massage = 14.7

± 1.6 mmol, P = 0.03, vs active = 15.4 ± 1.9 mmol, P = 0.064). H+ efflux

(FBF × [H+]v & #8722;a) was greater in passive versus massage at 30 s (2.2 ±

0.4e & #8722;5 vs 1.3 ± 0.2e & #8722;5 mmol, P <

0.001) and 1.5 min (1.0 ± 0.2e & #8722;5 vs 0.6 ± 0.09e & #8722;5 mmol, P =

0.003) after IHG.

Conclusions: Massage impairs La & #8722; and H+ removal from muscle after

strenuous exercise by mechanically impeding blood flow.

===================

Carruthers

Wakefield, UK

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------------------------------

Modify/cancel your subscription at:

mygroups

Sign all letters with full name & city of residence if you

wish them to be published!