PubMed · 3066930
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
M Hirakawa. 1988. [Hemodynamic changes in prone position].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3066930/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The purposes of this commentary are to provide a critique of Callahan's (this issue) article on Thought Field Therapy (TFT) and to discuss when our commitment to intellectual open-mindedness requires that we attend to nontraditional treatment interventions in clinical psychology.
Callahan (2001) has offered a series of case reports in an effort to validate the rationale and methods of Thought Field Therapy (TFT). These case reports employ subjective ratings, that is, the Subjective Units of Distress (SUD) rating scale as well as a gross measure of heart rate variability (HRV). My criticisms center around (a) inappropriately strong inferences given exclusive reliance on case reports, a potentially biased sample, and lack of appropriate controls; (b) misinterpretation of statistical artifact as systematic effect; (c) lack of systematic evaluation of HRV changes; and (d) erroneous interpretation of HRV. Callahan's article provides no evidence for the efficacy of TFT nor does it provide evidence for the credibility of TFT's rationale.
The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of three very short interval training sessions (15-15 s of hard and easier runs) run at an average velocity equal to the critical velocity to elicit VO2 max for more than 10 minutes. We hypothesized that the interval with the smallest amplitude (defined as the ratio between the difference in velocity between the hard and the easy run divided by the average velocity and multiplied by 100) would be the most efficient to elicit VO2 max for the longer time. The subjects were middle-aged runners (52 +/- 5 yr, VO2 max of 52.1 +/- 6 mL x min(-1) x kg(-1), vVO2 max of 15.9 +/- 1.8 km x h(-1), critical velocity of 85.6 +/- 1.2% vVO2 max) who were used to long slow distance-training rather than interval training. They performed three interval-training (IT) sessions on a synthetic track (400 m) whilst breathing through the COSMED K4b2 portable metabolic analyser. These three IT sessions were: A) 90-80% vVO2 max (for hard bouts and active recovery periods, respectively), the amplitude= (90-80/85) 100=11%, B) 100-70% vVO2 max amplitude=35%, and C) 60 x 110% vVO2 max amplitude = 59%. Interval training A and B allowed the athlete to spend twice the time at VO2 max (14 min vs. 7 min) compared to interval training C. Moreover, at the end of interval training A and B the runners had a lower blood lactate than after the procedure C (9 vs. 11 mmol x l(-1)). In conclusion, short interval-training of 15s-15s at 90-80 and 100-70% of vVO2 max proved to be the most efficient in stimulating the oxygen consumption to its highest level in healthy middle-aged long-distance runners used to doing only long slow distance-training.