"2LAP" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Andy Coggan wrote:
> > Actually, the exact opposite is true: most studies in the world of sports and exercise science
> > are underpowered to detect differences (in performance) that are relevant to athletes. To
> > state it another way:
if
> > differences in performance of the magnitude that mean medaling vs. not medaling at, say, the
> > Olympics were what you used to power your study, you'd likely use far more subjects than
> > typically used (if you could afford to, that is). Andy Coggan
>
>
> I'm not so sure; most studies have small numbers due to the magnitude of the changes that occur
> during studies
You need to read Will Hopkins treatise on the subject. As he points out, the vast majority of
studies are underpowered to detect changes in performance of the magnitude that is important in
high-level competition (where differences of 0.5% or less are often critical). (Although they may be
adequately powered to detect differences in the primary outcome variable, which is rarely
performance.)
> and these studies often have little relevance to athletes or athletes that are able to 'medal at
> olympics'.
If by that you mean that performance is rarely the primary outcome variable, then I'd probably agree
with you. If, OTOH, you mean that studies need to be done on elite or near-elite athletes to have
external validity, I'd disagree, and rather vehemently at that. There is nothing *qualitatively*
unique individuals who make it to the top of the sport, i.e., they are still human beings, and what
is learned from studying the physiology of "lesser specimens" is just as valid.
> I would argue that 'the sports world' gets very little 'value for time/money' from research that
> is aimed at sports performance (i.e. lots of papers/money/time with very little impact on
> performance).
As the saying goes, you get what you pay for, i.e., there is little or no funding for the types of
research that you seem to have in mind. If there were, there'd be a lot more bright exercise
scientists studying sports performance, rather than chasing NIH dollars by studying the
health-related benefits of exercise.
Andy Coggan