Rebuttal from Peter D. Wagner.
Rebuttal from Peter D. Wagner.
复制标题
彼得·D·瓦格纳的反驳。
DOI：
10.1113/jp270742
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Wagner,PeterD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wagner,PeterD
Lundby & Montero’s claim that diffusion limitation does not affect VO2max (Lundby & Montero, 2015) is based essentially on two papers from the group where Lundby trained, papers they accept uncritically (Calbet et al. 2003, 2009), and the dismissal of two papers (Hogan et al. 1991; Richardson et al. 1998), which they assert are not to be believed because they contain false positive outcomes–a claim with which we disagree.They ignore Fig. 4F in Calbet et al.(2003) where, comparing normoxia (N) to chronic hypoxia (CH), leg VO2peak is in fact directly proportional to mean leg capillary PO2, precisely as predicted for diffusion limitation. Those same data show higher VO2peak in normoxia than CH despite statistically identical arterial O2 concentrations (higher [Hb] in CH compensating for hypoxaemia), thereby dissociating O2 content from VO2. Thus, this paper actually supports the importance of diffusion limitation. Lundby & Montero reasonably question metabolism/perfusion heterogeneity rather than diffusion limitation as constraining extraction, but recent work (Vogiatzis et al. 2015) shows minimal heterogeneity, which therefore is highly unlikely to be the explanation.
