Week 5 - The 2 hour marathon

The marathon is a crazy race to me. I love running. I enjoy being out in nature and testing myself. I run stupid events, and this year my shortest race was 85km, which is 2 marathons back to back. So most people presume I would love running a marathon and deep down I would like to test myself over this iconic distance. Then I remember that it is 42km on a flat road and I stop thinking about it. I cannot run on roads. My head falls off and I get bored, then start looking for a dirt track.

On the other hand I have such respect for marathon runners. Watching them give everything to run at such fast speeds for 42km is amazing. The fact that the world record time for a marathon is 2:02:57 (Mulkeen & Minshull, 2014) is mind blowing to me. Now a project has been started to try and break the 2 hour record within 5 years (Ross, 2014). Five years to drop the marathon by just about 3 minutes sounds very optimistic to me. The report I read said they are planning on using all the latest sport science and sport medicine to give athletes the best chance as possible to achieve and break the 2 hour mark (Ross, 2014).

I believe the 2 hour marathon will happen, yet not in the next 5 years. I believe that there are just too many variables and as of now sport science is just too young. Ten years and I hope our knowledge bank will be so much bigger and will give us a better chance an smashing all sorts of marks and records. 

 Of course people compare the 2 hour marathon to the 4 minute mile. This, I feel, is not a great comparison. First of all it took 9 years to move that record from 4:01.4 to Bannister's 3:59.4 (Ross, 2014). I believe the things that can go wrong multiply and the margin for error decreases in events as the distance increases. Just think of the factors involved: road surface, pacers, weather, wind and distance. So many factors have to come together for 26 x 1 mile (26miles = 42km approx.). 

 To achieve such an incredible time as under 2 hours in the next 5 years would take the perfect storm of athletes, training, timing and injury prevention. I would personally like to see it happen and watch it unfold. I also think the even if this does not succeed, the amount we can learn from the process will make the whole process well worth pursuing.  

Mulkeen, J. & Minshull, P. (2014). Kimetto Breaks Marathon World Record in Berlin with 2:02:57.  Retrieved from http://www.iaaf.org/news/report/marathon-world-record-dennis-kimetto-berlin

Ross. (2014). The 2-hour Marathon and the 4-min mile. Retrieved from http://sportsscientists.com/2014/12/2-hour-marathon-4-min-mile/

Week 4 - Sport Science!

I love science, and I think sport science is a young area of science that does not get enough love. The innovations that have occurred in the last 60 years are mind blowing! In 1954 Roger Bannister ran the mile in under 4 minutes, a feat that at that time that was thought to be impossible. Now many athletes can run under 4 minutes for a mile. What does this have to do with anything?

Load management for me. 

As a coach and an athlete, running presents a lot of issues that need to be solved. The more data an athlete has the more the coach can manage the load placed on the athlete. Managing this load is such an interesting area - for me anyway. It is about bringing many factors together and making the most out of an athlete’s training time and recovery to produce the best possible level of fitness.

I could write ten blog posts on load management and only have covered the basics. Anyway, if the athlete gets overloaded at the wrong time injury can occur, and injury is the nightmare for every athlete and coach. So many factors within running contribute to possibility of injury. Load management and technique are major factors to be considered.  Managing both these factors is done normally by planning and checking data before and after training. Currently getting real time feedback is difficult, and mostly the coach has to be present in order to watch the athlete.

To help with this issue, step in sport science. A Spanish company, Kelme, have created “a prototype running shoe with an integrated device that improves training management and prevents injuries” (Science Daily, 2014). This device is in the shoe and relays information, in real time, to the athlete’s phone. This means when athlete is working on technique the coach no longer has to be physically present. Instead the shoe can tell the athlete when he or she has gone wrong and the athlete can fix the problem straight away.

The integrated device can also, it is hoped, help prevent injury by checking load and indicating if the gait pattern changes and it is advisable to stop. It could be like having your coach on your shoulder checking you are doing everything correctly according to the coach's instructions. This is just an awesome notion. Naturally time will tell if this works well or not, and it may or may not play out the way the Kelme company hopes. But to think we are at the point where sport scientists can assist everyone in sport and not just the elite is fantastic. What could be better than becoming a better, stronger athlete with less risk of injury!

Well done sport science! You Rock!

Science Daily. (2014). Device developed for running shoes that prevents injuries. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141030114851.htm

Week 3 – Summarising the debate.

Reading for this blog post has been interesting and scary. I am investigating immunisation, and there is a large and varied body of research studies supporting the efficacy of immunisation. To balance my research on this debate, I looked for negative studies in anticipation of finding reasoned studies presenting the opposing view. Firstly, I scoured the Massey University library - nothing but discussion on parents' fears of immunisation.  Next, the search moved to Google Scholar. Again the search provided no scientific literature.  Because of the necessity of finding information on the 'against' side of the debate on immunisation, I have chosen two websites to show the two prevailing lines of debate from the anti-immunisation group.

First website: http://educate-yourself.org/vcd/

Here Mr Adachi is convinced that vaccines are bad for us. He states: “The dangers of vaccinations to your child's long term health prospects and longevity itself far outweigh any potential benefits touted by the pharmaceutical industry for vaccines” (Adachi, 2013). He then claims that vaccines are being pushed by companies only to make money and these companies use misinformation to say they are safe. He does provide an impressive reference list, marred somewhat in that all link to other articles either written by himself or appearing on his own website. He has failed to provide outside links to any research papers, let alone papers reflecting rigorous research.

I think Mr Adachi has taken this position because immunisation being used by “Big Pharma” fits into his world view. He appears to espouse the belief that the Illuminati are in control and this is the true power behind what we see going on.

Second Website: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/05/12/vaccination-dangers.aspx

This web page has been written by a medical doctor which, for most people, lends more weight to what is being read. This article goes though many listed conditions and their side effects the author believes are related to relevant vaccines (Blaylock, 2004). The title of this article, 'Vaccination dangers can kill you or ruin your life' is, in itself, emotive and over-stated.    

Even though the article is well written, the author draws a long bow in that many conclusions are claimed for which there is no evidence whatsoever provided. Much of the evidence is presented in a way that the average reader could comprehend about half of it, and for the rest just has to take the author's word that it is true.

I do think that the author believes what he is writing. I am sure at the time of writing, 2004, there was not as much information on immunisation safety as is now readily available. It would be helpful if the author had provided some form of references so these could be followed to assess his claims better. 

I think both these websites reflect sincerely held beliefs in what the authors write. However, sincerity does not always make them correct. I am under no illusion that pharmacy companies are above reproach. Even bearing this in mind the amount of data and sheer volume of studies showing the safety of immunisation and the positive effect it has on long term health and the health system seems to conclusive. Many authors I read used fear as the prime factor to convince people against immunisation. People should be presented evidence to make decisions and not be convinced against immunisation by emotive stirring up of fear. After all my searching and reading a voluminous stack of papers and websites I believe immunisation to be a safe and effective way on improving people’s health and stopping preventable illness.

References:

Adachi, B. (2013). Educate yourself. Retrieved from http://educate-yourself.org/vcd/

Blaylock, R. L. (2004). Vaccination dangers can kill you or ruin your life. Retrieved from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/05/12/vaccination-dangers.aspx

For my Position paper I have chosen to do: Question 1. Action must be taken to improve New Zealand’s immunisation rates.

The improvement of immunisation rates is a topic that interests me greatly, because even though there is so much evidence showing how effective and safe immunisation has been and still the immunisation rates are lower than optimal. Why is this? Although the position paper asks about New Zealand rates of immunisation this is, in my opinion, a worldwide problem. What is really interesting that some of the trends I have seen from the New Zealand research can be seen across the world in general.

Baseline information on New Zealand rates of immunisation at varying ages has been extracted from the Ministry of Health website. The comparison of these statistics with levels of immunisation from the World Health Organisation (WHO) gave a more comprehensive view with which I was able to use to commence a research review in the university library.

There is no substitute for a painstaking literature search in the university library.  It does get easier and faster the more I use it.  I remember back to my first assignment search - what a nightmare! I had no idea what I was doing. Thankfully, the library provided instructions which were helpful, but there is no real substitute for just getting right into the library and using it. One of the problems is the ease with which I can get side-tracked by all sorts of interesting information and it is all too easy to find oneself absorbed in material quite unrelated to the original search!  I think the first requirement for literature review is self-discipline, followed closely by determination and stick-at-ability.

This time I picked my keywords and searched. When over a 1500 headings are listed it is time to start modifying the search. I first chose only peer-reviewed and still there were 1140 results. Now it was time to start playing with the dates. For New Zealand immunisation the library has peer-reviewed information from 1904 to 2014. Even limiting the search to just a six year period yielded 496 articles. This was going to be a long job.

When researching for an assignment I outline of the points I would like to cover before starting. I have learned the error of going into the library blind and hoping beyond hope that I find something useful. Going in blind to the library wastes too much time and energy. I also often go back to the library or the internet while I am writing to check that I have the support for my points and that I am heading in the right direction.

Searching for reference material is so very time consuming. In fact, way more than I ever thought. I always imagined it was the writing that takes the time, yet I was wrong. With research it is not just the time reading the papers that is so time-consuming. Searching the data bases and finding enough material to support your arguments can be difficult, yet worth it. So often I have learnt so much relevant information which sparks new lines of enquiry. For example, why are there different levels of concern regarding immunisation within different communities in New Zealand? Perhaps due to not having children or living in New Zealand for some time, I had forgotten how much disparity still exists between social and ethnic groups in New Zealand. I always hoped these differences were getting less, yet with my initial research this is not the case and action must be taken to avoid the risks of preventable illness within these group.  

Introduction for Communication in the sciences.

My name is Cameron Lamont and I am living in Germany. I am an extramural student at Massey University, studying Sport and Exercise. I would like to have studied more in the sport science programme, yet as an extramural this was not possible.

I am currently coaching Triathlon and the individual sports that are involved in triathlon. I am also a personal trainer. I am passionate about sport and ensuring athletes perform better, whether that is feeling better in their everyday lives, walking 5 km, or racing an Ironman or Ultra Marathon.

The decision for me to start studying again was a long process. I have always been an active person involved in sport. There were many changes in my life, and one of these was moving to Germany. Being here really started to show me that there is so much I can do in my chosen field. However, it became apparent that although I had, over the past twenty years, accumulated the practical knowledge and experience to work in the sports field, I didn't have the qualifications to back that knowledge up. At this point I put my time and energy to gain the qualifications to do the work I wanted. Part of this process was wanting to achieve a degree in Sport Science. This was not possible with distance learning which almost brought study to a halt. Discovering the Sport and Exercise programme opened the way to studying some sport science within that degree. Sport and Exercise has a strong focus on coaching and developing athletes which is what I am passionate about.

My ambition is to work my way to a place where I can influence as many athletes as possible in positive ways, seeing them as more than just muscles and results and helping them become better and more rounded people. Just where this will ultimately be I am still working on. I currently work as a coach and personal trainer for individual athletes as well as working with two triathlon clubs in Germany. I am currently waiting for my working visa for Switzerland to be finalised as I have been offered the head coaching position for a large Swiss triathlon club and team. I believe that my future lies in this direction.

My reason for taking this course is clear to me. I believe that the message of science is not working as well as it should, and misinformation abounds. I am a sceptic and am amazed about the speed with which misinformation and pseudo-science is spread compared with how slowly scientific information is spread. I am in awe of the work of people like Steve Novella from the Skeptics Guide to the Universe and Mark Crislip from Society for Science-based Medicine, who I believe are fantastic science communicators. I would like to learn to add my voice to theirs in my field of expertise, Sport. It is important to me to communicate knowledge of what science in sport really is, the bias endemic in science and advertising emanating from companies who produce sports products, and how that can affect the results. I believe the true results of sound, replicable science need to be seen and understood.

I believe I am developing a deeper understanding of the science behind sport, and also the ability to find, read and understand current sport science. I am able to look though the dubious claims of products and find the truth or lack of it.

My greatest weakness has been my literary skills. I should have worked on my writing ability a lot earlier in my life rather than when I returned to university. Added to this that I now work mainly in German and I must also work on my quality of spoken and written German. Working on these language factors will make me a better and more effective communicator in the sciences.

Regards,

Cameron.