(Update – Jan 22nd, 2016! I’ve now published my in-depth review of the Gen2 unit. So you’ll want to swing over to that post for all my thoughts after months of real-world usage. Enjoy!)
Last week while at Interbike I got the opportunity to spend an evening with the crew from BSX. They’re an upstart sports technology company that recently completed a hugely successful Kickstarter campaign for their BSX Insight device which allows you to complete lactate threshold testing on your own, at any time, without the usual fees or typical blood-driven procedure.
They offered to run me through two tests concurrently. They’d be simultaneously completing a traditional lactate threshold test with all the drawing of blood and bells and whistles, while at the same time attaching a prototype BSX device to my calf to gather data. They’d then formulate the results at the same time and show me the differences (if any).
Pre-test:
When I sit back and look at the test evening, one could see how if described appropriate it sounded pretty sketchy. I was told to go to a dark and basically desolate facility on the outskirts of town where no facility staff members would be present.
It was then communicated to me that if I died it’d be totally my fault. Further, injury was also basically my fault. In short, everything is my fault (I’m used to that, I hear that a lot).
And finally, there would be sharp knife-like objects jabbed into my body causing squirting blood loss every 2-3 minutes. I also had to run for my life during the whole process. Plenty pleasant, right?
All under the mantra of ‘What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas’…or something like that.
Thankfully, for better or worse none of the above will be required for end consumers of the BSX device. As avoiding such fun is ultimately the goal of the product, to be able to accurately assess your current lactate threshold with merely an optical sensor in a calf compression sleeve.
The Test:
The lactate threshold test is in many ways like a VO2Max test, for those who are familiar with that circus. Essentially you start off easy and then run (or ride) on a stationary device until the effort is fairly hard. The small difference from an effort standpoint is that a VO2Max is aimed to get you to the point where you’re basically about to fall off the treadmill. Whereas the lactate threshold test makes it a touch bit easier in that it’s at the point where it’s quite hard, but not ‘I want to die hard’. Both tests are typically done in a professional setting with administrators that hopefully are versed in them.
(As a side note: Having done a few such tests elsewhere, I find the quality of test administrators varies significantly from ‘great’ to ‘completely sucky’. In general, I’d avoid most gyms, since they typically don’t do them well and thus will give inaccurate results. Instead, focus on endurance coaches and/or specialty testing centers. In the case of the BSX guys, they’ve done about 400 or so tests as part of their product development/research thus far.)
On the flip side, a VO2Max test doesn’t require blood loss, whereas a standard lactate threshold test does. This means that in order to gather the comparison data they must take a drop of blood about 2-3 minutes.
This is done while running on a treadmill without stopping. Which, brings us to the test protocol. The test works by starting off from a super-easy pace, and then gradually escalating to a faster and faster pace until a ‘very hard’ effort. Each step initially lasts two minutes during the super-easy phases, and then increases to three minutes. Those three minutes allow the blood to catch-up to your exertion level.
They asked me up front what I thought would be my 10K pace, which I went with about a 6:00-6:05/mile pace (3:47/KM). From there they populated a table of paces for all of the treadmill pace shifts.
Then it was onto an initial baseline blood sample.
At the same time, they affixed two BSX monitors to me, one for each leg. In reality you only need one unit – but this allowed them to see how things varied and simply collect more data for their validation testing.
The monitors are small pods about 2/3rds the size of a business card. Below is one in its charging station. There are a few different versions of the pods (all the same hardware though) depending on if you’re a runner, a cyclist or a multisport athlete. They are $299US for the single-sport running edition, $369US for the cycling and or $419US for the multisport edition.
They have an optical sensor on the back of them, just like an optical heart rate sensor you’ll find these days.
They are placed in custom made compression sleeves that have holes allowing the sensor to measure readings while also keeping the sensor area dark (important for all optical sensors on the market). Further, it keeps it firmly in place.
After jumping on the treadmill they started an array of timers spread across laptops, tablets…and clipboards. Each of these would be recording different data that would then be pulled into BSX’s determination of my threshold. In the final version, all of this will simply happen automatically within a phone app combined with a web service.
At the first pace shift I was running at a pretty easy pace for me (8:34/mile – 5:19/KM), which was a great opportunity to get used to giving blood while actively running on a treadmill. The two of them would hold my arm/wrist down on the treadmill arm and then pricking my finger with a needle to get a droplet of blood for the sensor to read.
This would be repeated each pace shift change. Again, I want to point out that the blood portion here is purely for scientific comparison to their actual device they’ll be selling. As a consumer of the BSX Insight device there’s no blood involved (unless you fall off your bike or treadmill into a sharp object).
At the same time as the pace shifts they’d ask me what I thought the pace felt like from a perceived effort standpoint, using this little chart:
Here’s a graph of my heart rate as recorded by a traditional heart rate strap during the test:
As you can see, it was generally quite steadily increasing over the course of the test – no major bumps. Note that all of the pace shifts are pre-determined from the outset. So the exact length of the test might vary, and, the length of the test is a bit longer than a standard VO2Max test, which is typically about half this time.
In addition to heart rate data, their system also records pace. For this test that was with a standard ANT+ footpod, but they’ll be including an accelerometer based footpod variant within the BSX device itself. The BSX device will also take your heart rate data from an ANT+ heart rate strap, ANT+ power meter, or ANT+ footpod – and ‘bridge’ it to your phone, sorta like some of the other ANT+ to Bluetooth Smart bridges.
Speaking of the phone app – all of this data collection would normally be done by your own phone. One that you would control, or perhaps one that a willing friend might control.
This particular iPhone of theirs apparently lost a battle with the last test participant after getting pricked for blood just one too many times.
The overall goal here is identifying a specific bump in your lactate levels. Basically, the point where you dramatically shift in lactate levels. In my case that was being gathered by both blood sample as well as the BSX test. Here’s the blood test:
The ‘end’ of the test was the point in which I felt like I was well into the ‘very hard’ segment. For me, on this particular treadmill that was at a 5:21/mile pace (3:20/KM). You can see the massive jump at that point compared to the one previous to it at 5:42/mile (3:32/KM).
Once they saw this spike, the test was effectively over and I was free to begin drinking alcohol and caffeine again and enjoying all Vegas has to offer.
The Post-Test Data:
Next comes time to process the results. Now what happened the other night with the data is slightly different than what will happen when the product hits availability in December. It differs in that for me the guys sat down with a command center worthy array of computers to calculate the results using algorithms that were already pre-programmed. Whereas down the road the mobile phone app will simply send the data to an online service that automatically computes the results and spits it back to the end user in a few seconds.
The reason for the difference is simply that that online platform is currently being developed, thus for that evening it was more a human driven in process. So with that comes the obvious caveat that there isn’t a way I can guarantee they didn’t tweak the algorithms or results mid-stream for me. Though, I suspect that’d be a relatively product-limiting move longer term.
First, to begin let’s start with the blood side of things. In this case, they’re using the same standard as everyone else for determining your lactate threshold level, which is to look for two 1mmol increases over subsequent stages. In my case, that happens at the 5:42/mile pace (3:32/KM), where I hit about 4mmol.
Here’s the same graph plotted against heart rate instead:
Below is the same plotted against my perceived effort values. These were the numbers that you saw earlier assigned to reference points like ‘Hard’ and ‘Very Hard’. Typically, athletes that understand their limits fairly well will find their lactate threshold at about the ‘Very Hard’ level. This is different than someone who might not be as well trained and doesn’t understand perceived effort quite as well yet.
In my case, those happened to line up exactly perfectly:
Now, let’s move onto the data from the BSX device. This is the part that matters, since the above pieces were based on the blood lactate threshold test (that’s the one you can do today sans-device).
First is the raw data from the BSX sensor. They’ve highlighted the inflection point in the graph from the software, which corresponds spot-on with what the blood lactate test shows. In this case you can see that it’s directly after this point that things start to drop very quickly.
Next, in this three part graph we’ll see some of the backend processing of what BSX is doing. In the final service you won’t see any of the three below (or, the one directly above).
This first graph show probability of where the lactate threshold will be based on pace.
The next one is the probability of lactate threshold from the optical determination using the internal sensor within the BSX Insight:
Finally, you see the where the optical sensor calculated lactate threshold (green lines) combined with where the blood test calculated it (black line). The reason for the delay on the blood side is simply that the blood test does it every three minutes, whereas the optical sensor is doing it a few thousands times per minute.
What’s interesting here is the BSX guys noted that because of the real-time nature of the optical sensor they were actually able to pickup the threshold level quicker than at the end of that three-minute stage, since it wouldn’t have been until the next time I drew blood that it would be noticeable.
Overall I don’t have any major issues with the data collection process or the math behind it. The one issue I raised during the test was that I felt the treadmill was potentially inaccurate in terms of speed. Which would in turn give you inaccurate pacing data. This was based on me running that pace very often during training and knowing my perceived effort for it.
In talking with my coach about the results afterwards, he brought up a good point however. He noted that because the treadmill was set at 0% incline it would have indeed felt a fair bit easier than outside (on average it’s estimated to be 15 seconds/mile faster at that pace). That’s definitely true, and a key reason why most coaches will prescribe treadmill workouts at 1% incline instead.
As a result of that, my results would have been slightly skewed. If you account for that bias however, the results are near spot on where I would estimate I could maintain those paces for the expected 45-55 minute time period normally defined for a lactate threshold test.
What to do with the data:
Of course, having a number is somewhat meaningless unless you know what to do with it. And that’s where the BSX story diverges a bit depending on your profile.
The historical idea behind having a lactate threshold identified is that you can give that data to a coach who can better prescribe training and racing strategies for you. Taking that concept further, the thinking behind BSX as a device is that you can make it easier to test on a repeatable cycle. Meaning that the basis of their argument is that because most athletes aren’t getting blood lactate threshold tests done every 4-6 weeks they aren’t accounting for that athletic improvement. Of course, ‘most’ doesn’t include the lucky ducks at Olympic training centers and such who might get it quite often.
Thus rather than having to shell out $200 each month for a lactate threshold test and dealing with the bloody mess, you’d simply do it in the comfort of your own home/gym on-demand. They pointed out though that their idea isn’t however to train/race with it every day, rather more on a regular scheduled basis.
No mater how often you do the test, the center of that data story will ultimately be BSXInsight.com and TrainBSX.com, which are their web platforms that all of the data is funneled to.
Using that as a starting point the company essentially divides up solutions into three buckets:
Coached Athletes: For these folks (such as me) they provide the output data so coaches can take the data immediately and draw whatever conclusions they’d like from it. At the same time, they’re also offering an API so that 3rd party coaching platforms/sites can automatically pull data in. For example, should Training Peaks choose to do so they could automatically pull any new test results instantly, sorta like how Garmin files now instantly show up in Training Peaks from your device via Auto Sync. The difference between BSXInsight.com and TrainBSX.com is that the TrainBSX.com piece is more their coaching platform, whereas the other side is more of a data storage location.
Geeky Non-Coached Athletes: For this category the data is available on BSXInsight.com as both the lactate threshold as well as the generated training zones. The lactate threshold data would be based on the sport they tested in (i.e. running for the running test), while the training zones generated would be based on the approach and goals of the athletes. The idea here is that these are likely geeky/science-focused athletes that understand the science/theory behind what BSX is doing and just needs the numbers to develop their own training plans.
Athletes that want clear guidance: In this category you’re still getting all the data as with the geeky folks, except that the data is formulated into clear plans and guidance from a few well known coaches for different distances. They’ll be starting off plans for 10K, Half Marathon and Full Marathon races. But they noted the goal here isn’t really to have this be a premium training plan platform like some services. Rather, they want to jumpstart people into a training plan with the hope that as they grow addicted to structure they’ll move onwards to a more personalized coach (wherever that may be).
I think this three pronged approach makes sense and I’m optimistic we’ll see 3rd party companies (i.e. Training Peaks, Sport Tracks and the like) take advantage of this. Given the vast majority of existing Kickstarter backers are likely subscribers of one of those platforms – it seems like an easy decision process. Especially since the Kickstarter sales numbers are just the tip of overall BSX product sales (due to added retailers/distributors/etc since Kickstarter ended).
Final Thoughts
Overall for where they are in their development process things look quite good. They’re at the point of pressing the ‘go’ button on manufacturing (they were using Interbike to gauge final retail/store demand ahead of production runs). Based on those numbers coming they’ll be able to figure out how big an initial manufacturing allotment to make with (including the Kickstarter folks of course). From there the plan has things hitting in December for shipping.
I think from a device standpoint they’re solid. The cloud platform/service piece was a little harder for me to understand in terms of where they sit exactly development completion-wise since they processed everything manually in my case. But three months in a software world is a long ways away (three months in hardware manufacturing is not). Further, the algorithms are already developed locally and just need to be ported, which means it’s not a case of fresh code and scientific development as it is more migration of code platforms.
Thus I’m looking forward to seeing the unit hit shelves and seeing how coaches and athletes utilize it in training and racing.
(Side note: Some/many of you have asked about Moxy and their muscle oxygen sensor, I’ll be doing a similar testing session with them next week at the ANT+ Symposium. For some reason I apparently enjoy causing my body pain….)
—
With that, thanks for reading! If you’re looking to burn a bit of time, here’s all my Interbike 2014 posts packed full of sports technology items.
—
Update: You can now order the BSX Lactate Threshold sensor via Clever Training. In doing so you help support the site, but also save yourself 10% and get free US shipping using coupon code DCR10BTF (Note: This code is only valid on CleverTraining.com)! The three version are:
International shipments of the BSX units are $29US for standard delivery, or $39US for express delivery. Thanks again for your support via Clever Training!
Can you explain the difference between the versions? ie – the single sport, cycling and multi-sport? Does the device differ, or is it the analytics? Thanks
This would probably be cool for a team, or a coach with multiple athletes to use. It seems a bit pricy for one person to buy and then to use maybe 2 or 3 times a year. Amirite?
To a degree. Their MSRP prices are slightly higher than they initially envisioned. I think at the initially planned prices it might have been more per-athlete, whereas I think with this it might fit better between 2-3 people. I think that unless the coach/athlete are around each other a lot, the logistics in monthly trade-offs with a lot of athletes might become cumbersome such that it inhibits the tests.
Whereas if it was me and 2-3 friends in the neighborhood, it’d make more sense.
Howdy. We have the device set up as a one user device. It links to our server and keeps a record of your LT tests along with other data collected. You could use it with more than one person but it will skew the data collected. We felt that the device is like your training watch. Very rarely do you share your watch or heart rate monitor.
Thank you Ray – super interesting post. Maybe one day we could look down at our Garmin (or Apple Watch) and see %lactate threshold from this device rather than power or heart rate estimates.
Can/would BSX add such a metric to training devices via ANT+ profile?
Bryan answered a bit below, but there is some discussion on how one could potentially use the already existing muscle oxygen ANT+ profile for this data.
I’m not a BSX employee but I am intimately familiar with the technical aspects of the design. What you describe is technically possibly from a perspective of “could it in theory send the data to a ANT+ or even BLE display / logger”.
There is more to it than technical feasibility. Transmitting data burns power. Not a lot, but a non-zero amount. So you would give up X minutes of run time for real time data. For real time transmission, there would have to be some agreed to standard of data interchange, an Ant+ “profile”. Somebody has to write the profile, somebody has to come up with testing standards, some manufacturer has to agree to make a watch / App that captures and displays that data.
So in short, I would bet BSX eventually goes down this path, no reason not to long term. But short term they are focusing a LOT of time, money, blood, sweat, and tears to make the core functionality robust.
Again, I have no authority to speak for the company like Bryan or Dustin but I would consider that functionality a probability.
It may be BSX’s priority, but it’s rarely Garmin’s priority to add integration to non-standard profiles that aren’t in their devices. Hence why companies such as Moxy and others have to leverage the speed/cadence/HR profiles to get the data into the unit.
Thanks for making the point about treadmills needing to be set around 1-1.5% for a more similar pace to running outside on a hard, even surface.
It sounds like there may be an accelerometer (eventually) used in the unit for cadence purposes. It’s pretty rare to see accelerometers that aren’t measuring motion in all three dimensions anymore…couldn’t that same piece of hardware be used for “pace” as well if the software was in place? It seems to me that treadmill testing paces (not that this unit is limited to indoor testing) and outdoor utilization could be bridged by measuring force(s) associated with running and translating them to pace. That could possibly start with a calibration of a set distance (track?) and then the force(s) during the test could be translated into “actual” running pace to be used outside. Any chance that was discussed?? I suppose that same idea could be used with a Garmin Running Dynamics or similar system as well…
After years of testing in the ex phys world, I’m not terribly trusting in the accuracy of speeds seen in commercial treadmills.
Bryan Kraham with BSX Athletics here. The difference in versions is two fold, biology and technology. Your cycling version pairs with more peripherals like power meters. The multi-sport provides you with both your running and cycling LT’s.
Example: the top of my zone 2 for running is 156 BPM and for Cycling it is 151
Tosin: This is a bench marking tool that you would use every 6 weeks or so as you become more fit (or less fit) to adjust your training zones and intensities.
Husain: That is our goal and we are working with those types of companies to provide that data on your wrist.
Does it also generate data on the ‘aerobic’ treshold? In the case of rays test, there are clearly 2 breaks in the series, no? The first one being aroun 7.00min/mile.
You can pre-order at http://www.bsxinsight.com and use code NOPRICKS14 for a DC Rainmaker special of $50 USD off.
For your other comment, We are actively working on the identification of LT1 and we clearly recognize this is a very important event as well. For the test with Ray, we used our patented algorithm to identify the 1mMol jump in two back to back stages.
On the kickstarter campaign, you say “Through paired communication with your sports watch it lets you know, in real-time, whether to speed up, slow down, or even rest. BSX Insight is best used both during training as well as on race day to help you finish your perfect race. With BSX Insight you are sure to get the most out of every mile, every time.”
Are you saying this is not the case anymore? This should be only used as a diagnostic device, not a training / racing device to keep you at your threshold?
I’m not quite following the differences between the versions.
If you have the Cycling version, do you HAVE to pair it with an ANT+ power meter? i.e. you can’t use it with a Computrainer ANT+ HR monitor? Or can you use it on a Computrainer but you just won’t get your data with respect to power, only HR?
If you used the running version while cycling, wouldn’t it still work with HR? Or are you saying the muscle lactic acid is measured differently for running compared to cycling?
The accelerometer is already in the device and that is where we are headed with the device. The goal was to deliver to our kickstarter backers on time with a metric that is not readily available (or not at all available non-invasively).
Thanks for the reply. I used to test devices that estimated physical activity and I still think we’re only scratching the surface of what’s capable (and useful) with them. Definitely looking forward to seeing where this product goes. Good luck!
Thanks heaps for the words of encouragement. We are biased but we think this is a revolutionary piece of tech much like the heart rate monitor was 35 years ago.
@Tosy
A bit pricy yes. But for people like me that don’t have easily access to this kind of test because I am living in a small town, it will be a nice alternative to the cost of a train ticket + analyses. Especially if a treadmill is not obligatory, and if the protocol can be adapted for track for example.
Really impatient to see more coming about analyses and workouts, and also very disappointed to have missed the Kickstarter campaign.
in the same line, a soluition to analyse your foot movements during a run: link to kickstarter.com
Just a cultural comment, as/when you come to market this in other english-speaking countries: Prick is equivalent to “dick” in colloquial english in, e.g., the British Isles and I think is also understood that way in the Antipodes.
Are the 10% discounted prices already shown? Can the two offers be combined-meaning $50 off for the DCrainmaker code, off of the 10% reduced intro price? I may be interested in buying one for cycling.
My wife is a cyclist also: can she also use the device or is it one device per person?
Thanks-it looks like an excellent product! Keep up the good work!
I have noticed in other articles about BSX and their product that they are working to get data fields available for ANT+ devices.
Would that be something to ask/investigate on the ANT+ Symposium?
The BSX guys are dues paying ANT+ members but I don’t think they are making this year’s symposium. But please feel free to mention your interest. The more buzz BSX can get the better and I guarantee they will listen to feature requests and consider any ideas.
What type of data could the device transmit over ant? Sounds like it doesn’t just broadcast the current lactate level to whatever unit is running the test
It could transmit anything over Ant. Insight is limited only by processor horsepower, battery life, and radio bandwidth. The device has channels to both send and receive multiple ANT streams. The balancing act of battery life, system bandwidth, and algorithm complexity is the real engineering challenge. In theory the sensors in the system could in theory capture HR and gait data so in theory it could replace your foot pod and HRM. But the BSX guys are wisely focusing on their value add of Lactate first. There are plenty of affordable devices on the market to do gait analysis and HR.
It is a fascinating product being developed by real enthusiasts and experts in the field. It is a real challenge to get everything right but these guys are working hard to deliver.
Since this is live data it seems like this could be used for more than just checking your LT. Maybe as a replacement for a power meter or as better feedback when running. With steady feedback could you just dial in a % of LT to pace a race? I guess they did say you have to send the data to a website right now but in the future??
This device is also planning to support reporting muscle oxygen level which means in theory it can do everything the moxy can do, right? (If you think this is too expensive the moxy is 1200)
This is Roger from Moxy. When it comes to measuring the muscle oxygen parameters, there appear to be some significant differences between the optical configurations of BSX and Moxy. The “What Moxy Measures” section of the following document describes the 2 parameters (SmO2 and THb) that Moxy produces in detail. Moxy measures these 2 parameters under a wide range of conditions so it can be used for any sport while the athlete actually performs their sport. Cycling, running, hockey, skiing, motocross, rugby, horse racing and many more types of athletes have all been measured with Moxy. It’s not clear to me that the optical configuration that I’ve seen on the Insight is capable of producing similar muscle oxygenation measurements.
On the price side, it’s important to note that Moxy can be used every day, in any sport, on any accessible muscle, with as many athletes as you want and there are no subscription fees. It’s just a little bit different pricing model.
Guess I had higher hopes for bsx (I’m a kickstart backer) and hoped their SmO2 claim meant it could do what moxy could. I do love the stuff moxy does but not serious enough of an athlete to spend that much. Sorry
Hi this is a very interesting device. I have a few questions:
– Does it work for swimming (just recording) ?
– Does it support profiles (to share it with other people) ?
– Does it transmit ant+ data like HR or pace (to use it as a replacement of my HR strap / foot pod)?
– Does it work with no smartphone (just record for later review) ?
Another question:
Does it support Bluetooth HRM and power meter? Maybe I missed this point, or it’s obvious that yes, but the website site mentionned only ant+ HRM and power meter pairing.
Swimming – the device is 100% water proof and we are in the pre-testing phase for a swim application and custom sleeve to wear on your arm.
support profile – are you asking if you can show people your data? It will be completely agnostic and you can upload to your trainBSX / Trainingpeaks / coachya etc accounts or simply share your information on bsxinsight.com.
ANT+ for HR and pace – the quick answer, this was our original intent. The device does “see” your HR and the device does contain an accelerometer so we will be using that for pace and distance. Our rev2 device will be something more of an every day wearable if you want to ditch the other peripherals.
no smartphone – yes, the data is stored on the device and in the cloud for you to view on your free bsxinsight.com account.
If the item will be ready for Christmas, I suggest to consider the option to provide a second compression sleeve (without pocket, but with the brand name) as a gift. Not for the chimney and Santa Claus (too many holes), but we will appear less “grotesque” than wearing only one, although compression sleeves already make laugh people ;)
I was under the impression it will come with 2 sleeves. Page 12 of the BSX Insight brochure (What’s In The Box) lists the content as follows:
-BSXInsight
-docking station w/ micro USB cable
-2x compression calf sleeves
You are developing a swimming application. Am I to understand that it will be an extension of the device that will be out in december? Ie, the swimming functionality can be added to that package later? Or will it require to repurchase the entire bundle, and hence, it would be beneficial for some athletes to wait?
Any chance you could clarify what the device will do at release and what you plan to add to it in future firmware updates? I understand cutting certain features like HR and cadence to be able to ship on time but they way you’ve worded it here and on kickstarter make it hard to tell what is fully cut and will never come and what you plan to add to the firmware down the line (see the Polar tri watch and how it was released with limited functionality but firmware updates have made it much more functional)
Just to clarify, the device cannot receive BLE heart rate data or BLE power meter data, only ANT+. A future version might consider this but this is currently a hardware limitation.
I need to clarify:
one of the engineers caught this and here is the proper comment.
Just to clarify, the device cannot receive BLE heart rate data or BLE power meter data, only ANT+. The BLE communicates to your smart phone APP to control the device. A future version might consider this but this is currently a hardware limitation.
Totally agree blondin. Since compression calve sleeves are so popular now, BSXInsight should make a compression sleeve pair version where one is simply a compression sleeve and the other has a pocket for device as well as being a more full-length compression sleeve.
On another note, what is actual name of company? BSX? BSX is Boston Scientific’s code on the NYSE.
It looks like using heart rate to determine inflection point is just as accurate in the running version. However I would expect that for cycling, heart rate would be quite delayed and thus not very useable. So, I think the cycling version is where this device really demonstrates its usefulness. For running, you might as well do this test with heart rate. Comments?
Given 1 test for 1 discipline costs 100 euro at the testing center, excluding obliged medical exam beforehand, i’d say that the price is quite reasonable.
Everyday –
I will try to answer for Ray since he is a very busy man.
To answer your question:
Yes, the BSXinsight device uses NIRS to measure the O2 amongst other analytes in the muscle tissue to infer the LT. We use a patent pending algorithm to analyse changes in concentration in the analytes in order to predict the accumulation of lactate in the muscle, which precedes a systemic rise in lactate.
Bryan,
Question.
What happens, when as you point out the accumulation in the muscle of lactate is done but it may never show up in the systemic situation at your finger.
. So the chnage in SmO2 or Hb or O2Hb or TSI % can be rapidly in the calf muscle, but we never may show up as lactate reaction in the finger due to the lactate dynamic and its property to do more than just accumulate. ?( Key words, buffer, shuttle of energy, MCT 1, MCT 4 +++)
I like the look of this.
There is no reason why it can’t be used on the track, taking away if discrepancy of Treadmill pace, as long as the phone is being carried by the testee?
Bryan, could you confirm what the sizes mean in your sizing chart. I assume it’s calf circumference, but just would like to be completely sure to avoid any possible unpleasant mistakes in ordering. Relaxed or flexed, or does it make any difference? If you’re on the borderline between two sizes (e.g., I measured 35 cm), what’s your recommendation? Thanks.
You are right, it is calf circumference. When we do our measurements, we do relaxed. My recommendation is to go with the medium because I do not foresee your calf getting smaller, more than likely growing a bit.
The plateaus of the graph you mentioned have little to do with Ray’s actual test. All they were meant to do is represent the final stages of his workout with the right most plateau being his final stage, etc.
The heights of each stage were merely included for educational / curiosity purposes. Nothing more, sorry if this was confusing. The varying heights represent the likelihood of that stage being LT based on historical data of all the athletes we’ve tested. Ie most hit in the third to last stage. As you can tell, this was not where Ray hit his LT based on the results of his test.
running / 1 sleeve-device / also captures hr+pace data
cycling / 1 sleeve-device / also captures hr+power data
multisport / 1 sleeve-device / also captures hr+pace+power data
So, neither of those links disputes that sodium bicarbonate has an effect. One of those links confirms that sodium bicarbonate buffering is known to have an ergogenic effect. The other link is refuting that muscle processes are not the source of acidosis.
Presumably you’re just picking up the poster on the use of “lactic acid”, rather than disputing that sodium bicarb buffering is known to have an effect?
Wouter and everyone else, Apologies for the late responses. We are overwhelmed with the response and we can’t thank you enough.
Our testing protocol has been 20 watt increases every 3:00 until you can no longer sustain a full 3:00 stage.
We start with a very base wattage of 60-80 watts to get a base line reading. If the athlete knows their FTP we start 6-7 stages below FTP. If they do not know their FTP we will start the athlete at 100 watts and increase by 20 every 3:00.
The BSXinsight device found Ray’s LT in the same stage as the blood LT test. If you look at the graphs he supplied, you can see where the BSXinsight found LT earlier in that 3:00 stage due to the fact that the BSXinsight device samples thousands of times a minute rather than one sample every three minutes.
Interesting technology. The BSX Insight mainly seems to be marketed as a device that you use every couple of weeks to measure your lactate threshold. Would you also be able to use it on a daily basis to measure fatigue during exercise? I find that heart rate is a good measure of effort, but not a very good measure of longer-term fatigue, so it doesn’t really tell me whether I am over- or undertraining. It would be great if lactate levels could tell you how hard you should train each day so that you get the maximum out of your training.
Roger-
The BSXinsight in its current form is a bench marking tool just like the traditional blood based LT test that you would go to your sports lab for. You would use the device every 6 weeks or so to check your progress, see where you now are hitting LT and adjusting your training zones accordingly.
Bryan, while I do understand that it is a benchmarking tool and you would have to use it every 6 weeks to test, could you elaborate whether the BSXinsight is capable of being used on a ‘several times a week’ basis ?
Is a cellphone a requirement to transfer the data to the webservice? Or is there another option (via a cable of sorts). And if it requires a cellphone, what Android version do you need to run the application?
David –
You can do it two ways, through the phone and through the charging dock. The smartphone is also used to pair to the BSXinsight, connect your peripherals to the BSXinsight and to start and stop the test. The data is stored both on the device itself as well as in the cloud, then processed. As previously mentioned, the data can be downloaded via the charging dock to BSXinsight.com
Dear Bryan, I bought a BSXInsight. Is there a possibility to integrate the BSXdata with the .fit file of my ride registered through my Garmin (510) device (.fit file) ? How and where does it all ‘melt together’ ?
This look like a great product! If it’s possible to share one with my 2 running mates I’ll definitely get one; if not I probably rather won’t. As somebody wrote before, it seems a tad pricy for something you use 3-4 times a year. Not saying it’s over-priced – I appreciate the development costs of a novel product like this might have been high – but I can’t see this adding enough to my training to end up on the right value for money side.
It’ll return this weekend. The last few weeks have been just so swamped with Eurobike/Interbike that I just didn’t have any time left to get that out too.
I think I’m confused about what this device does and how its meant to be used. Going by Ray’s review it seems like the device is just meant to be used to make it much easier to measure lactate threshold and this device will then give you your heart rate zones to train in to be programmed into the decive(s) you train with. Nothing wrong with that in that those tests really aren’t cheap or easy to do on your own and sounds like this will make them much easier to do and after paying for the device basically free, making continual testing easier. So then there would be no point in wearing the device during a “normal” exercise session. Is that correct? Or is this device used for more then just threshold testing?
Team edition that was on kickstarter, this implied that the device couldn’t really be shared with others without getting the team edition. (don’t see it on your current web site though) Does that mean you and a friend can’t share a device to do threshold testing like what TomTom above wants to do?
You are correct, this is a bench marking tool. We will admit we were a little aggressive when it came to KS deliverable items. To make the BSXinsight an every day wearable, that would have required much more in the way of testing causing a long delay in delivery. We made the decision to deliver a pedestal product, on time, that delivers a gold standard metric non-invasively for the first time ever. You are right, it is exactly like going to the lab multiple times and paying them $200 or so to get your fingers or ears pricked.
As for sharing. We also had the intent of offering a multi user edition, but with only 2 backers on KS, we decided to focus on delivering the Running, Cycling and Multi-sport versions and making them better. It is very difficult for you to share your device with others and not recommended as the data will be skewed from user to user.
Bryan,
Maybe I am missing something but I don’t understand why a single device can’t be used to test multiple people? Does the device learn and store parameters to better interpret future testing for only one user?
I don’t understand why the device is not user agnostic as it is only interpreting a single set of test data.
-Yancey
As for sharing. We also had the intent of offering a multi user edition, but with only 2 backers on KS, we decided to focus on delivering the Running, Cycling and Multi-sport versions and making them better. It is very difficult for you to share your device with others and not recommended as the data will be skewed from user to user.
That makes no sense. What if one user is using it and stops training for 6 months and then uses it again? If it is somehow basing things off previous sessions then it will be just as skewed. I would expect each test to be standalone.
Is there any possibility to upgrade the device feature in the future? For example, first purchase the run edition and later upgrade to the multisport edition? That help me to make quick decision to jump onboard with the basic bundle and then move on with additional features.
One other potential market: gyms, esp for running. This is a lot of $ to figure out what 20 min all out can tell you, or NP of 2×20, etc. Running is tougher. But I don’t see shelling out for something like this, although I would pay a gym ten bucks to use it for a half hour from time to time just to confirm my testing. I’m speaking as a relatively geekiy recreational athlete and PTap user, not someone at the sharp end of his AG.
I am curious about how the paces were picked/planned. They seem somewhat randomly spaced (about 4% apart at the beginning and 6.5% apart at the end). But based on the blood test protocol, it seems like the spacing is important based on “look for two 1mmol increases over subsequent stages”. The size of the stages will directly affect where the jumps are.
The other strange thing is when I plotted Ray’s heartrate vs. speed (in m/s), the “inflection” at 5:42/mile is actually “low”, and the point at 5:21/mile is in-line with the other data points. You can kind of see it on the BSX plot above, but the X axis does not appear to be scaled correctly based on the pace. (It looks like the paces are equally spaced, when they are not actually.)
I still think this is a cool idea, but I’m not really getting the data analysis that was done.
Ray, for other “big data” projects, you have made all of the data available to your readers to play with. Is that an option here, or does BSX have the only copy of the recorded data?
I’ll defer to BSX to answer your other questions, however, as for the last line – I have no other data, but also have no problems if they can/are able to publish additional raw data from my test.
Thank your for a thorough analysis. You are correct that the pace axis is equally spaced, and hence not to scale. The graphs are used for purely illustrative purposes. All analysis is done in terms of speed and then converted to back to pace for the representation to the athlete. The lactate threshold is determined at the first stage with two successive greater than 1 Mmol increases in lactate concentration, so whether pace or speed is used on the independent axis, the result is the same. If you want to dig further and visualize infections in HR or RPE, then independent axis should be in terms of speed. We can confirm your observation that features in the HR vs Speed space are poor predictors of LT. This is evidence that the optical signal is critical to non-invasively predict the LT.
One other quick question, in the “raw data” plot, the break point is labeled at 1775, but the algorithm output is showing a value of much closer to 1600. (I assume the X axis on both plots is the same scale of seconds into the test.) Both “times” are approximately within the same pace (5:42) based on the paces in the estimated threshold plot.
Dustin,
Thanks for the response. But I think you missed my point for this part “The lactate threshold is determined at the first stage with two successive greater than 1 Mmol increases in lactate concentration, so whether pace or speed is used on the independent axis, the result is the same.”
Ray’s samples were taken at 8:34,8:13,7:53,7:30,7:03,6:40,6:22,6:03,5:42,5:21 min/mile.
Had they been taken at say 8:34,8:23,8:13,8:03,7:53,7:41,7:30,7:17,7:03,6:52,6:40,6:31,6:22,6:12,6:03,5:52,5:42,5:31,5:21 min/mile then it would have been much “harder” to get that 1 mmol jump per sample. By the way, I’m not claiming that you did it wrong, I’m just curious how the paces were chosen, because it seems important to get the data correct.
Sorry, I´m a cyclist coach from Spain.
Maybe I’m wrong with the utility of the device: Bryan do you mean that coaching can not use a device for a different cycling tests as I do with a traditional measuring lactate?
Thanks
Two things stand out to me:
1. The difference in price between the run, cycle & multisport models. It’s enormous and doesn’t really reflect the marginal cost difference between performing one or the other or both types of analysis. I’m well aware that value, price and cost are very different things, but if consumers perceive those differences to be badly misaligned, it just creates angst and dissatisfaction.
2. Like Elli & Yancey above, I’m also confused about why the devices can’t be used for multiple people. Given that Ray got perfectly satisfactory and usable data from a single test, I see no reason (other than different coding and pricing decisions, for which see above) that the product couldn’t be plausibly used in this way. For example, my WiThings scales can handle multiple users (automatically too!), as can my other fitness devices (with a bit of fiddling). Similar to point 1 above, if this is a restriction that is artificially placed on the device (and especially if that is intended to force an increase in the number of units sold, or to increase the price) consumers just feel exploited and will be happy to jump ship when the inevitable competitive devices show up.
So, my advice to the company would be: by all means protect your technology, and derive great margins from it, but win in the market by maximising the consumer benefit (=value), and align your pricing with that.
BSXinsight was designed with a single user experience in mind. This experience includes everything from storing: profile information, personalized assessment ride/run recommendations, web based data storage for immediate accessibility and trending purposes, etc. After initial setup all information is available for quick retrieval and repeat bench marking.
That being said, the BSXinsight device can be sold, or transferred between users or by a coach/team. Keep in mind that the user experience is disrupted with this model so we do not recommend it.
Sorry for the confusion on this by the way. The FAQ article referenced is out of date and this example represents the fantastic learning process we were able to experience through participating in Kickstarter this spring.
In the months since successfully funding, we have worked closely with our early supporters to refine the final product based on their requests/inputs. That is the beauty of a crowdfunding platform that brings together hundreds of enthusiasts. Needless to say, this article was supposed to have been removed for updating but was somehow missed. It will be corrected immediately.
I agree with both of your points Flobble. Piggy-backing on your first point, if there really is a legitimate reason for the large price differences, they should simply lay that out thoroughly on their website so potential buyers know what they’re paying for. Looking at their site as it is right now, if I were a cyclist (I’m actually a xc skier and runner) I wouldn’t see any reason to spend $70 more for the cycling version over the running version. Same with the multisport version. I’d just buy the running version and additional smaller size sleeve for my arm.
To avoid posting this as a response to a few different threads here, I thought I’d consolidate.
Any chance the bsx people can post a list of what functionality you plan on having in the device at release and what functionality bsx plans to add through firmware or smartphone app? There seems to be lots of speculation and confusion here. So perfect setup for people to form false expectations which may produce good buzz now can backfire once people get the device. Seems like it will just do the testing Ray did above and only for one person. So for runners it would give you heart rate zones for future exercises and for cycling would give power zones to target for future exercises. The device is only used for doing these tests so no need to wear it for anything else. The ant+ functionality will just be used to receive information from other sensors for use during the test. This device won’t actually connect to any watch or bike computer. Is that correct?
On the web site you also say you can do:
1 – Pair with trainBSX.com for real-time speed up / slow down direction
2 – Also records muscle oxygenation changes
What does#1 mean? Just keeping you in your heart rate or power zone? Or is it something to do with the lactate sensor that is more advanced?
For#2, does this mean you will support the muscle oxygen ant+ profile? (Maybe the option to transmit that data over a different channel so watches and other devices that don’t support that profile can still use that data?)
Future possible added functionality is have the device detect and transmit over ant+/ble heart rate and cadence? Are there other plans of functionality too add to the firmware you didn’t have a chance to add so you could hit your target release date?
Please see BSXinsight.com for full product functionality this fall. We recognize that the development has evolved since (because of) Kickstarter and have put all of our up-to-date information in one place. You can also see the following product video and brochure for additional information.
You are correct on most accounts:
* BSXinsight is a performance bench marking tool.
* It’s meant to be used every 6-8 weeks to track progress and update training zones (this recommendation is based on the fundamentals of human biology)
* The Running edition will pair with ANT+ HRMs
* The Cycling edition will pair with ANT+ HRMs and power meters
* Please see previous answer regarding multiple users
trainBSX is our coaching platform which can sync with BSXinsight.com just like any other coaching platform. It is not required however. If the athlete chooses to sync with trainBSX, they or their coach can write training plans that will sync with compatible sports watches (e.g. Garmin 910XT) to trigger alerts when the athlete is outside of their target training zone. These training zones can be HR or power or pace based depending on the preferences of the athlete and the sport type. There is unfortunately no such thing as an ANT+ lactate profile at this time (yet..).
Muscle oxygenation changes are currently transmitted via BLE to the users smart phone for real-time visualization and stored in the web for post workout analysis. BSXinsight does not support the MO2 profile at this time. This is because sports watches currently do not support it either. We are members of the ANT+ community and are actively working with their technical groups to make this a more mainstream feature. This is an important advancement we would like to see the community make in the near future.
All these and other questions are clarified in the aforementioned resources.
I’m not sure if I’ve understood this properly.
I am reading this and it seems;
(a) it is not measuring lactate mmol
(b) it “only” identifies the LTP or MLSS
(c) it is tied to a ramp test protocol
It doesn’t;
(d) support more than one user
(e) allow profiling of lactate during intermediate exercise
(f) broadcast ANT+ data that could be used by a suitable app/headunit
BSXinsight is a performance benchmarking tool that measures an individual’s lactate threshold and personalized training zones. These are the most actionable and understandable elements of a lactate test. It does not display real-time mmol lactic acid values.
We are currently evaluating multiple models for more ‘field’ based tests as there are definite advantages to completing the test in the environment and terrain that one is used to training/racing in. Along with those advantages however come many limitations or difficulties both to the athlete and to the technology. For now, we highly recommend completing the assessment workout exclusively on a treadmill or trainer using a sort of ramp test as you indicated. This makes it much easier for an athlete to keep to a constant pace/power during each stage of their test.
Much like sharing accounts of your current sports watch are possible though not advisable, BSXinsight can be transferred or shared with other athletes. BSXinsight was designed with a single user experience however.
Since there is no such thing as a lactate profiles on ANT+ these cannot be broadcast. As you are most likely aware, thisisant has created an MO2 profile for muscle oxygenation but this profile has not been widely adopted by most display units either. We are members of the thisisant community and are actively advocating more widespread adoption of emerging training technologies. We recognize our opportunity to be your advocate for this shift and will keep you updated on our progress.
Really interested in this. As a coach, I would love to buy one and then be able to offer accurate, non-invasive lactate testing to my athletes on a regular basis at what I figure would be a very reasonable price point.
Keep us informed! http://www.oxygenaddict.com
It is possible to do the test outside (in the track running or in the road cycling)? I prefer this (more specific) way of measuring performance.
Thanks.
We are currently evaluating multiple models for more ‘field’ based tests as you suggested. We agree there are definite advantages to completing the test in the environment and terrain that one is used to training/racing in. Along with those advantages however come many limitations or difficulties both to the athlete and to the technology. For now, we highly recommend completing the assessment workout exclusively on a treadmill or trainer. This makes it much easier for an athlete to keep to a constant pace/power during each stage of their test.
In its current version, BSXinsight can measure an individual’s lactate threshold and personalized training zones. These are the most actionable and understandable elements of a lactate test. It does not display real-time mmol lactic acid values.
I’m one of the KickStarter backers for this. When it was originally promoted it was under the premise of being an everyday wearable – replacing a heart rate monitor and footpod, whilst also giving you live feedback on your current lactate levels. Since then the marketing on it has degenerated into being more simply a direct replacement for a lactate threshold test. That’s obviously disappointing, but I’m still very much looking forward to getting my device, I do “field tests” for LT at the minute which I expect have pretty dubious results. Would I pay retail price for the BSX though, doing only what it does now? Not so sure.
Thanks again for being one of our early supporters on Kickstarter! We really appreciate it. I hope you were able to read our most recent update that explained the crowd-supported process which contributed to the design/development decisions of BSXinsight between conceptualization and completion. Information was taken both from market indicators and key players in the sports tech space who manage the digital ecosystems we athletes are presently training on.
If you have any particular questions I’d be happy to talk to you about it in person. We believe that the decisions have led to a far more valuable product and powerful tool in the hands of coaches/athletes.
As a cyclist : from reading all the replies here, I understand the BSX is currently only meant to be used on a fixed trainer in a standardized setting ( “Conconi like test”)
So, cycling outside on the road for 30 minutes with my BSX strapped on would not give me trusthworthy data ? And why not exactly ?
Likewise for me, although I’m very interested in getting hold of the device come December, it’s not clear to me what I’m actually going to use it for? Would I be right in thinking that based of the LT test on the treadmill that I can then plug that into the website to generate some sort of training plan based on the results.
Close. An LT test (whether the traditional invasive-type test with blood samples, or the BSX non-invasive test) will give you your training zones, not a training plan. You can use these training zones to construct a training plan, if you wish.
So the point of the trainbsx website is what in that case (over using Garmin Connect for example)? Think I have 6 months premium access coming to me as one of the Kickstarter backers.
Looks like one of the main features of trainBSX is the ability for coaches to design and monitor their athletes’ training plans and workouts on the website (in addition, BSX apparently also has a “dating service” for matching athletes and coaches). Garmin Connect does not have any of these capabilities. However, TrainingPeaks definitely does have these capabilities, and is considered by many to be the “gold standard” for coached athletes. So perhaps a better question is what is the advantage of trainBSX over TrainingPeaks.
Super interesting technology and approach to bring this to market. So much awesomesauce up in here imma need a roll of paper towels to clean it up. Kudos to the team.
I think a lot of people asking about price, multi-user, team version, etc etc are completely missing the point. I totally see these guys looking to exit with an acquisition by any number of the large multibillion dollar healthcare device makers (like phillps for example). Not sure if that is their strategy but that is the most obvious route in my mind. I just hope this doesnt go the way of the now defunce Zeo. Amazing tech that couldnt sustain a business.
I really dont see “end users” purchasing this in large numbers even at a quarter the cost. Better some kind of diagnostic service model where you pay $30 bucks and they fedex you out a device with a return envelope. I guess there is nothing stopping their customers from doing that…
Hi Ray,
1Q maybe it has been told already and I have missed that.
the calf sleeve appears to me like a compression one. compression sleeves are working on principle of delaying of the lactate effect. how BSX guys deals with this since the measure of lactate treshold is whate are trying to get but the sleeve self is working on thlactate treshold delay principle. or is the variance in this test that small that it is marginal for thcalculation?
cheers
Mike
Yup, I had a good test with them. Do keep in mind though that the sensors are different and focusing on different things. Also keep in mind Moxy is $1,200 and is more about a pure sensor and raw data than BSX which is more about the data and the platform with guidance.
I would be very interested to see the lower part of the graph and in particular the Aerobic Threshold.
As far as I understood that is not possible at the moment.
Is there any plan to have it available?
So far so good as an awesome and appreciated product. I’m a Nordic skier and runner. Per the photos, it looks like it’d fit fine with Nordic ski boots, but have you tried that combo? Please let me know. Thanks.
You can now pre-order the BSX Lactate Threshold sensor via Clever Training. In doing so you help support the site, but also save yourself 10% and get free US shipping using coupon code DCR10BTF! All three versions are available from them, and will ship in December, assuming BSX hits their timelines. The three version are:
Runner version – $299
Cycling version – $369
Multisport Edition – $419
(Links at the bottom of the post up above)
International shipments of the BSX units are $29US for standard delivery, or $39US for express delivery. Thanks again for your support via Clever Training!
Very great reading here and it shows, how the regular athlete is involved in changes from classical approaches like lactate sampling and Vo2 testing to noninvasive and interesting new trends.
I work with NIRS isince many many years and it was jusrt available over great equipment for research ideas.
With the new technique we now have Insight and MOXY pushing the new fundamentally different directions in live assessment of activities.
As Ray mentioned MOXY is a very different tool.
Here very short: MOXY is used not to find a point or threshold, where something seems to reach a critical limitation. Whit NIRS /Moxy we look for the reasoning ,why the body reacts with a limitation. We look for limiter in the physiological family so that the body has to reduce motor unit recruitment for self preservation.
SmO2 muscle oxygenation is a direct feedback on utilizatin and energy availability , The other info is the tHb Total hemoglobin, which is a trend information on blood flow and as such a feedback on as well muscle contraction quality.
When combing this information we than can make some decison during a workout, whether I like to increase or decrease delivery of blood and as such O2 or whether I like to get more towards utilization and different approaches on ATP production.
As such we use nIRS daily on any clients, whether performance athlets or rehab patients to observe and guide daily workouts so we can control intensity and stay in the ” Zone ” Intervall / strength workouts , warm up and cool downs as well as endurance loads will be control with MOXY live steady from your garmin watch or over a screen in a fitness or rehab center. We do and run this daily and there are centers now in Europe and in Canada and some in the USA who have this as feedback for their clients.
Thanks so much for the great way you open a discussin on NIRS, which was always under the cover in some small groups of useres and researchers.
If I want to use the device solely for the purpose of finding my training zones (and verifying them every 4-6 weeks), will I need to pay for a subscription or will that information be available to me for free?
Regardless of whether it will be free or not, can you list the cost(if any) and different channels the data will be available through (app/website/other). If the data varies across channels please include information about that too.
Eli thanks for teh feedback
Just short for teh regular reader here.
MOXY is used for any activity as it is a NIRS equipment. So no need to make it sport specific or for one person only. It is what it is, a direct feedback of Oxygen trends, whether you utilize more O2 tthan you can deliver.
As such it is a direct ( compared to VO2 and lactate which are indirect) feedback on ultilisation or delivery of blood volume and oxygen.
You use it therefor for what ever we used before indirectly but now directly to find your limiter ( cardiac, respiratory or muscular limitation of your performance, is it for endurance or strenght or interval..
With this information from a test or from a race or from a workout you can than create training concepts based on what you have to improve rather than what you speculative calculate with zoning ideas.
NIRS itself is the zoning feedback from workouts to workout. It tells you how long you go in an intervall depending your goal and it tells you when you are recovered depending on your goal. It is a training idea we work since over 15 years successfully in many differentsports it is now just affordable.
Can this device give live lactate readings in mmol/l and is this whole blood equivalents or plasma etc. Or can this only find inflection points such as LT1 and LT2 or MLSS?
Just curios, what about indoor-rowing on an concept2, combined with some indoor-cycling and sometimes some running… Which version would be adaquate/recommend?
Boris, here a link to some rowing information and discussion how we use NIRS in this sport. Great options now as we can use it live streaming from the boat to the coach in the boat or besides the rowing pool. We us a wasp for the moment but there are other options like WIMU or more.
The athlete himself can see it on a watch and or can give an upper and lower alarm like in a HR upper and lower limit during workouts like intervals or has the display in front of him as well. link to forum.moxymonitor.com
the oteher link shows you a nice discussion and some examples from rowing , where this specific athlete shows a restriction and limiter in his actual strenght of his leg muscles. ( Occlusion link to forum.moxymonitor.com. )
I understand that this is meant to be used as a benchmarking tool like traditional LT tests, and that no watch maker currently supports real-time monitoring, but is real-time, watch-linked use something that will be possible in the future with this exact product? Or will it be a subsequently developed product that offers that functionality?
I’m undecided about whether I want to buy it as just a benchmarking tool, but I’d buy it in a heartbeat if it were going to work with a watch in the future.
So Wow… I’ve been a BSX Insight backer for a while now and I’ve been super excited about the product. Reading through the series of comments here, it could be pretty easy to look perspective on the positive and groundbreaking nature of this product.
But c’mon, it’s a first generation product that can analyze light patterns in your muscle to determine the exact moment when they become fatigued. Sure there are some limitations when we start thinking blue-sky possibilities.
But heck initial consumer GPS provided “selective availability” and now we can determine locations within less than a meter.
Go back and look at the first Garmins to market and note the few differences from the current FR920XT.
I think gadget geeks and so-called tech-athletes have got it pretty good with some of the stuff that has come out recently… maybe we’ve been spoiled a bit… we won’t question a new watch that provides us some “vertical oscillation” for $400 (which we aren’t even sure how to interpret) and yet we grill first to market technology like the Insight because it won’t do real-time display…
I like Chris O Brian’s interesting view. I just like to add some feedbacks. It is actually far of the first generation ideas of using light pattern. In fact it is over 1/4 century old in practical application. And we know nicely from many thousands of tests and countless studies what we can read out of NIRS and where we still have some limitation. It even is possible to get this readings over your cheap FR 80 Garmin watch already so you have the info live as you go and do an interval workout paced by NIRS for intensity / duration as well as rest periods in between. Same is used in strength training and it is used in any possible sport, from Swimming to cross country skiing it is worn already during NHL games , during tennis games, for figure skating to readjust the combinations of jumps, for cycling and adjustment in combination with bike fitting, for rehabilitation in any muscle injuries like ACL , hip replacements and knee replacement. For postural awareness and much more. NIRS is a simple cheap version to actually do individual physiological feedback information’s from oxygenation feedback to utilization , from delivery information of blood to potential reasoning why we see a drop in Stroke volume.. So yes fun to see technology advancing.
Thanks for the info, Feldmann. I had no idea there was an FR80. I knew that NIRS had been around a bit, but not >25 years… happy to see it just coming into the “consumer market”
Chris O Brien you are welcome. Here some tidbits from the earlier days:
Centre for Sports and Exercise Science, University of Essex, Colchester, UK, bjonesa@essex.ac.uk.
Abstract
Portable near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) devices were originally developed for use in exercise and sports science by Britton Chance in the 1990s (the RunMan and microRunman series).
Even somewhat earlier : 1790
n The history of near infrared spectroscopic
analysis: Past, present and future –
“From sleeping technique to the morning star
of spectroscopy”
T. Davies
Norwich Near Infrared Consultancy, 75 Intwood Road, Cringleford, Norwich, NR4 6AA, UK
The history of the analytical use of near infrared
(NIR) spectroscopy is reviewed and its future
potential is assessed. This future is very bright
if sufficient new researchers are attracted to this
academically unfashionable spectroscopy.
“Glittering like the Morning Star, full of life,
splendour and joy”
Edmund Burke, 1790.
And this is a fun section:
In 1983 Professor David Wetzel wrote an article [1] for
Analytical Chemistry in which he described near infrared
(NIR) spectroscopic analysis as a “sleeping technique”. At
the time of the first international NIR conference held under
the aegis of the Intern ational Committee for NIR spect
roscopy (ICNIRS) in 1987 I referred to that paper and said
that it was “Time for the Giant to wake up” [2]. A gap of
a decade and the additional excitement of looking to the millennium
justify a further re-assessment of the potential of
NIR spectroscopy. I believe the “Giant” has woken up but
that the future of NIR spectroscopy is so important that we
can now see that the giant we had imagined is a pygmy compared
to the potential of NIR to influence all aspects of our
lives.
It woke up many years back and as mentioned, as we speak, it is used with live feedback during ice hockey games in downhill ski training and figure skating and much more.
boooo Coupon code “NOPRICKS14” is not valid. DCR10JKW! is alos not valid.
Did you get so many orders that you suddenly become pricks…;)
Taking under consideration that you can’t really tell mmol/L and your lactate threshold value is more of algorithm derived than than anything. I would argue this will work perfectly in all cases, I bet you do test in full TT position and results would be different from hands on the drops. it’s more of approximate LT number delivery via some math, similar as with 20 min FTP test. Maybe just show real life Sm02 value and and another sensor to place on non involved muscles.
When using the code DCR10JKW, you’ll need to do so without the exclamation mark. Also, that’s only good on Clever Training (which supports the site here).
Error on my side on the garmin . It is FR 70 not as I wrote FR 80
Thanks for the friendly correction to my e mail as well as thanks for the many critical but fair questions concerning NIRS.
Mr. DC Rainmaker did an assessment with another NIRS equipment many weeks back and I am wonderng and look forward to a critical and constructive feedback similar as he did with the BSX Insight so there is an ongoing discusion into a very bright future ( not just because it is a bright light) of new ideas on using Bio markers for individual training ideas and concepts..
Just reading more accurate through your great explanation of the test. You write , that you had a BSX on each side of you legs. Can you show us side by side the NIRS data raw example as you have in red from the one side. Thanks Juerg
I’d have to defer to the BSX guys on that one, I included all the raw data I had up above in the files. Though anything beyond that they might still have.
DC thanks for the fast response. Will be fun to see the datas from the BSX guys of your left and right calf NIRS activities as it can give some nice indication of symmetry in utilization as well as in blood flow. Will try to get a link of studies we did in that regard.
BSX just emailed stating that the shipping date will be postponed to January. Devaju for me. I am one of those who pre-ordered the Recon Jet and has waited for more than 1.5 years and still waiting!
I will NOT be surprised if BSX eventually ship their products more than a year later!
Ive seen it all. Those nicely phrased emails and reasonings concluding to the inevitability of delays after delays.
The emotional price we have to pay to support new product developments… Another disappointing winter…
I’d say BSX is in a much better spot than Recon. The key difference is that BSX has an actual product that they’re demonstrating actively with 3rd parties (as seen here). Recon, with Jet however, largely speaking hasn’t been letting 3rd parties test/use the product.
I’m also not happy with the way the release date being moved out is being handled. If regulatory concerns are holding you back, then why not ship to / in the countries where you don’t have issues and then let the rest know that that specific country is a problem?
Regardless, it looks like I’ll be putting up with being pricked a bit longer…would have liked to do a comparitive check with my coach, who also does my bloody LT test. In line with other posters, and having reviewed all the material BSX have made available, I’m also still unclear on what will be released in “V1” vs. “V2” and whether this means a physical hardware update, a simple (or not so simple) firmware update…or even when to expect what.
Transparency trumps all…and an update to the BSX web-site with a clear and realistic timeline / features/ use cases will be a great start.
I know they are talking to Garmin regarding connect IQ and so on…so I’m holding thumbs that it makes it to the FR920XT but that’s just it I know this because I e-mailed them directly, and they responded directly, not because this was put in a general update.
I’ve seen the device in action and don’t think it’s as useful as they make it out to be. The lactate threshold point (workload/HR) is only a small part of the equation… you can track improvement with any race and use a formula to estimate appropriate training zones based on your race time. If you are interested, hop over to my blog…
Sorry for the delay in responses guys. Half of the BSX team has been busy traveling the country providing demonstrations to high level coaches, athletes and retailers while the engineers and devs have been working LONG days getting everything finalized.
I am going to blanket some things, others from the team will provide more specifics.
US and Canada based orders are going out the first week of January. We had set backs with backed upped ports as well as with the CE stamp, which is delaying international shipments.
As for connecting to devices like Garmin etc. We had a very productive meeting with Garmin in November. That is all that can be disclosed at this time.
You can use the device daily to view your oxygenation data POST workout currently. You simply doc your device, and the raw data will be visible on your dashboard and can be exported as a .csv file.
Adam ST. Pierre…as a person with your background, I would put a * with your advice of just using different races to provide estimated training zones. You can do that, but how accurate are they going to be? Was it windy? was it hot or humid? was the course hilly? Were the conditions the same in the next race. Yes, you can get an estimate I agree wholeheartedly. In our scenario, you get your LT and subsequent training zones, of which you can adjust to your preferred percentages / # of zones.
We have validated with N = > 700 athletes to date, and we are finding LT in the same stage as the blood test to 96% accuracy. The
Hit submit before finishing the statement. If you click on the link “lactate and SmO2 comparison. You will see an example of our data (blue data, which in this example is not smoothed) compared to that of a blood based test (the red line) and you can clearly see three different planes that correlate directly. Flat line, slight curve and dramatic curve. You can also see in our data where we left the BSXinsight running after the test, this particular athletes recovery period.
I agree that using races to estimate LT deserves an *. Anytime you use a formula (such as using 70% of LT for your easy days) it deserves an *. So what I’m saying is run a race to determine your * training zones or use the BSX Insight to determine your * training zones. My point of contention is that the actual lactate concentrations at each workload are important and that formulas do not accurately predict training zones. You have excellent correlation at lactate threshold, but there is more to a lactate profile test than lactate threshold. The training zones you estimate from LT may be close enough for most individuals to use, but I think and actual lactate profile is still very valuable. Use the 700+ samples you have and come up with an algorithm that tells you lactate concentration (even if you have to enter in some known values) at each workload perhaps. I think your technology can be very useful, but I don’t think the current product is of much use.
Someone above posted about the comparisons to the first GPS units and the first this or that piece of tech. We are launching a product that currently does something that has never been done before non-invasively. We will call it a Cadillac. The next iteration will be the Ferrari and then onto the Lamborghini.
The first run is geared towards your middle of the pack age grouper on up to the pointy end. There are millions and millions of endurance athletes that simply do not get their LT done for several different reasons. Cost, pain, inconvenience, having to repeat it 3-4 times a year.
We have produced something that is simple and actionable…well and repeatable.
I agree that for the elite of the elite like yourself, Neal and Rob (well and because you have access to, and conduct top level testing) it is something that you will wait for further generations of the device that can give you real time actionable data.
We are very excited about some of our newest findings with actual mmol/L data.
Any chance you could clarify if this device will support any ant+ profiles? (I.e. broadcast them) I remember you saying optical heart rate wouldn’t be implemented due to time but I also remember talk the device might support the muscle oxygen profile. Is that happening at release or in a planned firmware update or has it been cut as a feature? Thanks
Thanks, from my perspective limiting the feature set at initial release is good if it let’s you make sure those features work well with a good experience but would be nice to know about what is planned through firmware updates verses if I want that functionality I should hold off buying cause this hardware can’t support it. Like the garmin stuff that can’t be talked about, can it at least be mentioned if this is a firmware thing so buying the device now will allow it in the future assuming it doesn’t fall through?
I’m sure you’ve noticed how some companies seem to just add new features to new devices even if the old device could support it while others like pebble keep with the same hardware and just keep adding to the firmware.
Eli,
You are spot on and hence, why we have made our business decisions around just that. We wanted to release a pedestal product device that provides you with something that has never been available before (non-invasive)
We are launching with a Cadillac, iterating towards a Ferrari, and then the Lamborghini.
It’s talk like that that makes me think this initial Cadillac release will do lactate threshold testing an all the coming features you talk about will make me go out and buy another car. So if I want some of the extra functionality I should hold off on buying unless I want a garage full of cars. Remember the pebble now has much more functionality now then when it first came out, but it is still the pebble.
As in your analogy suggests you get what you buy and new features will only come with a new model year or different model as that’s how cars work because other then the Tesla you never get updates to the car besides recalls to fix things. Which is why I wonder which model you are following.
Just like any gps watch or other piece of endurance tech: they launch, push updates, eventually come out with a newer and better device, push updates, eventually come out with a new release. (see Garmin 310 and not 920, Timex trail runner to ONE GPS)
We will fall into that same scenario as we continue to research, develop and iterate.
Almost all garmin fitness products ship feature complete with just bug fixes and if they need to add support for a new garmin device (virb, vector) to better sell the other device. See the issue I have is you mention some future functionality:
-broadcast data over ant+ in real time (don’t say which profiles you might support)
-connecting to garmin devices
Is this for future devices or are these things we can expect to be added to what is sold now?
Yes, I think it would be best if you spelled out what “future” features can be added via firmware vs what will require a whole new device. It’s sounding to me like it’s best for everyone to hold off now as the majority of what didn’t make it into the initial release will require completely new hardware.
I pre-ordered mine yesterday through Clever Training. Since I’m a few weeks behind on my winter training program due to coming down with a chest cold, I plan to get the device and use it (with it’s protocol) for my baseline test, and test again in 6 weeks, and 12 weeks to evaluate progress and adjust training zones. I’m excited to try the new technology out.
At this point I’m considering cancelling the order I placed in September 2014. 15 Dec shipping didn’t happen, early Jan shipping didn’t happen, Mid Jan shipping hasn’t happened and end Jan shipping hasn’t happened. Right now, not being a U.S customer I have no idea when to expect anything.
I don’t think they will be shipping till April. They haven’t gotten their certification yet and it seems they are putting these devices together one at a time. They don’t have their apps available yet for IOS or Android.
Honestly, I don’t know why they keep stringing it along. It’s better to under promise and over deliver than over promise and under deliver.
There is no way, that December date could ever have been achieved. Just like there was no way their January, or even February dates will be achieved (they don’t have certification yet and that can take time). Maybe by March it will go out to “kickstarters” and by April it will go out to the over paying customers. Too bad by then trainer season will be over for most of us.
Any folks who ordered via Clever Training were sent the following last night:
“BSXinsight: Lactate Threshold Sensor
Thank you for your pre-order of the BSXInsight Lactate Threshold Sensor. We have been notified by the manufacturer that they are in the final stages of assembly and expect to ship inventory to our warehouse the first week of March. Once we receive the shipment, we will fulfill orders within our queue in the order that they were received. When your order is fulfilled, you will be updated with a shipment notification and tracking information for your convenience. If we receive any updated information from the manufacturer or any additional changes, we will be sure to notify you at that time. Thank you for your patience with regards to the release of this product.”
If it’s March for the CT guys then it will be…well, who knows how long for the international orders. I’ve just requested a cancellation of my Insight order and a full refund via the store.bsxinsight.com site. Lets see how long that takes.
Hmmm,
Not pleased with the delay. That is the information i received:
”Dear
First and foremost, thank you again for your enthusiastic support. We are energized by the overwhelming positivity and encouragement from each of you that we receive on a daily basis.
As many of you know, the first batch of BSXinsight devices were shipped out last week! These orders went to our early Kickstarter backers. In the excitement of this tremendous milestone, many of you have been asking “when are you shipping my device?”
We had hoped to begin that process in January along with the Kickstarter orders. But since this was our preproduction run we made the strategic decision to limit our initial quantities. This allowed us to learn from the first run and work out any kinks or problems. In retrospect this was unequivocally the correct decision and one which will result in you receiving the highest quality product.
What does this mean to you? A slight delay to next month. We apologize for this slight shift in the date but BSXinsight is a highly technical product with unparalleled accuracy and one which requires the highest standard of manufacturing. We want your product to be as good as it can be and want you to know that we are dedicated to continually making it better.
Moving a release date is not a decision we take lightly and is a choice we make only when we know it is in the best interests of the product and our supporters. Thanks to everyone for your understanding and we assure you these few extra weeks will be well worth it when BSXinsight does arrive in March.
Finally, we will be sending weekly updates as we work towards the next ship date. We want to keep you immediately informed of all progress. One of the first will include some very exciting news regarding unadvertised functionality that we have just added.
Please be sure to watch our Facebook and Twitter feeds for more updates and news along the way as well.
You failed to mention that you just placed your order 7 days ago. We apologize to those who have been waiting much longer. We made a strategic decision to place a smaller batch run so we could iron out any wrinkles in the assembly line process so we could better present that process to the final assembly house for our large batch order.
I am not trying to make an excuse here, but we wanted to make sure that we deliver you the best possible product. And with any new tech, we do find bugs or improvements to implement along the way. We could have chosen to send out a product that we were not 100% satisfied with just to meet a timeline, but we decided to take a little more time to perfect things. We are a team of 9 individuals working long days and nights to get you your BSXinsight.
If anyone has comments or concerns that they would like to direct to us, please send a note to info@bsxinsight.com. We are also usually online for a live chat through the website during normal business hours central standard time. The only time we are not is when all hands are on deck assembling and shipping units.
With a new product some delays are expected. I think the biggest issue folks have is that you gave completely unrealistic dates. You shouldn’t be doing small batch runs now to finalize the assembly line. All that, plus certification, should have been completed before you tossed out a date. It’s all about managing expectations.
In all honestly, I never expected the December date to be met, however, I did expect it to have been ready to ship in January.
After the posts about having to wait for certification and perfecting the assembly process, I’m kind of shocked December or January was ever mentioned as a possible date.
So now I get to read unboxing posts from the lucky few that have actually gotten one already. Most likely by the time this is ready to ship I’ll be outdoors 100% and won’t use this till next winter.
This is not really a BSX specific problem but a crowd sourcing problem. All Kickstarter campaigns are started before a product is anywhere close to a production state and that is when they tossed out the December date. You should have seen the delays with the Pebble watch
If it was a kickstarter that would be one thing. I didn’t hear about it (or place an order) till it was advertised as a pre-order with an expected Dec 15th ship date.
I ordered mine on the 7th of November, and received the same email as everyone else yesterday saying that things were delayed.
I’m in the International shipping group, so I’m guessing that (on current estimates) that means late March/early to mid-April.
In terms of how I feel about that, it’s a bit contradictory – I’m annoyed, but only because I’m excited about the prospect of getting it.
I’m sure it will show up, in an ideal world I’d love it to drop through the letterbox tomorrow, but that’s not going to happen and I suspect we all knew, or at least suspected, that being the early adopters of an as-yet un-released product wasn’t a guarantee that it would hit it’s projected RTM.
If its a kickstart project it will be late, especially if its a completely new company with new technology. The Mio when that was on kickstart was delayed from when they were planning to ship but was still a good product. Technology in general is delayed. Who got a Garmin 920 on the date it was supposed to be released? Was the Vector pedal on time?
Please don’t bring Mio in as an example! I bought their first gen product and it simply didn’t work – HR would drop from believable (~155 bpm) to unbelievable (~55 bpm) during a quasi-steady state interval, until you power-cycled the unit.
Got mine today! I’m not sure yet if I’m only supposed to used it for a LT test every 6-8 weeks or if I’m supposed use it daily; the instructions aren’t terribly clear and support is currently just a web FAQ – not unexpected for such an early stage product.
Has anyone else used yours yet? Has anyone been able to display the BSXInsight’s data in realtime on a watch or is that simply not possible at this point?
I do not know how BSX works but if it is another NIRS device than you should be able to see it on at least a laptop or on a tablets or a home computer screen when you do a workout. NIRS is simply a collection of feedbacks from the situation of Hb and how much O2 you may have loaded ( actually on Mb and Hb )
There are NIRS equipment on the market since long time and there are very small devices out since a while like Portaman from Artinis in the Netherlands which sends signals over a very long distance so you can have a rower in a rowing boat on the lake and you as a coach can see his O2 reactions and needs. This device can show an incredible great information on a lap top with even three different penetration depth . Than there is a simpler version out there for practical users , but I am biased on that one.
So for many on here the technology is not new at all it is just nicely package but it is used and available since a long time. Great to see now an additional one BSX in the market and time will tell, which of the all great equipment’s can be used for what you as a customer like to use it. Hope we get some great feedback from the first BXS users and how they use it in the workouts and for other actions besides running and cycling like for interval workouts and for strength workouts..
OK, the thing is VERY frustrating. I’m sitting in a pool of sweat writing this… I tried to do an assessment on my bike. Yikes!
First, they have GREAT instructions for putting on the sleeve like “PLACE your BSXinsight into the sleeve pocket using the large inside opening.” Thanks a lot, for that I really didn’t need directions. Then their website for setting up your profile is buggy as hell (at least via Chrome and Safari on OS X). I finally fought through that.
The iOS app is decent, and I was able to pair it… then it in turn could pair to my Stages and Scosche. (Actually, I had to move the HRM to my wrist to get it close enough to my calf to pair.) Fine. Then it asked me all sorts of questions, e.g. my conversational and 40K power numbers. No idea of how to set those, so I just guessed (180 and 140W). Then it tried to kill me! Check out link to strava.com for the blow-by-blow…
My config: bike on KICKR, but used Stages PM and Scosche Rhythm+ as HRM connected to their device. Strava tracks came from same devices on Edge 810. (KICKR power meter hooked up to iPad, but not connected to anything else.)
Anyway, it walked me through 60..280W in 20W increments. I stopped it a little bit after it wanted me to go to 280, and then it had the nerve to whine about not having enough data. NO feedback, zip zero nada.
Bottom line: I think it’ll be a great device. I hope. I hope. I hope. BUT: they really need a good youtube video and a much better onramp to using this beastie.
I think it assumes the 20 watt increments are true increments. Your watt chart looks like a slowly increasing line without any flat parts. Maybe they need to hold the power more steady so set the KICKR to erg mode and set its power to each interval the bsx software wants
For 40k power look at: link to strava.com and see what type of power you can hold for an hour with conversational being chatting with someone on a bike ride what your power looks like
I think Strava does a lot of smoothing (or I was), but the real effort was more or less incremental. It said it was mad because I didn’t do enough segments.
My hour FTP number is 180W, at least according to Strava. (Yeah, I’m an old guy.) I told it that for my conversational power number, and 140 for my 40K.
I could see the oxygenation number go down to 70%, which was kind of cool. Anyway, I’m not sliming these guys — once I get over the learning curve, I suspect it’ll be useful. Maybe when I recover, I’ll try different numbers and pay more attention to the protocol it designs for me.
Use erg mode on the trainer to get the power curve to look more like steps and set the conversational power lower to around 90 and see what happens. (thinking the session needs to start with some lower power intervals so it can get a baseline of your lactate levels to be able to see how they increase)
Eli is right on both accounts. BSXinsight needs a minimum of seven stages (warmup stage + 6 after) to properly calculate results. That doesn’t mean stopping after seven, but rather make sure you have the proper amount of stages before you hit the big wall. Also, the power levels should look like steps as Eli alluded too.
We are working on a few more videos to give more clarity into the testing protocol.
Going onto BSX Insight’s facebook page opened up some more info, but not quite enough. The first post is a youtube video to help get you started. It glosses over the part that nailed me, at least for the bicycle assessment. link to youtube.com
I already sent this question in to info@bsxinsight.com but they don’t seem to answer their emails.
There was a blog comparing the BSX to the Moxy and it mentions that the BSX reports relative blood oxygenation whereas the Moxy reports absolute blood oxygenation levels. So Absolute makes sense, but what exactly is the relative blood oxygenation levels relative to? The start of a recording session?
Is it reporting relative blood oxygenation due to a limitation in the hardware? software or just because it needs relative oxygenation for the LT algorithm?
I’d try the Moxy folks, they seem to be more knowledgeable about blood oxygenation and could probably explain the difference. Sadly the bsx doesn’t seem ready for showtime. There are some posts in the wattage forum explaining the differences that will be observed depending on which muscle you use a NIRS device on. For cycling they really shouldn’t be using the calf.
I would say it may be too early to tell how useful bsx will become at muscle oxygen. BSX seems to be concentrating on just the lactate threshold data right now and trying to do that well. That does seem like a good focus with LT testing costing ~$100 per test when BSX makes a test “free” so big market while focusing on muscle oxygen will bring a much smaller market. So in the short term Moxy is much better for muscle oxygen based on what the devices can do right now, but don’t know if you can say BSX won’t get better.
(Also if muscle oxygen based training catches on I’m guessing other companies will make products too driving the prices down, or at least driving Moxy to charge less)
Hi,
Is anyone made a comparison with BSX vs traditional lactate measuring device during an incremental step test?! I mean the values are in 100% correlation?
They’re shipping for Kickstarter backers already. For retailers, they plan is by the end of the month. Here’s the update from Clever Training that went out on Friday to folks that ordered via that route:
/////
BSXinsight: Lactate Threshold Sensor
Thank you for your pre-order and continued patience for the release of the BSXinsight Lactate Threshold Sensor. We have spoken with the manufacturer and confirmed that they are still on track to have the items at our warehouse and ready to ship by the end of March. Once your order has been processed we will notify you with the available tracking information, until then we will provide weekly Friday updates. If anything changes on the product availability we will be sure to let you know. Please feel free to email sales@clevertraining.com if you have any additional questions regarding your order.
/////
We shall see if they start sending out tracking numbers. Still, it’s a bit of semantics at this point even if they print out labels since they really aren’t going out today. They really should have had these things packaged up and ready to go first thing. I know if it were my company and I had delayed shipments 4 times, I’d make sure they were ready to go. From all their pictures you would think these things have been sitting around in boxes for days waiting to be packaged up. Seems like they are intentionally dragging their feet while they work out some kinks with their software. Perhaps if they were more upfront about why they are holding this all back, folks would be a little more accepting.
I received an email today which implied they shipped:
By now you should have received a tracking number for your BSXinsight which will be arriving very soon. Now is the time to prepare for your first lactate threshold assessment so you’re ready when it gets to your door!
I did not however receive any tracking info, so either they missed my order or someone was a bit optimistic and clicked the send button too soon.
Same here so I messaged them on their online chat and they told me their “online auto generated email system jumped the gun by 24 hours.” They also said they were in the middle of fulfilling order and I should receive my track number soon. A few hours ago I did! Hope this isn’t an April Fools joke, I can’t wait to start testing!
I’m sure it’s not as straight forward as you make it seem. With any new technology you’re going to experience delays. I agree more communication would have been better but I doubt these people are as cynical as you’re making them out to be. I’ve been to their office and was amazed that they only had 7 people doing everything, even though they were super busy they took the time to sit down and talk about BSXinsight, and how to incorporate it into my training. Very friendly and look forward to seeing how they develop.
Ps- Being able to track your training sessions is about to be released.
It was in the upper 100ds. I ordered in October. I contacted them via chat and they have an automated reply saying that if you haven’t gotten a tracking number now you will get it either today or tomorrow. So doesn’t do us any good, but they clearly missed their end of March date and I probably won’t get mine till late 2nd week of April or even 3rd week.
Considering all the delays they had, you would think they would have hired some temps for a day or 2 to finish up the shipping of all their pre orders.
Richard, I didn’t seem to find your order in our system. Did you order under another name? This way I’ll be able to tell you which day we will be shipping yours out.
The primary reason for the delay is that we made modifications to BSXinsight based on the information we learned while building out the KickStarter versions (which we did ourselves – not a manufacturer). From there we expedited a large order of unit fabrication and have been fulfilling orders 11 hours a day as units arrive in our office from the manufacturer.
Agreed, they really blew it for this season. April is too late since most folks will have already started the race season. On the positive side, maybe they will have it out before September. Or should I say August since that would really be August 31 to them.
The new BSX app will now determine your aerobic threshold in addition to your anaerobic threshold. This update SERIOUSLY improves the usefulness of the device, particularly for marathoners.
Interesting discussion. I think I find myself kind of in the middle: interested in being supportive of a firm that’s pushing the envelope on what can be done to help athletes train better, but a bit concerned on what is “real” vs “hype”, and not sure if all reasonable (I think) questions have been answered to make a solid buying decision, at least at this time.
One thing that was a bit troubling is, the website and discussion here clearly states that the device is meant to be used in regular 4-6 week intervals on a trainer or treadmill, yet all the pictures and promotional materials show athletes using the device “in the field”, as if it’s appropriate to use it as a day to day, real-time tracking device. I don’t think it rises to the level of duplicity, but is confusing messaging at the very least.
Ray, this is where you become SUCH a valuable resource. If the marketing and messaging was a little clearer from the manufacturer, I would’ve purchased with no reservations. I did indeed end up purchasing, but I’m definitely more concerned that it could be a “risky” purchase, with thoughts of needing to return it if not happy. Having put my money down I guess suggests I’m optimistic; here’s hoping BSXInsights follows through!
I’ve got the unit, and will be doing my first two tests over the next two days. I’ll be looking at the unit from two perspectives – one is mine as a ‘user’, and the second is also in the framework of how a coach might use the data. My coach is eager to start digging into it – to separate usefulness from hype – and perhaps I can even sucker him into writing a piece within the review.
So here is the thing. The device is capable of tracking muscle oxygenation similar to how the Moxy does it (although it’s still unclear as to if the device measures absolute or relative oxygenation – they have NOT answered any questions about this and seem to be intentionally avoiding it) and could in theory communicate with an ANT+ device that supports oxygenation profiles. I think they were originally planning on supporting those protocols, don’t know if they actually do at this time. I suspect that could be added via firmware at some point.
As far as the usefulness of the device or LT in general is a debatable topic. Some camps say that your FTP or CP is all you need. Others will argue that it’s hard to do a true accurate FTP test (most seem to do 20 minute tests which are about as accurate as using the maximum HR formula). 95% of 20 minute power might work for some people, but it’s probably wrong for more people than it is right. Thus being able to get your LT could be valuable and or more convenient than doing a 1 hour FTP test.
With all that being said, I don’t know if these guys just have poor management or don’t know what they are doing. Their marketing material is clearly wrong and hasn’t been updated. If you google it you will find more articles discussing the outdated feature set (showing it being used all the time which is what was originally planned).
“The BSX Insight is meant to be used every 6-8 weeks to re-establish your training zones and see how you are improving based on the data it provides you with. It is not meant to be used every day.”
This was more perplexing to me:
“The one problem I had while taking my first test was I felt that my numbers were too low, so I contacted the company to ask them about this data. They (BSX) answered my questions, suggested what to do during the next test in order to get a more accurate number and even let me know what my body was saying according to the device.”
Shouldn’t it be intuitive enough that I don’t have to “hack the system” to get an accurate reading?
Marvin,
Allow me to give you the complete story for why Erin experienced issues during her first test.
When we followed up with Erin she admitted to not adhering to the test protocol fully by not completing the test (which requires you to go to exhaustion). She completed the stage she assumed was her LT and stopped, we were able to see that in the data collected by BSXinsight. Similar to doing a blood LT test, when using BSXinsight to do an LT assessment test Erin should have completed stages past her LT to get accurate results. There was no issue with BSXinsight or processing the data.
Not completing the test protocol is clearly bad, but let me ask this question:
Lets just say she couldn’t continue after hitting the level that she did? Would you then argue that the LT it determined was correct? There are some folks that are at extremely high Lactate levels even at their FTP. It is conceivable that they could hit exhaustion at a power/pace just slightly above.
Shouldn’t the test be looking for the inflection point where Lactate has a huge increase? Wouldn’t the data from her test, even stopping too soon have show that?
Steve that’s a great clarifying question. First, I would say that if she couldn’t continue after hitting the level she did, then she would be at exhaustion (obviously). From that BSXinsight would have the necessary data to determine her LT.
It is looking for that inflection point in your muscle oxygenation (similar to that of lactate in a blood test). Here is a FAQ page written with a nice graph to show you what the raw data should look like. With Erin, she stopped the test just after her oxygenation reached the peak. If you’re looking at the FAQ graph, her data looks similar to if the FAQ athlete had stopped at the 18 minute mark. Which is not enough data to complete the full “curve” of what the oxygenation data should look like, and therefore not enough data to give an accurate LT result.
Allow me to add some ideas and thoughts to this interesting discussion.
In many cases O2Hb or HHb , or depending what NIRS equipment you may use SmO2 or TSI % or Hb difference can react , but do not have to react, similar like many blood vlaues. In the discussion here it is lactate, but you could take epinephrine or adrenalin or norepinephrine and other datas, indicating a change in performance and or intensity.
NIRS data indicate what they are, informations as a trend or in some equipment as an absolute value on the change in O2 bound to Hb or Mb. If we use HHb ( deoxygenated Hb ) than we may see an increase in the values at some intensities, where the body delivers less O2 than he actually needs or is able to utilize. If NIRS uses O2Hb ( oxygenated Hb ) than the trend would show a drop in O2 Hb., if they use SmO2 than you would see a drop in the graph . If they use Hb diff than you would see a drop as well..
Now we can have a situation, where lactate may increase as it often happen at a higher intensity but O2Hb or HHb may not chnage at all or in fact we may see an increase in O2Hb or a decrease in HHb.
This can easy be produced as a fun experiment by simply playing with respiration so you shift the O2 diss curve to the left. O2 Hb will increase but lactate as well. . So next is, that NIRS will tell you whether you have a Delivery limitation or a Utilization limitation. Beginners often show a utilization limitation. Top athletes can show a delivery limitation. In the case under discussion , this person may in fact has pushed very hard and had simply to quit as she may have a Utilization limitation. So she delivers perfect O2 and actually so much , that she has no problem to maintain a high level of oxygenation, but she has a limitation to use all what she delivers so she will increase O2 independent energy production as only so much can be utilized over O2 dependent help. We see using NIRS since many many years often cases, where O2 Hb or HHb simply do not drop despite a very extrem increase in lactate or epinephrine and other blood markers.
.. So the question for me is how we than can use a high O2 Hb or HHb level or SmO2 or TSI level to correlate with a chnage in a metabolic marker like lactate is.
Lactate is NOT produced due to hypoxia or a dropping of O2levels as we by now most of all learned to accept..
If we like to have a more in depth discusson and if you like to see graphs we can go to MOXY monitor forum. to have an open and fair discussion.
At this point, I would have to say the information is interesting, but also a bit overkill.
Based on current research, no one has conclusively shown that training at an exact wattage level or even an exact % of FTP or LT achieves a specific result in all athletes or is guaranteed to train x systems at the maximal possible rate.
With that being said, as long as you can get a close approximation of your LT, that is good enough to base your different zones.
So at the end of the day, all LT is showing is a point where you are above a sustainable effort. Does it matter that Lactate is a lagging indicator produced as the result of hypoxia or elves? No, all that matters is that you will not be able to hold that effort much longer than 1 hour.
Unless you can conclusively show that training at a specific power that achieves say a 57% blood oxygenation level will achieve result x better than training at 55% or 61% then I think you are barking up the tree of over complexity.
Steve,
wowww thanks for that incredible and for me the first constructive feedback on this page here.
Absolutely agree and it is perfect written. and all in english and not in my Swenglish (swiss and english) you make the absolute perfect point.There is in fact no study done which shows what the change will be when training at any % intensity, whether it is based on wattage, HR lactate levels or SmO2 levels at all.Reason: we are not a machine, we are a physiological system with daily sometimes extreme changes in how we are able to delivery energy ( cardiac system , respiratroy system capillarisation reaction like reflex vasoconstriction and vasodilatataion or how we utilize energy over changes in O2 diss cuvre and so on.
This is exactly the reason why NIRS technology can be a potential game changer in sport and any activity.
It is already an extremly efficient tool in rehabillitation. Let’s give you an example.
65 year old cardiac patient comes in my offcie for a cardiac rehab.
Goal : Increase and redeveloppment of his Stroke volume. So we have to find a daily optimal intensity not based on any % calculated but based on his daily reaction caused by many physiological reactions after food intake, post exercise reaction from yesterday, even barometric pressure due to changes in weather pattern. So the only way we can have a perfect contolled workout is with a hemodynamic live assessment like a physio flow , where we see live noninvasively his Stroke volume, his Ejection fraction % his systemic vascular resistance his cardiac contraction time. Now we pair this with a K42b and have as well his respiratory information like Tidal Volume and respiratory frequency and more important his pCO2 for information on his O2 dissosiation curve reactions, which is crucial for O2 loading in the lung to the blood and O2 release from the blood to the tissue. Now you add a NIRS and we originally started with the incredible great Portamon wireless and super small and we have live feedback, when one of the vital organs start to limit blood supply and as such oxygen supply to nonessential body parts like noninvolved muscles and later involved muscles.
The absolute first reaction on some problem in energy delivery is in non essentiial body areas like noninvolved muscels.
We will reduce blood flow there over a reflex vasoconstriction and therefor we reduce O2 delivery towards this areas as well. The first place we see this is over NIRS live feedback.
. Now true all this is overkill and if I have 10 patients a day I never could do all of this.
BUT I can use a NIRS equipment and see :
Drop in tHb as an indication of blood flow in a noninvolved muscle as an early sign, that delivery starts to be limited at this current intensity. Than I can see, whether SmO2 drops at the same time as a sign of reduction in O2 delivery in a nonessential muscle group. Following this reaction at a current intensity we will have if we increase intensity the next NIRS reaction by seeing a drop in SmO2 even in the involved muscles due to many different resons. This many different reason can be traced back because over many years we did all the above, collected hundreds of datas by having all the above equipment on patients and athletes and finally can use live NIRS to trace in most cases back, what is limitation at the current intensity and what will be triggered at that current intensity. Is it a stimmulation for the cardiac system ( SV for example ) is it a stimmulatiion for utilization or stimmulation of mitochondria density developpment or vasuclarisation. Now this intensity may be differentt tomorrow due to the stress we aplied today so again we use live NIRS to get the same physiological stimmulation and NOT the same physical % calculated performance
So real application. The client comes in, applies 2 MOXY’s on anoninvolved and one on a involved muscle,has a HR monitor on and 5 min later can see his live feedback on a big screen on the wall, he starts his cardiac workout. He can see numbers or traces and in some cases when the weather is nice he may go for a walk outside,he has an alarm from a Garmin watch telling him, when SmO2 starts to go into a critical level so he can adjust intensity accordingly. that is it. a live daily optimal load to hope we can improve not just his performance but even more important his stuctural situation in this case rehab of his heart.
Is it done in Sport absolutely: we have whole icehockey teams training as a team but individual load. Example interval.
1. Warm up to reach optimal individula Oxygenation and optimal individual blood flow.
2. Start interval all at the same time.
Player a has a arterial occlusion after 16 seconds so he stops and he has a reloaded CP SmO2 information after 56 seconds so he goes again all out till he desatruates down to the first load or reaches again arterial occlusion so this time after 19 seconds so he rest this time it takes 45 seconds for reloading and he goes again. After set 6 he can’t anymore push to reach arterial occlusion so training set is over.
Player b will be different different length of load different lengt of recovery different numbers of sets,but all did an all out load to reach arterial occlusion but very different stimmulation needed
This is live observed by the coach on a small tablete with 8 players at the same time so 2 coaches 16 players 16 optimal indvidual loads.
Now you move this into the game and you know which player has to come of the ice and which one can not yet go back on the ice. Is that a game cnanger.
Watch for some top teams and what the assitend coaches have in their hands. ?
Steve thanks for your realy great point as it is exactly why NIRS is NOT a lactate analyzer nor can it replace any lactate analyzer. it is what it is it measures changes in O2.do we deliver more than we need, are we on a homeostasis or do we use more than we can deliver. This in some equipments as an absolute % level like SmO2 . Than you add the trend only in blood flow and therefor supply changes and you have a cute little tool with an incredible live feedback potential.What it needs is an outside the BOX idea and a more critical look, whether physiology can be calculated over formulas or whether physiology takes place just now as we speak
Got a nice email with the question:
Can we back up at least some of our crazy stroies.
Answer is yes most of them and here just a short version of some of the many papers out there supporting the use of NIRS since a long time and some very newer version of people jumping into this fascinating field.
Michael J. Joyner and Darren P. Casey
Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; and Department of Physical Therapy and
Rehabilitation Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
L Joyner MJ, Casey DP. Regulation of Increased Blood Flow (Hyperemia) to Muscles
During Exercise: A Hierarchy of Competing Physiological Needs. Physiol Rev 95: 549– 601, 2015; doi:10.1152/physrev.00035.2013.—This review focuses on how blood flow to contracting skeletal muscles is regulated during exercise in humans. The idea is that blood flow to the contracting muscles links oxygen in the atmosphere with the
contracting muscles where it is consumed. In this context, we take a top down approach and review the basics of oxygen consumption at rest and during exercise in humans, how these values change with training, and the systemic hemodynamic adaptations that support them. We highlight the very high muscle blood flow responses to exercise discovered in the 1980s. We also discuss the vasodilating factors in the contracting muscles responsible for these very high flows. Finally, the competition between demand for blood flow by contracting muscles and maximum systemic cardiac output is discussed as a potential challenge to blood pressure regulation during heavy large muscle mass or whole body exercise in humans. At this time, no one dominant dilator mechanism accounts for exercise hyperemia. Additionally, complex interactions between the sympathetic nervous system and the microcirculation facilitate high levels of systemic oxygen extraction and permit just enough sympathetic control of blood flow to contracting muscles to regulate blood pressure during large muscle mass exercise in humans.
Great question. I will say that it’s not how many steps/stages you go past your FTP, as to how many stages you complete during the test and pushing yourself to exhaustion. The minimum number of stages required is 6, plus the warm-up stage at the beginning.
The second to last paragraph on this FAQ page should give you some more information.
Ok, that’s good! I’d rather do 2 low level steps and 1-2 after my last FTP measurements, than 3 with a pain.
The Inflection point in the graph at LT is not so evident, so i thought that the main drop is a must for some calculation to predict the LT inflection.
Not a problem! That’s the amazing thing about BSXinsight, it doesn’t matter if you’re just getting in shape or winding down your race season. BSXinsight’s algorithm adapts to your physiology and level of fitness!
We see using NIRS since many many years often cases, where O2 Hb or HHb simply do not drop despite a very extrem increase in lactate or epinephrine and other blood markers.
Is it exception or rule? Shouldn’t the H+ concentration (decr. pH) shift the dissociation curve right and display smo2 drop on the graph?
I was hoping BSX would write a feedback on this interesting trends with see with NIRS. So I like to give some feedback on this from my point of view.
a) True H + change towards a lower pH would shift the disscurve to the right and as such help to release O2 from Hb, so HHb should go up easier or O2Hb dropping or if you have SmO2 SmO2 would drop as well. ( some care has to be made when there is a big chnage in tHb) Now do not get lost, keep in mind, that pH changes H + changes , but pH may not change just because we see an increase in lactate. An increase in lactate can in some situation mean an increase in H + and a potential drop in pH but it does not has to be always the case.
We can see an increase in lactate without a change in pH as long the system can keep H + in balance ( help buffer H + and lactate is one of a great buffer helper together with other options.
So we can have an increase in lactate but no change on H+ and therfor no change or minimal change in SmO2.
2. NIRS placing.
NIRS is great but it just only measures what happens in the muscles we have it placed.
Remember: NIRS does not measures lactate, it can’t it measures changes in O2 and gives trends in blood flow over tHb.
So if the calf muscle, due to technical way you run for example ( heelrunner ) or you are a forefoot runner, or in cycling you may drop your heel or tipi toe out of the saddle or what ever you just do, you get a feedback on the result of this muscle involvment and that’s it. Lactate if tested in your finger is a systemic left over of an energy source, lactate, which as well helps under other situation to buffer and maintain H+ balance ..So your calf musce may be not severely involved in a hard workout and as such my not show a severe or clear drop in SmO2.. That’s why NIRS is so great, you than simply place it on a muscle you think is one of the main contributor of the performance and you have a better chance to see a clear drop in SmO2 as an indication of a shift indelivery to utilization situation. Some may name it SmO2 break point.
3. ONe more point , which is interesting wiht NIRs, it gives us feedback on delivery and on utilization.
So once you know the Limiter in your physiological systems and it may be a local utilization limitation so you have a limit how much O2 you can turn arround, but you have an excellent delivery system Cardiac , Resp and so on you simply may deliver far more in the tested area, than you actually can use so SmO2 ill stay very high, as there is never or minimal problmes with delivery and always enough O2 in that tested muscle but other muscels involved in the activity are clearly overloaded and utilize or can utilze more than wee can deliver.
So here just a few points why SmO2 may drop or not despite a change no change in lactate . Hope that helps and was clear enough in my “swenglish ” swiss and english
Thank you for such a detailed response. Yes, the increase
in lactate and high values of lactate doesn’t mean an increase in H+ (in the blood, but what we have in muscle cells), so do you mean the extreme level of lactate or extreme increase in lactate?
Austin, how many steps I must do after my FTP?
The main drop on this at 290watts, FTP ~ 260, if i stop at 280 can you determine FTP?
The right answer: bsx will determine the threshold (but it won’t be near a lactate threshold) it’ll be lower. You must do as much steps as you can, the last step must be in max HR, pain and other pleasures.
My results (i have the same ):
day, LT/AET, watts
16 apr: 232/247, stopped at 320w (complete 300w)
25 apr: 217/237, stopped at 300w
16 may: 207/234, stopped at 280w
23 may: 236/254, stopped at 320w
In the last test i also haven’t reached max HR (184-186) , it was only 173. So I have doubts if I completed 320w step, how would it affect the bsx thresholds? but it’s impossible (physiologically) to repeat the test again immediately.
All tests were performed in the same conditions as much as possible the same week day, time (except the first), sleep, nutrition, training intensity during the week, a rest day before test.
Austin, can you share the graphs (bsx raw data) last test to compare?
oleyhe
both actually, increase in lactate levels as well a speed of increase in lactate.
Here what we can se with NIRS when we use multiple NIRS on one athlete
Placement>
1 NIRS on left calf
2 nd NIRS on right calf
3 rd NIRS on left vastus lat
4 th NIRS on right vastus lat
5. NIRS on right delta pars acromialis
Now what we did is step test and changing bike technique in left and right leg so for example drop heel on the left side and tippi toe right side.
At the same time I had SEMG on left and right calf as well so to see,whether it was not just a position change but in fact a change in motor unit recruitments.
Why > because we could have a positional change without a higher recruitment pattern and than NIRS feedback would change and we could make the wrong conclusions.
Very short summary of this case study.
We have very different HHb O2Hb SmO2 and tHb results in left and right. depending on position.
Now depending on efficiency of the position we have changes in lactate but we never know which muscle really contributed how many lactate to the result in the finger. It is simply the end result of lactate who reaches the finger tip and that is it. We never know ho much really is used before it reaches the finger nor due we know, whether it was produced due to what some may call anaerobic reasons or not.* anaerobic reasons are more the exceptions than the rule
Now we may completely overload the right calf due to the very inefficient position we may choose and as such the muscle may even create a at least venous of sometimes even arterial occlusion. We can se that with any good NIRS on the trend in tHb.
tHb will increase in case of a venous outflow restriction and than may gt flat in case of an arterial occlusion. There has to be a certain reaction after we stop to know, whether it was an occlusion trend o a vasodilatation due to increase in cardiac output. Now the answers are all given with NIRS assessment , which is the beauty of this devices…
Now lactate and pH will react accordingly. In an occlusion situation we have no outflow and sometimes no inflow so H + can go nowhere so it is intracellular and in the local pooled blood and the balance is gone and ATP splitting has its challenge. so your muscle simply quits.
In all other muscles you may as we always do even at rest , create lactate, you may use it to move H + out of the cell into the circulation. You therefor can maintain Balance and kep going. Now you have to deal with H+ in the circulation and bed sides other options respiration is a nice helper by getting rid of CO2.
Example> we have regular trained athlete, who can move all out effort a VE of 165 L of air. a certain % will be CO2. To stay normocapnic he will have to remove a certain amount of CO2. If the muscular activity now produces far more H + and he should ventilate a VE of 240 L/min but he is not trained to do that he will accumulate CO2 will get hypercapnic and H + will be very high in the blood but ultimately in the cell as ell and performance as t drop or end.
Now in te latter stage we have a high lactate and a high H + so low pH. If he now is able to move 240 L/min VE in fact we have athletes who can move 300 L/min, than he can keep H + longer balanced in the cell can keep performance going and we have a balanced H + in the cell but an ongoing increase in lactate in the blood as he can use the lactate as a H + shuttle and as well as energy source and the ATP levels can be maintained on the needed level..
In other words>
When we work with for example hockey player and we can improve their respiration they can maintain a longer all out performance as well they have a much faster recovery when on the bench due to al this interactions between H + lactate and O2 disscurve reaction of loading and unloading of O2 from lungs to blood or from blood to muscle..
If you have a NIRS you can easy make for yourself a demonstration
We use this in our workshops . Bike or run just below what some people will call lactate thresholds. No matter which of the 25 different lactate threshold ideas you may use. Simply go a speed you can therforr sustain for 30 to 60 min. So you could take FTP 60 or 20 or what ever you believe in.
Now go 15 to 20 mn so your physiological systems are balanced HR RF watt and O2Hb or SmO2 and if you have a NIRS who gives tHb stable tHb Some as well would name it MAXLASS.
Less crazy names simply feel ypu work but very great feeling.
Now take a lactate sample.. Optimal as one sample really says nothing, take 2 sample , one by 8 mn and one by 15 min. In a max lass or in a balanced situation the sample should be fairly close to the same result plus minus 0.2 mmol when you use a point of care analyser. This is the accepted and often seen variation. This is a problem for some threshold concepts , as we can have plus minus 0.4 range so it can be difficult to say where certain lactate reactions may be as well as we look at step length.
Now assuming you ave a stable good performance.. Start hyper ventilation so get rid of more CO2 than needed for 2 – 4 min and than test lactate. than go back to balance for 5 to 10 min test lactate than try to hypoventilate much harder to do and test lactate. You will be surprised on the result despite a fixed wattage and you will be surprised on the NIRS O2Hb reaction. It is on of the simple workshops demo to throw a lot of open questions towards all of us as we all learned a different story on lactate, than hart we know now it is. So the classical ideas on lactate use like lactate tolerance trainings are still out there but why would we have to learn to tolerate lactate, when we start to accept that lactate is a very great product and nit what I was many years back .
Hope this gives you some feedback but as usual much more new questions when we look more critically into the relation ship of the different physiological reactions.
Physiological reactions change daily and hourly and using a point based on any testing is a great concept to make it easy but with todays technology we much rather look daily live where and how we react due to the workout we did yesterday or the food we took in , the barometric pressure change and so on.
Now in the past we had to do that as lactate or VO2 and other methods are all indirect feedbacks and we had to hope . With IRS we have a direct feedback. So in 3 hours I will do a ride in Joshua tree national park. very hot today slightly altitude and very different than Canada so I have 2 NIRS on and will adjust my intensity accordingly. My goal today is to do a vascularisation workout. So high CO without overloading the cardiac system, and good vasodilatation help over CO2 so slower and deeper breathing than usual but avoiding shift of O2 diss curve to the right so I will look live on tHb and SmO2 reaction as well as HR. I have a small cellphone size tablet on my handle bar and se that all live in front of me. I may be super slow but who cares in may age anyway.
day, LT/AET, watts
16 apr: 232/247, stopped at 320w (complete 300w)
25 apr: 217/237, stopped at 300w
16 may: 207/234, stopped at 280w
23 may: 236/254, stopped at 320w
This are great datas and may help many of us to have some critical thoughts.
1. Power zoning versus physiological live feedback help to possible adjust power to the physiological feedback.
2. The question, whether when we use a single test point like LT or FTP or 220 minus Age or any formula. and than take a calculator versus having the advantage of newer technology, which give us live feedback for physiological defined zonings .
Just as a simple example to this above post and his HR reaction in one of his tests.
When we use any current great NIRS equipment ,than we are able to get pretty close to an individual information on current performance limitation reasons.
Depending on the workout we may have done yesterday we have a different physiological reaction today by the same wattage or performance in any sport.
Example>
The limitation is a cardiac output limitation with a tendency wo compensate with HR when SV reaches a current limitation.
So I may plan a Stroke volume stimulation workout.
Therefor I workout today to actually use the physiological reaction from my workout today so I can have a Stroke volume workout stimulation tomorrow.
The result will be , that today I may have by 200 wat 167 HR and tomorrow I have by 200 watt 153 HR.
Meaning that I create a more efficient cardiac out put and as such I will have as well a higher maximal end wattage today.
So using if possible power and using live feedbac on bio markers will be a nice individual approach to a better quality of a workout with the information I look for.
Now using NIRS I have this now always ahead o me.
NIRS is a direct or as direct as we can go for the moment feedback with as usual its own limitations.
The question than comes up. Why would I use a newer direct technology and degrade it back to a 40 plus year old squeaky concept of 25 different versions of LT ideas, when |I can see live now , what was never possible before with VO2 or lactate or any other tool .
Why would I test for a point information every 6 or longer periods of time, when we all know , that we have daily changes in physiological reactions. So why not trace live energy demand and supply and adjust depending on your workload the intensity accordingly to todays physiological reactions.
Lots of interesting questions now show up in many great discussion forums and yes we have often more questions than answers. That is the great advantage from any point test no discussion as 80 % form 100 are given as a clear result. But is it a clear stimulation when looking form a physiological idea of training .
Juerg, it’s another situation. This is an issue with algorithm BSX use to determine *-threshold. I could continue to perform the test, and stopped just because completed a sufficient number of steps and it was above my FTP.
Today I suffered up to 340w and bsx results were 247w – AET, 263w – LT. If I stopped at 280w, I would have received near 207/234. It looks like they take a %% of the final step and are looking the inflection or smth. at this segment. It would be interesting to take a look at the smo2 data.
Also during the test CO2 concentration increased from 490ppm to 1600+ppm in the room (~50m3) despite of open windows, 40cm fan on full speed and 12C outside, which certainly affects the results )
sorry for the late response, I was at the ACSM in San Diego so no back in the airport and I love to read your last feedback.
Reason. My long explanation is not looking anymore data.
My explanations or better put thoughts would be more relevant, if your test data would be the result of a physiological feedback created by your body..
Now based on your feedback we have to ask some interesting questions..
This questions relate to any type of physiological testing.
Question.
Does the protocol I choose combined with the equipment I may use create a test result I like to create, or does the physiological reactions can take lace despite the protocol .
Example.
Famous one.
Igo all out for 300 m. I take immediately after 300 m a HR a Respiratory frequency and the well know lactate level.
Question. How is the lactate value immediately after 300 m. What is the level after 2 min 4 min 6 min and perhaps 10 min..
Once you give a possible answer we have to ask . Why
After our answer to why we have to wonder, whether the test 300 m we did is a great idea to assess HR RF and lactate as it suppose to be during the run in that intensity.
You can create many ideas and test, where the result is what you may like to see, but it may be not the result of the physiological response but may be created due to the test protocol design.
The body is a physiological team with some great team players like the heart the respiratory system , circulation and many more.
Each team member tries , if given the time to be a part of a great work * survival ( and in sport we may name it performance.
Your cardiac system may react initially with increase in frequency due to lack of preload ability and once blood volume is moving better you may recorrect HR down as Stroke volume is now more effective.
Many more options in this direction.
This is called functional reaction which if given time than can get some help from a structural ability.
Same holds true for design of workouts. Do you like to create a functional stimulation or o you like to repeat functional stimuli to hope to create a structural change..
To optimize this workouts it is nice to know , what is your current limiter and how does this limiter can be supported to a certain degree with some compensation from stronger trained systems.
The most famous example in exercise physiology is the miss concept of VT * ventilator threshold is equal to lactate threshold . This can be close but it now has to be close.
It all depends on limitation or compensation ability of the respiratory system.
Now when using NIRS we have very similar situations.
If you have a great developed delivery system, but a less optimal developed utilization situation than you may deliver a lot of O2 in fact more than you are able to convert to maintain ATP but you still use more energy than you have to use for a short time before you quit an O2 independent helper.. Now in NIRS we see that as we have cases, where in any protocol step test we have a minimal and sometimes no clear drop in O2Hb so no breakpoint is easy to see.. On the other side we may have a nice lactate level situation in the blood, as lactate was helping us to maintain H plus balance intracellular by helping to buffer H plus *MCT1 and MCT 4 ideas.
Now on the other hand we may have a sever drop in O2Hb but lactate actually drops as well. * O2 disscurve shift idea(.
In short summary
Your data suggest, that the LT or AET or what ever points you try to find are not created by a physiological reaction and or reasoning but are forced upon you due to the test protocol respectively your choice to go all out or not.
This opens the question , whether the LT you have under any situations is a reliable point to than be used with a calculator to find physiological zoning.
With todays technology of direct feedbacks like NIRS is that would be a very big step backwards to the stone age of lactate testing.
Physiological assessments should be given us answers on the physiological systems and zoning should be build on this feedbacks and not on a % calculation of a magical point we find due to a fixed test protocol..
Physiological reactions should take place as they occur and not at a point, where we like that they have to occur. Or in words of the fist great exercise physiologist Aristoteles.
When the facts proof the existing theory wrong, the theory has to be reviewed and not the way that we adjust the facts so the theory can be maintained.
Depending on where you’re shipping to, import duties may end up not being charged at all. In South Africa for instance you can look up the commodity code for fitness equipment (hrms and the like are exempt here) and you should effectively end up paying only the 14% vat.
Lucky you. I am in Hong Kong and according to BSX, FedEx won’t ship to HK. Which is odd, given the number of FedEx packages I receive.
What frustrates me most is that, according to BSX itself, sports stores in the US are receiving units. Meanwhile, original Kickstarter supporters (I am in the low 100 range) are not. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
Keep in mind many athletes can ride at 110-120% of their FTP for 20 minutes. Using a 20 minute test and taking 95% is more likely to be wrong than correct. If you are looking to improve your FTP, I would base your training on the BSX value. If you were to do say 2x20s at your FTP based on a 20 minute test, you most likely will get better at doing 20 minute intervals but not necessarily improve your true FTP.
I tend to agree with your observation. In this case, to equate both testing protocols, I will have to multiply my 20min average with 0.88! What a morale cruncher. And most of my future workouts will now on be lower in power since all my power zones will shift downwards.
Its hard to stomach but probably the right thing to do.
Received mine yesterday. Was on charge last night and did my run test this morning. Pairing the unit using the app and a Samsung Note 3 was hit and miss. Wahoo Tickr paired once in a “check if it does” last night but wouldn’t pair for the test this morning… showed up fine in the wahoo utility when I had a look there. Having to re-pair the devices for every test is a pain. Def something to look at for the next version of the software…also, from a usability perspective. Get the pairing out of the way earlier in the process…right after the bike/run test selection screen.
I can’t really find a good forum where this device is being discussed (and I am the first person to post on their help forums!)
I did my test yesterday and it came up with 256. I’ve done 20 minutes at 320+ and over an hour at 280 in the past 2 months. Previously I set my zones off 95% a “typical” 20 minute effort, which is obviously a lot higher than 256.
If I follow the Coggin test protocol, my zones are much higher than what BSX thinks. Similar to someone above, but worse.
Certainly if I used the BSX training zones, I can just ride around all day in zone 5, which seems a bit weird. I also find the trainer much much more difficult than outdoors up a mountain, so maybe that is part of it.
I will retest in a couple of weeks and see if it is consistent.
I received my BSX Insight yesterday, charged it and did my first test last night. I tapered my training back this week, and checked my TSB to see that I was just barely negative to try to hit close to ‘zero’ (or fully recovered) prior to taking my test. I track my heart rate variability numbers every morning also-those showed I was well recovered and ready to take a test. So I ended up testing to the protocol, and sticking to it exactly to make sure I did it well. My notes and thought below:
First, I had to decide whether or not to ‘warm up’ prior to taking the test, like I would more traditionally do during a 20 or 30 minute constant power test (usually warm up for about 20 – 25 minutes before drilling the long interval). I chose to simply start from cold as I was concerned doing a ‘warmup’ may change my ‘resting’ blood chemistry, and the first step in the test was to establish the baseline chemistry. In hindsight, this was the correct approach.
During the initial interview questions, I was a little conservative in my answers of 40k TT power average and conversational wattage estimate-better to start too off a little lower than too hard.
Notes from the test itself:
I had my wife holding the phone as it stepped through the 20W increments during the test. She also controlled changing the resistance on the rollers (I use E-motion rollers) so I can do the easiest portion (60W for me) all the way to the hardest (240W for me) all without having to shift from my small front ring to large front ring. This was super helpful and helped the test run smoothly. She also was in charge of handing me my water bottle a couple times during the test to keep me drinking. Primarily though, she gave me the heads up when the 3 minute segment was coming to a close so I could focus on hitting a ‘lap’ on my Garmin Edge 810, and shift to the next gear to quickly dial in the new power level. It worked great.
A note about setting up a Garmin for taking the test:
I have 6 fields displayed on my screen as follows (from top to bottom): Power-3 sec avg for current power; next row down: Power-Lap (for my current lap’s average power-to ensure I’m targeting exactly the wattage that I’m supposed to for that 3 minute increment); next row down (2 fields): Cadence & HR (instantaneouse HR); Bottom row (2 fields): Lap time (to know how far into the segment I’m in) / HR-Lap (to see my average HR for the current lap). This is how I have set up my Garmin for all my interval work, which allows me to pace to wattage as closely as possible. Worked perfect for the BSX test!
Results: I hadn’t take a 20 minute test in a while, but suspected I could hold about 200-210W for a 20-30 minute effort if I was well rested, etc (like I was). The reported FTP (LT2) was 199w, so I’m a bit stronger than I was suspecting (good news) with a LTHR of 180 bpm.
My aerobic threshold (LT1) numbers came in at 175W & 171 bpm-both numbers I believe from doing intervals in the recent past.
Power zone recommendations from the test seemed spot on, though I’m not used to my ‘Sub-Threshold’ zone encompasing the actual test value in the range (my range was 180-208). I would have call this just ‘threshold’, for Zone 4-then I agree with that wattage range. Supra-Threshold (zone 5) is more like V02max and lines up with my V02max zone that I’m used to.
I was glad to see that my endurance zone (Z2) has been adjusted according to my test, so I know where I need to be for endurance rides. I was surprised to see that zone 3 (tempo) was completely below my LT1 number-perhaps that’s no surprise and just reveals my ignorance in where to place that zone?
Overall, I’m very please with my test, and BSX in general. I think it’s a great product and I’m super excited to have a ‘non-subjective’ way to re-evaluate my progress. It get’s old constantly guessing if I did my best effort for a 20-30 minute effort, how my 20-30 min power corresponds to my ‘true threshold’ power, what number to use to set my zones, etc. For that clarification alone, the BSX Insight has done a great job with what I’ve seen already.
Update: Yesterday I retested after a 5 week training block (pretty intensive). I planned to retest this coming week, but due to travel, fatigue, and weather, I ended up with a lighter training load towards the end of last week. As such, my TSB gradually recovered to near zero-meaning the time was optimal for me to test again, so I decided to test yesterday afternoon.
After a dedicated threshold training block designed by my (former) coach, I was pleased to see the training in the correct (BSX test based) zones paid off. My LT1 wattage improved from 175w up to 191w, with my LT1 HR staying about the same 171 bpm initially and 172 bpm yesterday. My LT2 numbers likewise showed a nice gain from 199w initially up to 217w yesterday and my LT2 HR came down slightly from 180 bpm to 178 bpm.
I have updated my zones and plan to start training with the new zones this week! So far, I’m really happy with the BSX device and how it provides me with an objective power vs LT number on which to base my training zones.
A couple notes: I did not end up using the default (Coggan?) zones for HR because I’ve historically used a more ‘Karvonen’ based set of zones (where you subtract out your resting HR, rather than assuming the lowest HR to be ‘zero’). Also, my gains were pretty substantial for a short amount of time. I have a theory as to why: I’ve actually been hovering around the 200-210w threshold power range the last several seasons, but haven’t ever set my zones based on anything higher than 200w. Also, I’ve done very little V02max interval training (which I started to incorporate the last 2 weeks of my last training block). I think my body has been ‘saturated’ and ready to step up a level, and the V02max intervals are helping to very effectively boost my FTP in relatively short order-witnessed by a pretty large increase in my LT numbers.
One other thing: I know in the world of 280-360w threshold athletes, my numbers may seem pretty diminutive, however, I should have added the other factor: I’m a short, small male. My initial test weight was 132.2 lb, and my weight yesterday was about 130.4 lb. Thus my initial BSX test result was 3.32 w/kg and my test yesterday was 3.67 w/kg. I’m hoping to gradually build up to 4 w/kg, but don’t have a timeline or expectation on when to expect to get to that level.
I will say though, that having the knowledge of where I tested out using the same method / device has been helpful for me to know that I can safely increase my training zones and be able to manage them. This, in and of itself, has made the purchase of the BSX all worthwhile for me. I am not interested in real-time O2 numbers at this time, so simply having a repeatable protocol to follow and test results, based on the same measurement (with whatever perceived flaws or limitations may theoretically be present) is all I was hoping for from the BSX device. In other words, this has served the purpose of blood lactate testing for me, just as promised by BSX-and for that, I’m a satisfied customer. :-)
First, I use the iphone app on my iPhone 6+ (just in case anyone is wondering). So far, I have not had any connection problems at all.
To answer your questions, the first test started me off with a 3 minute segment at 60w, then proceeded with a protocol up to 260w. During the first test, I only made it 1 minute into the 240w segment, before voluntarily terminating the test (I was beat!). I hit close to my max HR during the test (190 bpm), but not the highest I’ve seen (ever) (193 bpm).
The second test, I was in a bit better shape. The app set me up to start again at 60w for the ‘baseline’ reading, and set up segments up to 280w. I was able to complete the 240w segment, but mis-shifted going into the 260w segment (I chalk it up to fatigue / mental error). I probably would have lasted less than 1 minute into the 260w segment. Anyway, my max HR for the second test was 187 bpm. I likely would have come close to the 190 bpm on the second test again, but it was sheer willpower to continue into the 260w segment, and I messed up the shift, so I wasn’t able to continue (nor did I want to, especially after the missed shift). Hopefully on my next test, I’ll be able to spend more time in the 260w step-if not even complete it. That’s my goal anyway.
It seems that bsx-thresholds depend on how many steps you completed even after your LT.
I’ve edited bsxinsight data example to show what I mean. The green lines where I stopped and green ellipsis is where bsx-thresholds determined. If the algorithm based on your physical reaction and search for some special inflections, then it must not depend how many steps you’ve completed after LT.
Nice observation. I can not give an answer n how BSX solves this physiological problem or reaction. What I can tell you is, that when using NIRS you can have very different reactions depending on how hard you may push a load or step test lets try in simple words t explain what I mean.
Your body as in most people has some stronger abilities and some weaker, depending on how you use the body. Some are stronger in the upper body some are weaker compared to the lower body.
Some may have a very great developed respiratory system compared to their muscular system and so on..During any decent length activity you will always first reach the limit of your weakens team member.. Now in a step test the point , where you may reach this weakest link is , where you the first time kind of feel you have to work to maintain the performance. Now depending on your personality or what ever you may not like that feeling and decide this is hard and quit. .. So you did not asked for some support * compensation ( from team members or systems, which could still work harder and therefor help you to maintain the same or even a next higher level..
If you , like in your last case decide to push harder than you have to integrate compensators and the trend in NIRS as well as for sure in lactate is very different.
This changes NIRS tracing dynamic as well as lactate accumulation and utilization dynamic and as such the comparison between both will look very different and Break point if they exist are on very different intensities.
Now this can happen as in your case due to the design of a protocol combined with your daily motivation plus physiological situation, but it will happened always during any ride you do outside on your bike.
In the past , despite that e know that since. a long time , we had to make some compromises. we use a range of a HR zoning or a range of performance feedback and hope the range was or is good enough to believe we are in a specific stimulatory physiological zone. The dream would be to have a live feedback, whether we have to adjust the performance down or up to be in our target training zone.
Any test we do or numbers we calculate miss that option. NIRS is most likely the first tool we have , where we can get closer to this dream.
looking live, whether we have more O2 delivery than we need , whether we are in balance or whether we use more than we can deliver.
So it is all about the old idea of aerob* O2 ( and anaerobe * not enough O2 ( to put it vry simple.
So why would I go and use something, who is indirect perhaps more or less connected with this idea, when I directly can watch the O2 situation with NIRS . Why would we defend this days 25 different LT concepts , who all look , where this magic change O2 and not O2 takes place and use complex ideas and theories, when I can watch.
Why would I need for every person a different NIRS when it simply gives you feedback on O2 trends no matter on what body the equipment is placed on.
Why would a NIRS care whether it is cycling or running or rowing or strength workout
when all what it is doing is alive feedback on O2 trend.
Do we simply try to maintain a great old idea onLT and force NIRS into this theory
or is there a good question to be ask, whether we may have to review this theory as technology may have advanced in what we can see and therefor can learn.
This was what I may have suspected. If this is true than what is the BSX Insight for when you can simply calculate your FTP based on which stage and how much time into the last stage you are in.
The BSX Insight should give you the same reading irregardless of which step(above your FTP) youu terminate. Else, the BSX insight is flawed.
Thats why I would like to see the grapgh data of my test to see whether the BSX Insight is doing a proper job!
This comment is NOT a critic on any test ideas or equipment but it is a thought on physiological reactions or perhaps better dynamics when we try to use protocols to find something..
As mentioned before it is all about energy supply and demand to maintain a crucial ATP level for survival.
So it is easy to understand, that when I design a protocol where I increase by 1 km / h step after 3 min or I design a protocol where I increase by 2 km/ h per step , that the sudden demand at each increase is different and therefore the supply reaction will be different.
So at each 3 min step change we have an immediate demand for more energy but we have a lag time of the delivery systems like HR ( or better CO ) and VE from the respiration side of delivery but as well as release of CO2. We have a different reaction locally due to the muscle compression which will be different depending on step increase. So NIRS will react live accordingly and you vey easy can see that.
The delay in delivery will create a bigger demand on the local available energy and as such we have to hope for some great support of O2 independent energy supply as well. If load and the step length time allow it the delivery system will finally pick up and establish a new higher load balance of supply and demand.
We reach a new sustainable SmO2 plateau or a stable O2Hb and HHb situation and hope fully as well therefor a stable blood flow.
All this reactions will create a very different load and step length dependent picture in any type of assessment , where we collect data’s like lactate or VO2 or blood sugar , ammonia epinephrine or any blood values.
All the above have an additional big question mark. That is the time delay when the substance shows up in the cell than moves to the blood , than may be used on other areas in the circulation ( like lactate ) before we actually test the left over concentration in the finger tip or earl lobe or where ever we decide it is practical to take a sample.
All this is one of the reason , why we discuss the idea of threshold and here on lactate threshold.
There is no doubt a direct connection between the performance , increase or decrease in performance and any metabolic marker, no matter whether it is called lactate or what ever.
The fascination of lactate threshold was historically easy to understand, as lactate was the bad ugly and trigger of all performance drop and end of an exercise intensity.
The fundamental shift of what lactate seems to be form a great energy source to a shuttle object to move energy and more completely asks for a review of our nice created classical theories.
I mentioned before the question of a lactate tolerance training . Who would have to tolerate the fact to get free money. Hard to believe we have to tolerate that we may in fact enjoy it.
The reasoning of cooling down to get rid of lactate or lactic acid. Why would I use a great source of energy in between a set of a game or tournament when I can store it and have less problem to reload energy storage of food intake. Many more interesting questions.
From a marketing point of view and in the stage we are today with reviewing and working on interesting new concepts on direct energy supply and demand feedbacks we see with live NIRS we clearly tend to try to go back to an established but possible not optimal theory of lactate threshold.. The fact to be able or suppose to be able to test lactate noninvasively is super exiting but do we really need lactate to fond out where we have more O2 perfect O2 and not enough O2 for ongoing performance. Again why test an indirect substance, which has many other reasons to change besides O2, when we can directly assess the trend in O2 now with NIRS.
It is absolutely true, that the simplicity of having one point using it as 100 % and than calculating intensities is a much easier concept to grab than when we have to look at our own bodies reactions and this in some cases daily as it can change sometimes a lot due to the training stimulation the day before.
This is why when using NIRS now we have to look at the individual trend and as it is now super affordable and live we will see more and more coaches using this interesting concept. Nice is to combine it with your current ideas and experience and than starting to ask critical questions, when comparing the feedback information you get form what we did in the past and what we can add for the future.
Here to end a simple example how we use NIRS live.
High school PE lesson for aerobic strength. ( sounds a crazy concept.)
Aerobic means for us using O2 for the load.
So as soon we not use anymore optimal O2 respectively see live the O2 supply runs out we stop.
Better the student stops as not all stop at the same time. It depends on the effort they put in. They have to try to deoxygenate as low as possible. Than wait for re- oxygenation and the set number is given depending on the goal of the coach. a) may be re-oxygenation is the goal so as soon they can not reoxygenate anymore the workout is over.
So student 1 has a today established deoxygenation level of 25 SmO2 % and a reoxygnation level of 80 SmO2 %.
Now he starts and he decides not to push himself hard. So it takes him 38 seconds to reach the target. Student 2 decides as he is highly motivate to go hard so he reaches his target in 26 second.
Now both wait till they are up on their reoxygenation target.
The highly motivated student relaxes great , the other fools around..
You as a coach do not care as physiology takes care on this.
The ” good ” student has to go again after 48 seconds the as well good not motivated student is happy as he has a longer ” break”. You see where this goes.
The “good “student is finish with his workout after 6 sets and moves on to some other task like for example coordination training or technical training to have a better tripling ability or he plays with other students who are finished as well. The to highly motivated student will have much longer before his body tells him that is it.
It is the individual concept off learning . It is not that the coach tells where the student has to go it is that you pick up the student where he is and what can be done now to create for him a personal best based on what all is included in creating persons best.
The fun part is that in the next lesson the not as ” good ” student is highly motivate to get over with thee workout as he likes to play or do nothing and he suddenly has a very different way how I he approaches the strength workout.
Far of the topic we started out but direct related to what we try to do, when we integrate direct bio markers in the market. Look forward and perhaps at least avoid moving backwards to an established but perhaps squeaky concept of LT.
Thanks for sharing your data example with BSX. This is so nice as we can much easier follow some thoughts :
1. take the end of step 200 watt for example and than step 220 watt.
You can see that the increase in lactate is getting close to 1 mmol per 3 min step.
That means, as lactate has a time lag the lactate values we read out where created and most likely higher values not as we see it in the analyzer but some unknown time span before we take it.
So in your case if you would at 200 watt or 220 watt decide to increase the step length to 5 min the lactate curve we see will have a very different dynamic.
O rit just could be, that after 3 min a value of 1.8 mmol may when taken 3 min later by the same wattage be 1.5 mmol now or may be higher.
It all depends, whether the delivery systems may pick up to support the O2 supply more and than we may see after an initial increase in lactate a drop as time goes on. The 3 min step length in this case may be by a certain intensity to short to give all supply systems time to see, whether they still can be a part of the O2 delivery team or not.
If the supply system can reach again an efficient balance of O2 delivery and utilization than in a NIRS trend SmO2 or HHb or O2 Hb will after an initial reaction ( SmO2 and O2Hb will show a dropping trend and HHb will show an increase. ) in some NIRS equipment you may see some contradiction in this reactions.
Now if we reach again a supply and demand balance than SmO2 can be flat or in some cases, where we even are able to sy supply more O2 than needed SmO2 will again go up.
You can follow this trend slightly in your example.
If you do the same but in 5 min steps you see it much nicer.. Now if we can reach again a O2 balance or even oversupply , than the lactate dynamic will change as well. Problem. The short 3 min time section often does not allow us to see that change and for sure not if it is a small change.. Therefor we may see an increase in lactate at each step but we see due to its live feedback a very different dynamic when looking at NIRS feedback. Now this is true under the assumption, that I do NOT change the muscel activity dramatically during the steps.
What do I mean.
There is in running a very common situation, that when running slow and perhaps uncomfortable slow I may be a heel or more middle foot striker. As intensity increases and I move the center of gravity for running more forward than many runners and even more on a treadmill will start shifting more to forefoot running. If we as we should for performance comparison increase the treadmill to an 1.5 % incline we nearly have every runner going to forefoot.
So when we tested NIRS on different locations than we see, that the calf is a great place but as well has some major feedback problems as explained above. Now remember any systems has its weak parts.
So NIRS with a single unit on one calf picks up what it can, trend on O2 supply and demand on the calf. That is it.
So the lactate we test in a running test on the finger it may partial be coming from your one NIRS tested calf , but it may as well can come form many other in running involved muscle’s.. So technical change of activity, where the muscle where we place a nirs can be involved could change the dynamic and as such the lactate dynamic and NIRS dynamic may go in the opposite direction.
Example. We used 6 NIRS in cycling assessments. always left and right leg. 2 on knee extensor, 2 on hip extensor knee flexor and 2 on calf.
The cyclist where instructed to bike with a heel drop in the right leg and a tippi toe position on the left leg.. We looked at wattage production or performance contribution of left and right leg as well as SEMG activity. We added just for fun non-invasive cardiac hemodynamic, VO2 data collection as well as Lactate to the data collection.
Summary : As you can easy understand in a step test they got to an end performance and the lactate was up, so was VO2 so was SEMG and so was CO. What was very different ,as you can imagine, is the dynamic of left and right NIRS data’s as well as SEMG activity in the different muscles.
Now depending what you like to proof with your theory you could take the data of NIRS from the right leg if it fits your lactate dynamic and your lactate threshold idea ( remember you may have to choose from 25 different lactate threshold concepts ) but one may fit your theory. And if this does not work you can try to see, whether the NIRS reactions form the other leg may fit your theories.
The fact in physiological reactions is, that they only make sense, when they are showing up independent of your protocol and theory . So if I have to create a certain workload in a protocol and if I do some small changes in this workload or protocol and we are not able to repeat the LT or what ever I look for a point, than the questions is whether we assess a physiological reaction or whether we please a specific designed protocol which fits our theory. So when you look the great data’s we see than keep this ideas in mind and try to see how the 2 discussed values , lactate and SmO2 will be influenced by the discussed options.
Ray, I have just received mine from CT. I bought the Multisport as I am a triathlete. I am confused about which test protocols would you recommend for both bike and run. I also would like to know if you would use is for a daily workout outside of the tests. As usual thank you for all you do for us!!
I bought the multisport edition and i think, at the moment, it’s the best way to throw away money…
they said that you can use daily, but after month, there’s no way to use it except for the test.
then there are a lot of problems to pair ant+ sensor with the app. i spent 30′ to be able to star the test (and with other apps, the pairing has no problems)
hope they will update everything
Same problem with the run test again. Pairing is a major issue. Suspect it also dropped out on the last set…what was reflected on my HRM910xt for HR was not the same as the display on the phone…HR therefore not trust worthy and therefore useless.
I had the opportunity to test out pairing and discovered
– Samsung S6 with Android 5.02: BSX pairs, but not HRM
– Samsung S5 with Android 5.0: BSX pairs, but not HRM
– Samsung S3 Note with Android 4.4.2: BSX pairs, HRM pairs as well
l
Maybe time for BSX to update their app to – what I suspect – support devices with Android 5 (i.e. Lollipop).
I have this problem initially. I think the manual did not phrase this properly. You should be able to pair irregardless of which phone you use or which app.
You HRM is not pairing with your phone. It is pairing with your BSX insight.
Take out your bsx insigt from your leg sleeve pouch and bring it nearer to your hrm and pair them. Same goes to your power meter. Take out your bsx insight and bring it next to your powermeter and pair them.
Initially I made the wrong them of bringing my phone close to the hrm and power meter instead. This does nothing to improve pairing. Your phone only communicates with the bsx insight to control it but not with other ant+ devices.
Let me know whether you can pair ur devices after this!
Thank you Lukman! That is right, we’ve seen increased success with connecting HR monitors and power meters when the BSXinsight is moved in close proximity.
The elephant in the room, really, is treadmill accuracy for the running test.
I go to a pretty fancy fitness club. They have 4 or 5 brands of treadmills, including some models by Woodway, and Matrix Fitness, maybe 30 units in total. All of them with different levels of calibration, in terms of pace and distance.
Depending on which unit I run the test on, I get different results that vary by 30-45 seconds per mile. That is a huge difference.
Since I have no way to know which treadmill is accurately calibrated, I have no way to know which assessment is correct.
I have no doubt the algorithm works, but unless you own a calibrated treadmill, you won’t be able to trust your results fully.
I remember this name and it was a great critical comment he offered on another NIRS page.
His points are well taken and it is one of the big discussions between physical performance and physiological feedback.
The great step forward with any NIRS devcie is exactly that. It is not a question of absolut performance but rather a direct live feedback what and how the physiological reactions are now,today with that specific activity I like to do.
So you have immediate feedback for example, whether the intensity you choose creates a delivery limitation or a utilization limitation.
You can see , whether you have a relative free blood flow and therefor free supply of O2 but as well free out flow of CO2 and other substances you may look for, like lactate.
Or you can see, that the performance you do may create an complete occlusion so you have no inflow but as well no outflow.
You can see, whether your effort allows to deliver more O2 than you need , whether you are in a balanced situation or whether you have a time limitation in the intensity you choose due to the higher utilization rate than what you are able to deliver.
Last but not lest you will see whether the limitation is more locally or more systemic.. How much more can we dream of and this is why NIRS is a game changer no matter what equipment you choose to use.
Pairing an HRM is a major major issue with this device.
I have now attempted 14 times to get an evaluation done with HRM included. Not a single attempt was successful, in only two cases the HRM actually connected, but was lost already in the first few minutes. All HRM (Garmin, Viiiva, Wahoo) showed up as ANT+ devices on the Endomondo on Samsung Galaxy S4, S5,S6 and Note 3.
As much as I like the discussions about the relevance of BSXinsight testing protocols, I have a hard time to further tolerate their product support. In the space of four weeks trying to communicate, I did not receive any meaningful reply (other than generic links to their support website).
So if I could ask the company representative present on this tread to address the pairing issues head-on? No testing results clearly nullifies any reliability and comparison discussion.
I would definitively feel better about my USD 400 investment if the device and the HRM would start to pair reliably. Maybe supporting HRM via Bluetooth if the ANT stack proves too much of a worry?
Sorry you haven’t been successful in connecting your HR monitor. The FAQ links our support team sends out is to help troubleshoot all known issues and provide quick solutions to problems our customers are having. If you are still having issues please reply with your email address and I will have our support staff follow up with you.
I have now used my for 2 test. The first worked perfectly!
Booth the bsx and the hrm paired up directly and waere connected all the time.
During the period in between I remember an update to the app, an uppdated to make the pairing process better.
For the test the other day, I was not able to pair at all first. After a couple of tries it finaly paired with the BSX. The Hram I tried to pair for one hour. It never worked. I tried with other apps on the phone and there were no problems.
Did you make sure and fully charge BSXinsight prior to attempting your assessment? If so, please contact our customer support (info@bsxinsight.com), we’d be more than happy to help you troubleshot the issue.
I see that you have 3 successful tests completed and have not attempted to start another one since April 22nd. Email us (info@bsxinsight.com) and let us know what the issue is you are having.
I’ll respond to you via e-mail too. But a quick summary.
I’ve tried to do tests a couple of times. What you are seeing on-line are 3 tests that were actually attempted because these were the only times I could actually get the HRM to pair or were frustrated enough to forego the HR data.
Test 1: Run – No HR data. Couldn’t get the HRM to pair.
Test 2: Bike – HRM paired and seemed ok. I “sort of trust” this test…”Sort of” because of test 3:
Test 3: Run – HRM paired and seemed ok. However there was a mismatch between what was being displayed on my FR910XT and my phone at the same time, and the HR result is also lower than what I would have expected it to be but in line with what I would expect if the HRM had “dropped out” at some stage during the test. The HR displayed on the phone was stuck at a lower value where the HR displayed on the Garmin unit was way higher.
I’m travelling over the next couple of weeks, but if you give me some things to try I’ll take the unit along and make some time to give it another go.
I got a few emails over the last few weeks asking me how the LT concept from BSX is used.
Meaning the idea of 1 mmol increase in 2 follow up steps.
.As I do not know what they exactly use here the question.
Example.
Here a number example.
.Step 1: 1.4 mmol/
step 2 1.4 mmol/
step 3.1.6
step 4. 1.9/
step 5.2.8
step 6. 3.9
step 7. 5.4
Question is the concept looking for the first 1 mmol increase or the one in the middle.
so in the above case. :
Is the “LT” by step 5 , so 2.8
or
by step 6, so by 3.9
Thanks for the clarification,
I may not be able to explain clear what I am looking for with the LT idea BSX is using so if somebody can help me as I have no clue how to show graphs in this section I can show you from examples from BSX why I am confused on what they may use as LT criteria.
Ray, are you still contemplating a review of the BSX? Or you have ditched it already?Just curious,… not hearing anything about it, is that meaning you have lost interest? not working?
thanks!
6co
The BSX folks and I have been playing appointment tag trying to get a conference call scheduled (mostly my fault, my schedule has been a nightmare the last 10 days), as there are areas I’m looking for clarity on – such as how exactly the unit/site (technically) will be used beyond just doing the tests (meaning it was envisioned as a day to day training tool).
Hallo Ray, great to have this feedback.
Remember the question we had on your original test where they had a BSX left side and rigth side.
Can you check in your conference call , whether they can show us the raw data from both legs as I never got a feedback on this questions.
Second , as Istill look for a feedback on the LT ideas they used > Is it 1 mmol increase 2 times in a row and than is the LT the first point where we have the 1 mmol increase or is it the one in the middle.
Thanks for the great discussion on here.
Juerg
May be it is my “Swenglish” Swiss and english , that I can not get a feedback.
So lets’ try here the question again: The definition of the LT used by BSX is based on the website the below wording .
LT2 – Anaerobic Threshold
Technically speaking, anaerobic threshold correlates closer with the onset of blood lactate accumulation or in other words the transition from “steady” to “rapidly increasing” lactate workloads. You are said to have crossed lactate threshold when blood lactate concentration increases by at least 1 mmol/L in two consecutive stages.
Does that mean in a value example :
Step 1 . 1.2 mmol Lac
Step 2. 1.0 mmol
Step 3 . 1.2 mmol
Step 4. 1.4 mmol
Step 5 . 2.3 mmol LT 2 ????
Step 6 . 3.4 mmol LT 2 ????
Step 7 . 4.9 mmol
Step 8. 7.1 mmol So by step 5 . 2.3 mmol we have after that always more than 1 mmol increase per step.
According to the above definition from the BSX site we would have somewhere here LT2 ?
Is it by step 5 so 2.3 mmol as after this we have 2 step with more than 1 mmol increase ,
Or is it by step 6 as we again have 2 steps followed by more than 1 mmol increase
Thanks so much for the clarification from anybody .
The key aspect of the ANT+ sensors pairing is that it’s not the phone or tablet which has to pair with the ANT+ sensor, it’s the BSX sensor itself who needs to pair with the ANT+ sensor. It would have saved me a lot of time and aggravation had the instructions clearly spelled this out. Lukman has made this observation here on May 30th.
I was able to pair and successfully run the assessments this way: I paired the BSX sensor first then brought the sensor in very close proximity to the HRM sensor, and the tablet confirmed the pairing in 5-10 seconds, then put the BSX sensor in its sleeve and then started the assessment.
I found a similar solution, but it seems as if the HRM drops out after some time, almost as if it loses the connection but the HRM values are kept as at the last recorded value – I haven’t been able to confirm this or a solution to it.
Still waiting for BSX to get back to me after my e-mail (see above) and their initial reply saying they’ll investigate…
I am now in the same boat as Etienne. Pairing has become a nightmare and once I finally got it to pair, it put me through the whole test only to say “Sorry, we lost one or more signals, you’re f*cked, try again later.”
THANKS FOR NOT TELLING ME DURING THE TEST.
This is the most rage inspiring product I’ve ever owned, so that’s something.
And yes, of course, all my various ANT devices work fine (I own at least 6 ANT+ HR straps and a half dozen receivers.)
Same problem here, pairing is an absolute nightmare! I have completed 4 test after 30 minutes of frustration trying to get it to pair and only got a result 2 out of the 4!
I’m very proud of myself control for not throwing this thing through the wall!
If they can get the pairing issue fixed and polish up the app I would say it’s worth the money but as of right now NO.
Hopefully the pairing issue will be at the top of Ray’s list of questions for the final review.
So another week down and still no response from BSX – unless you count the automated Zendesk response saying “We haven’t heard from you so we’re closing this if you don’t respond”…to which I responded that I’m waiting for BSX…to which I haven’t heard anything further.
Seriously, don’t buy this unit unless you have an appitite for frustration and poor service.
The original reason for choosing the Insight over the Moxy was price. The local currency vs USD exchange rate is a killer. In hindsight, the Moxy would have saved me plenty of hassle I think. Judging by what I’ve seen on the Moxy forum and Jeurg’s responses here I think the depth of information and support makes spending the difference between the well envisioned but poorly executed Insight and maybe not as “cool” looking but well supported and actually functioning Moxy, worth it.
I actually got a response from Austin shortly after posting this. Some suggestions, all of which I’ve tried to no avail. However, while writing to him I thought of something else…but I can’t try it since I’m out of town on business. Maybe somebody else having the pairing issues can give it a go and let us know if it works for them. My reply to BSX below.
—-Snip—-
Hi Austin,
I’m very miffed. Things at this price point with this amount of marketing and hype should just work…particularly considering the intial shipping delays we had to put up with. I have browsed extensively and have seen and tried these solutions before.
What I understand is that my phone talks to the Insight using Bluetooth and the Insight talks to the HRM using ANT…and ANT is having the trouble going through my body. If that is indeed the case I have thought of something else to try re no 2, but since I’ve been away on business I haven’t been able to do so yet.
Some people have had success placing their HRMs on their backs – sounds weird I know….but Garmin even has a reference to it: link to support.garmin.com
See bullet point 1, line 2:
”
•The HRM is to be worn with the logo right-side up, directly on the skin just beneath the breastbone.
Position the monitor on your back if heart rate readings are erratic.
”
So even though my HR is not erratic, this may give me the line of sight between the HRM and the Insight that I need to keep the two talking for the testing session. I’ll give this a try when I get home next week. Hopefully the HRM will still pick up my HR correctly if I position it this way.
Etienne, Thanks for the nice words.
Here just some feedbacks.
This is NOT a critic on anything, but rather a philosophical direction where exercise physiology and in specific practical applications could go in the future thanks to incredible advances we enjoy in technology.
The key word is bio markers.
My dream is still as pointed out in many discussions 20 years back a bio watch. A feedback where we see HR as a simple small feedbcak on cardiac output. RF respiratory frequency as a small feedback on VE and live oxygenation values combined with trends in blood flow.
We are close there with the latest Garmin watches where we now have HR and oxygenation live feedbacks.
We have additonally the early adpater of respiration feedback the original idea from NZ with Zephir which works nice and most likely it is a small step to combine . ( I am a technical dummie so always hope and know great tech brains can do it. )
So when I look back at the start of this evolving journey , we had all this great equipment combined.
NIRS and the early small great Portamon from Artinis combined with K42B a portable VO2 equipment combined with a physio flow which is a live hemodynamic feedback on nearly all you can dream of ,combined with SEMG from BTS Italy combined with many blood values and one of the top equipment for this is most likely I stat. ,and now even oxygenation feedback from the brain and you can see where we end up. A multitude of physiological data collections, but unfortunatley with a huge price tag. 150’000 $ +
So when we now go back to coaching and individual people like people with major health problems who like to try to do exercise, which make sense, to improve health ,. as well as the group of people enjoying health and try to stay healty, than the next step was to see, whether we can move back down to a simple tool and get as much feedback as we can get with the above toys.
True we will loose many specifc situations and yes we have the risk to create a cook book , but there are always some compromises to be made.
.
So MOXY is a NIRS in a price range which exploded the market for nIRS uses.
The next small portable but still not direct live on a watch great NIRS is Portamon . Price difference is big and any reader doing some search can or knows how big.
. The this years ACSM in San Diego showed the explosion of NIRS use in all fields and directions.
20 years back we had hundreds of poster presentation with lactate, today we have it with NIRS.
. Is there a connection. Most likely as lactate is an indirect feedback for possible metabolic situations in the body ,but has all the small disadvantages of lag time and other know open questions.
NIRS is a direct feedback on energy situations, so du you have a higher delivery than usage are you balanced and or are you spending more O2 than you can deliver.
Pretty straigth forward and simple ( I am biased ) but is that not what we all tried with older great ideas , looking for the magical intensity , where the O2 delivery starts to run into trouble.
So instead of finding the magical point we now see live trends where and how it happens.
VO2 at the mouth was great, but now we see O2 in the working muscels and or brain.
Lactate was interesting but since the 1985 open many questions and still has many open question.
Summary.
I do not know exactly what BSX is doing , but the company clearly helps, as it is a bloodless lactate analyzer .
MOXY is a NIRS. Meaning you can use it for anybody fo any activity anytime on any decent muscle with as usual some limitation due to penetration depth of the equipment.
The biggest user group now are game athletes like hockey player, soccer player and any personal trianer who likes to creat for his costomer an individual load recovery feedback for any kind of workouts from intervall to simple biceps curls.We use it live during races and events to see what really happens and what may limit performance.
To be able to do this you have a live feedbakc in the studio over a screen with mutiple users or you have a wtatch with ANT option and speed cadence options to see live SmO2 and tHB or you have a Garmin watch which now is the first watch , where you have actual SmO2 and tHb live as a number and or as a Graph.
You can use than a high or low level with alarm if you do for example intervall on your cross country skis and you can not watch always to the numbers.
What sounds wonderfull still has many weaknesses and that’s where we work on with a dedicated crazy group of people all over the world.
Thats’ why we show and explain all the weakness and strednght we see in NIRS usage and try ( not always successfull ) to give some answers to many great questions but in many cases we have no answers but just additonal question which alwayss help to move forward.
My big thanks goes to Fortiori the inventor of MOXY and Roger, the brain behind. I am just a lucky guy to have fun and push this ideas so I can use it in a very practical situation with my patients here far north in Canada some people would name it in the bush.
I am thankfull for Roger , that I could talk him out of selling the MOXY as a replacement for lactate assessment . Yes easier to sell but most likley not that close to the reality. MOXY is a NIRS and NIRS asseses and gives feedback on oxygenation trends, That is it. And even by giving this feedback we still are using many needed assumptions to get to what we see.
So many readers may confuse the 2 equipment but they are very different in what they achieve and for what they may be used as you can see.
Hope this makes some sense and please read my comments carefully as even if I try to be objective I am still biased as we all are.
Thanks to all readers on here who sent me daily e mails with some great questions. I hope I answer decently fast and hopefully as honest as I can answer with all the limitation I have. Juerg
Let me expand on my perspective, I was simplifying greatly when I compared Insight to Moxy and I think I have a pretty good understanding of the use cases for both, and don’t get me wrong, both are exciting. Due to miniaturisation, improvement in manufacturing processes and obviously supply and demand we are now able to get data only professionals could justify having before.
As others have pointed out, Insight should give you a pretty good idea of what your lactate levels are doing, if working as advertised, arguably more so than traditional testing because of the sampling frequency and repeatability of the tests (forgiving the treadmill calibration elephants etc….there is simply less that can go wrong with something like this). LT however, and for lack of a better description, is a “summary” of the processes going on inside your body. It is a well understood and correlated measurement that can be used to determine training parameters that either alone or in combination with other measurements (HR, Wattage etc.), enable you to modify your training like never before (unless you were one of those pros or serious amateurs).
Moxy on the other hand is able to give you the raw data, what you do with it and the actual impact thereof in your use case is pretty much up to you to figure out. There are some pretty good ideas of what the data means and what to do with it, but ignoring for a moment the amount of time MO measurement and NIRS has been around as a concept, the field is pretty much in its infancy in the way we want to apply it here e.g. performance improvement for the general athlete, not only rehabilitation or improvement for the elites.
As we learn more about the impacts and resulting change in behaviours we will be able to find more and more applications for the data in combination with other data, and the more accessible it is because of it’s affordability, the bigger the data sets become that we can work with. I compare it to what Firstbeat had to go through the first time HR data became available. By combining more and more sensor types, a more complete picture will appear e.g. things like movement capture, (as already done to some extent with moxy+bike setups), hrm, breathing rate etc). Take it another step further. Add other sensor types, like temperature, humidity etc…and the lab moves outside and an even MORE complete picture emerges for the day to day, amateur athlete. Exciting times indeed.
I made a clear decision to go with the Insight rather than the Moxy because firstly, I am spending enough on traditional LT testing to justify it and secondly, I work with a coach that knows what to do with this type of information. If I had gone the Moxy route I would have thrown myself and the coach into deep water, therefore the benefit wasn’t achievable in the time I had available when making the decision.
Having spent a lot more time on the Moxy forums and having the issues with the Insight that I am, the Moxy may have been a better choice because even if the practical application of the raw data is still unclear due to my own (and coach’s inexperience, if we had bitten the bullet and started simply measuring, thinking and making incremental changes (rinse and repeat) I would have had…pardon the pun…REAL insight by now (remember the shipping date when I ordered was supposed to be late 2015…delay delay delay receive..now we’re already 6, almost 7 months into the year and I still don’t have a usable result).
To summarise.
If Insight performed as advertised it would make a good substitute for traditional LT testing, with some interesting possibilities regarding “daily use” scenarios (that were also advertised but not realised). It is the comfortable, safe route with incremental benefits.
If you are the type of person or coach that is data driven, analytical to the extreme and willing to spend the time to learn what to do with vast amounts of information – and to hopefully add to a body of knowledge, then the Moxy would be the better choice.
As it stands now, I have a relatively expensive doorstop if BSX can’t get the device to give consistent and reliable data…well, it’s too small for a doorstop unless I really wedge it in there, but you get the idea.
I’ve been very critical of BSX, and to be fair, part of their feedback the last few days is that they have been on-boarding additional staff members to help deal with these and other issues. Hopefully we’ll get to see some improvements and a working (permanent) solution soon, however, as soon as my finances allow, I’ll be ordering a Moxy (or three) too.
Just read your post here and thought my experience might be helpful. I’m having all those issues too with connecting the BSX to ANT sensors (while the ANT sensors are connected to and showing values on my cycling computers, so it’s definitively a problem with the BSX app).
I actually had pre-ordered the BSX while it was still being developed, but got myself a MOXY before the BSX was delivered after reading on the Dallas Cycling Center blog and seeing that the MOXY seemed to be potentially more useful and at least more interesting. Meanwhile I’ve added to a total of three MOXYs and can confirm that they are working reliably, their support is helpful, and the data seems to be useful, although it requires more knowledge to make full use of the data.
One note though: While the MOXY gives a reading of between about 10 and 85% SmO2 for myself, another more advanced cyclist I tried it on had a range of 0 (!) and about 90% on his Vastus Lateralis. I do think the readings are correct, but, if your SmO2 drops quickly to single digits, I’d find it more difficult to interpret the data, so I would recommend starting with just one. (I do know though that I am getting higher values higher up on my VL, so, I might have been able to get a more useful range of values with him by placing the MOXY higher up.)
Also, a useful assessment protocol with the MOXY will likely take longer than the 30-40 minutes of the BSX (minus the time you need for connecting) which may be an issue for testing many cyclists in a row or for extreme short distance track athletes.
Hope you will be more satisfied with the MOXY too.
Thanks for the nice feedback.
I do not like to take over this section here, but your observation of the SmO2 reactions are great and true. If you like to get some thoughts ( not answers ) really on this please come to the MOXY forum and we can show you some interesting ideas and share informations with people all over the world, who help all of us to undertstand and intergate NIRS into the mainstream population as an additional or new tool in exercise physiology.
. Cheers Juerg
I found the experience of running fast on the treadmill quite precarious, so I did something about it.
I created an audible pacemaker. This service creates an mp3 pace track that is tailored to the Tutorial Screen of the BSX Insight App. I hope others find this useful as I have.
So you use like trainerroad to make the program ? And then sync the training with the bxs app,
Like start them at the same time. I dont realy see how to do this ? Need to pair the heartrate to the Bsx and also the kickr to the bsx, Dont i walk into troubles when pair the kickr also to trainerroad ?
Tried to use trainerroad to control the kickr instead of the wahoo app.
Just made an bsx program starting at 80 going up to 400w.
At this way i dont need to manually adjust the power while doing the test.
First i tought i needed an bluetooth dongle but i could connect all devices with ant+
I’m a postgraduate student undertaking the MSc Digital Marketing in the University of Southampton. I’m working on my dissertation which is about the consumption of wearable tech devices as fashion and I would be very interested to get some viewpoints from wearable tech users from different countries and cultures toward their adoption on wearables. So I need some perceptions of wearable tech users all around the world and need to do some interviews with the users about their experience with these devices. I read your review about BSX Insight and thought that it would be great to talk about your experience with it and it would be an interesting example for my dissertation as wearable tech become fashionable. I’m aware that you may have limited time and other obligations as well. However, if you can give me some information about your experience with BSX Insight, that would be much appreciated and it’d be very efficient to talk with someone who really experience these kind of devices. The interview will be made on Skype or another video chat platforms which preferred by you. If you are interested, could you get in contact with me from this email address? Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward hearing from you soon.
FYI BSXinsight has just pushed an app update on my Android Device. As I am travelling for quite some time, I do not have access to the device at this point in time. Should there be users here of the new app, maybe you could report whether connectivity has indeed improved, as claimed by the App update.
Just did my first test today. I used the new Android app.
It took me about 20-30 minutes to connect all devices. So annoying. Furthermore, as I control my Kickr with my bike powermeter I can’t tell which PM gets actually connected. Therefore, I had to switch off the Kickr. But when I plugged in the plug again I was too far away from my bike (1.5 m !!!). Connection lost. And so on, and so on. Sometimes it would lose the connection event though I was holding the pod right next to the HR/PM. I looked like doing some yoga getting all the devices close.
I don’t know why but it did not log my heart rate during the assessment. The device showed as connected. So I did not get an estimate for my LTHr (which I’m actually not interested in).
One should be able to specifiy the ANT ID. Or see at least which devices are connected.
The pre-assessment questions: does anyone know what the “conversational power level” is? For mountainbikers weekly mileage is irrelevant. Why not ask for weekly training time?
The positive aspect: the estimated FTP was spot on with my 0.95 x CP20 field test. However, the aerobic threshold is at about 95% of FTP for me? Can I sign up for the next Ironman now? Or is this a different AeT?
And then of course: I want to see the raw data! Really, I want to see it! Not just the FTP value.
My verdict at the moment: don’t buy yet. This is not a mature product yet. I don’t know if this is just a software issue or if hardware plays a role to. As a consumer you would not know. Given the very high price tag I’d say do not take the risk to get exploited as beta tester.
What are others experiences with the new firmware and app update?
Had massive connection problems before update (even when moving the device close to power meter and HR sensor) that rendered the device pretty much useless; one ride so far with the new firmware and it connected without any problems.
Disappointed that the update to the app is kind of minimal, still no display of power or power meter ANT+ ID or the ability to select power meter (this matters if there is more than just one ANT+ power source, e.g. when using the KICKR) and no raw data to analyze afterwards (just the live relative SmO2? display in the bottom right of the app).
So BSX have announced that the features they touted, including real time data, for Generation 1 of the device will only become available in Generation 2! And what a surprise, no firmware upgrade for Gen1 so if you want these features you have to buy the Gen 2 device!!!
Hello Ray,
I would be interested in what you think about the recent announcement of BSX Insight regarding the Generation 2 device. I’m not sure if I shall feel robbed or if this is simply the risk I have to face being an early adaptor.
Thanks
Boris
I’ve had some very bad experiences (detailed above).
That said, I did my first “painless” BSX LT check on the bike last night. Not sure if it was a fluke, but the unit paired first time and stayed paired with both the HRM and the Kicker. Strange thing is, nothing had changed that I’m aware of.
With some luck the G1 unit is nou actually usable (although not up to scratch vs what was promised and introduced in the G2).
I swim, bike and run. Then, I come here and write about my adventures. It’s as simple as that. Most of the time. If you’re new around these parts, here’s the long version of my story.
You'll support the site, and get ad-free DCR! Plus, you'll be more awesome. Click above for all the details. Oh, and you can sign-up for the newsletter here!
Here’s how to save!
Wanna save some cash and support the site? These companies help support the site! With Backcountry.com or Competitive Cyclist with either the coupon code DCRAINMAKER for first time users saving 15% on applicable products.
You can also pick-up tons of gear at REI via these links, which is a long-time supporter as well:
Alternatively, for everything else on the planet, simply buy your goods from Amazon via the link below and I get a tiny bit back as an Amazon Associate. No cost to you, easy as pie!
You can use the above link for any Amazon country and it (should) automatically redirect to your local Amazon site.
Want to compare the features of each product, down to the nitty-gritty? No problem, the product comparison data is constantly updated with new products and new features added to old products!
Wanna create comparison chart graphs just like I do for GPS, heart rate, power meters and more? No problem, here's the platform I use - you can too!
Think my written reviews are deep? You should check out my videos. I take things to a whole new level of interactive depth!
Smart Trainers Buyers Guide: Looking at a smart trainer this winter? I cover all the units to buy (and avoid) for indoor training. The good, the bad, and the ugly.
Check out
my weekly podcast - with DesFit, which is packed with both gadget and non-gadget goodness!
Get all your awesome DC Rainmaker gear here!
FAQ’s
I have built an extensive list of my most frequently asked questions. Below are the most popular.
You probably stumbled upon here looking for a review of a sports gadget. If you’re trying to decide which unit to buy – check out my in-depth reviews section. Some reviews are over 60 pages long when printed out, with hundreds of photos! I aim to leave no stone unturned.
I travel a fair bit, both for work and for fun. Here’s a bunch of random trip reports and daily trip-logs that I’ve put together and posted. I’ve sorted it all by world geography, in an attempt to make it easy to figure out where I’ve been.
The most common question I receive outside of the “what’s the best GPS watch for me” variant, are photography-esq based. So in efforts to combat the amount of emails I need to sort through on a daily basis, I’ve complied this “My Photography Gear” post for your curious minds (including drones & action cams!)! It’s a nice break from the day-to-day sports-tech talk, and I hope you get something out of it!
Many readers stumble into my website in search of information on the latest and greatest sports tech products. But at the end of the day, you might just be wondering “What does Ray use when not testing new products?”. So here is the most up to date list of products I like and fit the bill for me and my training needs best! DC Rainmaker 2023 swim, bike, run, and general gear list. But wait, are you a female and feel like these things might not apply to you? If that’s the case (but certainly not saying my choices aren’t good for women), and you just want to see a different gear junkies “picks”, check out The Girl’s Gear Guide too.
I did a beta test with these guys. Can’t wait for the final product.
Thank You! Awesome review, as usual! I think I need to buy one of these!
Can you explain the difference between the versions? ie – the single sport, cycling and multi-sport? Does the device differ, or is it the analytics? Thanks
This would probably be cool for a team, or a coach with multiple athletes to use. It seems a bit pricy for one person to buy and then to use maybe 2 or 3 times a year. Amirite?
To a degree. Their MSRP prices are slightly higher than they initially envisioned. I think at the initially planned prices it might have been more per-athlete, whereas I think with this it might fit better between 2-3 people. I think that unless the coach/athlete are around each other a lot, the logistics in monthly trade-offs with a lot of athletes might become cumbersome such that it inhibits the tests.
Whereas if it was me and 2-3 friends in the neighborhood, it’d make more sense.
I was under the impression that sharing the device with others wasn’t possible unless one bought the team edition. (source: link to bsx.zendesk.com)
Has this changed since the initial kickstarter campaign? And if so, is it possible to share the device btw athletes without skewing the results?
Hmm, that’s valid – I didn’t realize you couldn’t share. I’ll defer to the BSX guys on that then.
Howdy. We have the device set up as a one user device. It links to our server and keeps a record of your LT tests along with other data collected. You could use it with more than one person but it will skew the data collected. We felt that the device is like your training watch. Very rarely do you share your watch or heart rate monitor.
Thank you Ray – super interesting post. Maybe one day we could look down at our Garmin (or Apple Watch) and see %lactate threshold from this device rather than power or heart rate estimates.
Can/would BSX add such a metric to training devices via ANT+ profile?
Bryan answered a bit below, but there is some discussion on how one could potentially use the already existing muscle oxygen ANT+ profile for this data.
I’m not a BSX employee but I am intimately familiar with the technical aspects of the design. What you describe is technically possibly from a perspective of “could it in theory send the data to a ANT+ or even BLE display / logger”.
There is more to it than technical feasibility. Transmitting data burns power. Not a lot, but a non-zero amount. So you would give up X minutes of run time for real time data. For real time transmission, there would have to be some agreed to standard of data interchange, an Ant+ “profile”. Somebody has to write the profile, somebody has to come up with testing standards, some manufacturer has to agree to make a watch / App that captures and displays that data.
So in short, I would bet BSX eventually goes down this path, no reason not to long term. But short term they are focusing a LOT of time, money, blood, sweat, and tears to make the core functionality robust.
Again, I have no authority to speak for the company like Bryan or Dustin but I would consider that functionality a probability.
They are working with thisisant.com
And also with Garmin; integration as feature in a watch is their first priority
It may be BSX’s priority, but it’s rarely Garmin’s priority to add integration to non-standard profiles that aren’t in their devices. Hence why companies such as Moxy and others have to leverage the speed/cadence/HR profiles to get the data into the unit.
This is pretty cool!
Thanks for making the point about treadmills needing to be set around 1-1.5% for a more similar pace to running outside on a hard, even surface.
It sounds like there may be an accelerometer (eventually) used in the unit for cadence purposes. It’s pretty rare to see accelerometers that aren’t measuring motion in all three dimensions anymore…couldn’t that same piece of hardware be used for “pace” as well if the software was in place? It seems to me that treadmill testing paces (not that this unit is limited to indoor testing) and outdoor utilization could be bridged by measuring force(s) associated with running and translating them to pace. That could possibly start with a calibration of a set distance (track?) and then the force(s) during the test could be translated into “actual” running pace to be used outside. Any chance that was discussed?? I suppose that same idea could be used with a Garmin Running Dynamics or similar system as well…
After years of testing in the ex phys world, I’m not terribly trusting in the accuracy of speeds seen in commercial treadmills.
Bill,
Bryan Kraham with BSX Athletics here. The difference in versions is two fold, biology and technology. Your cycling version pairs with more peripherals like power meters. The multi-sport provides you with both your running and cycling LT’s.
Example: the top of my zone 2 for running is 156 BPM and for Cycling it is 151
Tosin: This is a bench marking tool that you would use every 6 weeks or so as you become more fit (or less fit) to adjust your training zones and intensities.
Husain: That is our goal and we are working with those types of companies to provide that data on your wrist.
Bryan
BSX Athletics
Where do i sign up for one of these babies???
Does it also generate data on the ‘aerobic’ treshold? In the case of rays test, there are clearly 2 breaks in the series, no? The first one being aroun 7.00min/mile.
Wouter,
You can pre-order at http://www.bsxinsight.com and use code NOPRICKS14 for a DC Rainmaker special of $50 USD off.
For your other comment, We are actively working on the identification of LT1 and we clearly recognize this is a very important event as well. For the test with Ray, we used our patented algorithm to identify the 1mMol jump in two back to back stages.
Thanks for the reply Bryan. Looking forward to it.
Thanks Bryan!
On the kickstarter campaign, you say “Through paired communication with your sports watch it lets you know, in real-time, whether to speed up, slow down, or even rest. BSX Insight is best used both during training as well as on race day to help you finish your perfect race. With BSX Insight you are sure to get the most out of every mile, every time.”
Are you saying this is not the case anymore? This should be only used as a diagnostic device, not a training / racing device to keep you at your threshold?
Thanks!!!
I’m not quite following the differences between the versions.
If you have the Cycling version, do you HAVE to pair it with an ANT+ power meter? i.e. you can’t use it with a Computrainer ANT+ HR monitor? Or can you use it on a Computrainer but you just won’t get your data with respect to power, only HR?
If you used the running version while cycling, wouldn’t it still work with HR? Or are you saying the muscle lactic acid is measured differently for running compared to cycling?
Patrick,
The accelerometer is already in the device and that is where we are headed with the device. The goal was to deliver to our kickstarter backers on time with a metric that is not readily available (or not at all available non-invasively).
Bryan
BSX Athletics
Bryan,
Thanks for the reply. I used to test devices that estimated physical activity and I still think we’re only scratching the surface of what’s capable (and useful) with them. Definitely looking forward to seeing where this product goes. Good luck!
Thanks heaps for the words of encouragement. We are biased but we think this is a revolutionary piece of tech much like the heart rate monitor was 35 years ago.
Bryan
@Tosy
A bit pricy yes. But for people like me that don’t have easily access to this kind of test because I am living in a small town, it will be a nice alternative to the cost of a train ticket + analyses. Especially if a treadmill is not obligatory, and if the protocol can be adapted for track for example.
Really impatient to see more coming about analyses and workouts, and also very disappointed to have missed the Kickstarter campaign.
in the same line, a soluition to analyse your foot movements during a run: link to kickstarter.com
We are offering DC Rainmaker fans a special $50 off of purchase for the Cycling and multi-sport editions by entering code NOPRICKS14 at checkout.
We are also offer 10% off all editions site wide at http://www.bsxinsight.com – Offer expires 9/30/14.
Bryan
Shipping worldwilde?
I think I will be weak once again ;)
Yes, we are shipping world wide. We have several kickstarter co-creators world wide as well.
Bryan
Just a cultural comment, as/when you come to market this in other english-speaking countries: Prick is equivalent to “dick” in colloquial english in, e.g., the British Isles and I think is also understood that way in the Antipodes.
I believe that’s the intention…
Are the 10% discounted prices already shown? Can the two offers be combined-meaning $50 off for the DCrainmaker code, off of the 10% reduced intro price? I may be interested in buying one for cycling.
My wife is a cyclist also: can she also use the device or is it one device per person?
Thanks-it looks like an excellent product! Keep up the good work!
Sean
(Picking a post at random, just for the sake of clarity, I had/have nothing to do with the discount code.)
I have noticed in other articles about BSX and their product that they are working to get data fields available for ANT+ devices.
Would that be something to ask/investigate on the ANT+ Symposium?
The BSX guys are dues paying ANT+ members but I don’t think they are making this year’s symposium. But please feel free to mention your interest. The more buzz BSX can get the better and I guarantee they will listen to feature requests and consider any ideas.
What type of data could the device transmit over ant? Sounds like it doesn’t just broadcast the current lactate level to whatever unit is running the test
It could transmit anything over Ant. Insight is limited only by processor horsepower, battery life, and radio bandwidth. The device has channels to both send and receive multiple ANT streams. The balancing act of battery life, system bandwidth, and algorithm complexity is the real engineering challenge. In theory the sensors in the system could in theory capture HR and gait data so in theory it could replace your foot pod and HRM. But the BSX guys are wisely focusing on their value add of Lactate first. There are plenty of affordable devices on the market to do gait analysis and HR.
It is a fascinating product being developed by real enthusiasts and experts in the field. It is a real challenge to get everything right but these guys are working hard to deliver.
I’m not questioning how, just what it would broadcast as it seems like all the talk is in abstract terms. (See my longer post)
Very interesting.
Since this is live data it seems like this could be used for more than just checking your LT. Maybe as a replacement for a power meter or as better feedback when running. With steady feedback could you just dial in a % of LT to pace a race? I guess they did say you have to send the data to a website right now but in the future??
You said they measured on both legs. Was there any difference between the two sets of data? thx
That was my big question, too.
This device is also planning to support reporting muscle oxygen level which means in theory it can do everything the moxy can do, right? (If you think this is too expensive the moxy is 1200)
Eli,
This is Roger from Moxy. When it comes to measuring the muscle oxygen parameters, there appear to be some significant differences between the optical configurations of BSX and Moxy. The “What Moxy Measures” section of the following document describes the 2 parameters (SmO2 and THb) that Moxy produces in detail. Moxy measures these 2 parameters under a wide range of conditions so it can be used for any sport while the athlete actually performs their sport. Cycling, running, hockey, skiing, motocross, rugby, horse racing and many more types of athletes have all been measured with Moxy. It’s not clear to me that the optical configuration that I’ve seen on the Insight is capable of producing similar muscle oxygenation measurements.
Intro to Muscle Oxygen eBook
On the price side, it’s important to note that Moxy can be used every day, in any sport, on any accessible muscle, with as many athletes as you want and there are no subscription fees. It’s just a little bit different pricing model.
Roger
Guess I had higher hopes for bsx (I’m a kickstart backer) and hoped their SmO2 claim meant it could do what moxy could. I do love the stuff moxy does but not serious enough of an athlete to spend that much. Sorry
Hi this is a very interesting device. I have a few questions:
– Does it work for swimming (just recording) ?
– Does it support profiles (to share it with other people) ?
– Does it transmit ant+ data like HR or pace (to use it as a replacement of my HR strap / foot pod)?
– Does it work with no smartphone (just record for later review) ?
Another question:
Does it support Bluetooth HRM and power meter? Maybe I missed this point, or it’s obvious that yes, but the website site mentionned only ant+ HRM and power meter pairing.
Blondin –
The BSXinsight communicates and listens with both ANT+ as well as BLE. Our mistake on the website. We will fix that.
Bryan
Pablo,
Swimming – the device is 100% water proof and we are in the pre-testing phase for a swim application and custom sleeve to wear on your arm.
support profile – are you asking if you can show people your data? It will be completely agnostic and you can upload to your trainBSX / Trainingpeaks / coachya etc accounts or simply share your information on bsxinsight.com.
ANT+ for HR and pace – the quick answer, this was our original intent. The device does “see” your HR and the device does contain an accelerometer so we will be using that for pace and distance. Our rev2 device will be something more of an every day wearable if you want to ditch the other peripherals.
no smartphone – yes, the data is stored on the device and in the cloud for you to view on your free bsxinsight.com account.
Bryan
Many thanks for your answers,
your reactivity is highly appreciated.
If the item will be ready for Christmas, I suggest to consider the option to provide a second compression sleeve (without pocket, but with the brand name) as a gift. Not for the chimney and Santa Claus (too many holes), but we will appear less “grotesque” than wearing only one, although compression sleeves already make laugh people ;)
Best,
I was under the impression it will come with 2 sleeves. Page 12 of the BSX Insight brochure (What’s In The Box) lists the content as follows:
-BSXInsight
-docking station w/ micro USB cable
-2x compression calf sleeves
(source: link to issuu.com)
You’re right though. The actual pre-order page lists “custom compression sleeve” in the singular.
Bryan, is it possible to get the definitive word on this?
hi bryan,
another contribution to the flow of questions:
You are developing a swimming application. Am I to understand that it will be an extension of the device that will be out in december? Ie, the swimming functionality can be added to that package later? Or will it require to repurchase the entire bundle, and hence, it would be beneficial for some athletes to wait?
rev2 device?
Any chance you could clarify what the device will do at release and what you plan to add to it in future firmware updates? I understand cutting certain features like HR and cadence to be able to ship on time but they way you’ve worded it here and on kickstarter make it hard to tell what is fully cut and will never come and what you plan to add to the firmware down the line (see the Polar tri watch and how it was released with limited functionality but firmware updates have made it much more functional)
Just to clarify, the device cannot receive BLE heart rate data or BLE power meter data, only ANT+. A future version might consider this but this is currently a hardware limitation.
I need to clarify:
one of the engineers caught this and here is the proper comment.
Just to clarify, the device cannot receive BLE heart rate data or BLE power meter data, only ANT+. The BLE communicates to your smart phone APP to control the device. A future version might consider this but this is currently a hardware limitation.
Totally agree blondin. Since compression calve sleeves are so popular now, BSXInsight should make a compression sleeve pair version where one is simply a compression sleeve and the other has a pocket for device as well as being a more full-length compression sleeve.
On another note, what is actual name of company? BSX? BSX is Boston Scientific’s code on the NYSE.
It looks like using heart rate to determine inflection point is just as accurate in the running version. However I would expect that for cycling, heart rate would be quite delayed and thus not very useable. So, I think the cycling version is where this device really demonstrates its usefulness. For running, you might as well do this test with heart rate. Comments?
Given 1 test for 1 discipline costs 100 euro at the testing center, excluding obliged medical exam beforehand, i’d say that the price is quite reasonable.
Ray, how do they estimate lactate threshold? Are they measuring light scatter changes due to oxygen changes in the muscle tissue?
Everyday –
I will try to answer for Ray since he is a very busy man.
To answer your question:
Yes, the BSXinsight device uses NIRS to measure the O2 amongst other analytes in the muscle tissue to infer the LT. We use a patent pending algorithm to analyse changes in concentration in the analytes in order to predict the accumulation of lactate in the muscle, which precedes a systemic rise in lactate.
For a more in depth answer go to https://bsx.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/200848415–But-How-Exactly-Does-Your-Device-Measure-Lactate-Threshold-
Thanks! Good to see some real science in this space!
Bryan,
Question.
What happens, when as you point out the accumulation in the muscle of lactate is done but it may never show up in the systemic situation at your finger.
. So the chnage in SmO2 or Hb or O2Hb or TSI % can be rapidly in the calf muscle, but we never may show up as lactate reaction in the finger due to the lactate dynamic and its property to do more than just accumulate. ?( Key words, buffer, shuttle of energy, MCT 1, MCT 4 +++)
I like the look of this.
There is no reason why it can’t be used on the track, taking away if discrepancy of Treadmill pace, as long as the phone is being carried by the testee?
excellent review. I’ve just pre-ordered one. can’t wait to get hands on and fine tune my trainning zones.
Lovely product. Revolutionary.
Bryan, could you confirm what the sizes mean in your sizing chart. I assume it’s calf circumference, but just would like to be completely sure to avoid any possible unpleasant mistakes in ordering. Relaxed or flexed, or does it make any difference? If you’re on the borderline between two sizes (e.g., I measured 35 cm), what’s your recommendation? Thanks.
Mark,
You are right, it is calf circumference. When we do our measurements, we do relaxed. My recommendation is to go with the medium because I do not foresee your calf getting smaller, more than likely growing a bit.
Bryan
Bryan, it’d be a good idea to include this added info to the sizing info/chart on your site.
I worked with them briefly and loved their attitude. Good group!
That test was definitely taking one for the blog, many thanks Ray for your amazing efforts to bring us the latest sports tech.
Why does this chart link to dcrainmaker.com show that his LT pace is most likely 6:03?
Hi David. Dustin Freckleton here from teamBSX.
The plateaus of the graph you mentioned have little to do with Ray’s actual test. All they were meant to do is represent the final stages of his workout with the right most plateau being his final stage, etc.
The heights of each stage were merely included for educational / curiosity purposes. Nothing more, sorry if this was confusing. The varying heights represent the likelihood of that stage being LT based on historical data of all the athletes we’ve tested. Ie most hit in the third to last stage. As you can tell, this was not where Ray hit his LT based on the results of his test.
Hope this makes sense!
Because his threshold pace was 6:03 via lactate. I’m not sure why they chose the faster pace as it is incorrect.
so the versions are:
running / 1 sleeve-device / also captures hr+pace data
cycling / 1 sleeve-device / also captures hr+power data
multisport / 1 sleeve-device / also captures hr+pace+power data
is that correct ?
Could you use the BSX to determine how much sodium bicarbonate to consume for Lactic acid buffering?
Why? link to sandwalk.blogspot.com
link to sport-fitness-advisor.com
So, neither of those links disputes that sodium bicarbonate has an effect. One of those links confirms that sodium bicarbonate buffering is known to have an ergogenic effect. The other link is refuting that muscle processes are not the source of acidosis.
Presumably you’re just picking up the poster on the use of “lactic acid”, rather than disputing that sodium bicarb buffering is known to have an effect?
Missed that, sorry
one final question:
how does the test-protocol for cycling proceeds?
Wouter and everyone else, Apologies for the late responses. We are overwhelmed with the response and we can’t thank you enough.
Our testing protocol has been 20 watt increases every 3:00 until you can no longer sustain a full 3:00 stage.
We start with a very base wattage of 60-80 watts to get a base line reading. If the athlete knows their FTP we start 6-7 stages below FTP. If they do not know their FTP we will start the athlete at 100 watts and increase by 20 every 3:00.
Thanks Ray for this review. :)
I didn’t read what was the result of the BSX device ? Same pace as blood test ?
Spoutnix,
The BSXinsight device found Ray’s LT in the same stage as the blood LT test. If you look at the graphs he supplied, you can see where the BSXinsight found LT earlier in that 3:00 stage due to the fact that the BSXinsight device samples thousands of times a minute rather than one sample every three minutes.
Bryan
Interesting technology. The BSX Insight mainly seems to be marketed as a device that you use every couple of weeks to measure your lactate threshold. Would you also be able to use it on a daily basis to measure fatigue during exercise? I find that heart rate is a good measure of effort, but not a very good measure of longer-term fatigue, so it doesn’t really tell me whether I am over- or undertraining. It would be great if lactate levels could tell you how hard you should train each day so that you get the maximum out of your training.
Roger-
The BSXinsight in its current form is a bench marking tool just like the traditional blood based LT test that you would go to your sports lab for. You would use the device every 6 weeks or so to check your progress, see where you now are hitting LT and adjusting your training zones accordingly.
Bryan
Bryan, while I do understand that it is a benchmarking tool and you would have to use it every 6 weeks to test, could you elaborate whether the BSXinsight is capable of being used on a ‘several times a week’ basis ?
Is a cellphone a requirement to transfer the data to the webservice? Or is there another option (via a cable of sorts). And if it requires a cellphone, what Android version do you need to run the application?
David –
You can do it two ways, through the phone and through the charging dock. The smartphone is also used to pair to the BSXinsight, connect your peripherals to the BSXinsight and to start and stop the test. The data is stored both on the device itself as well as in the cloud, then processed. As previously mentioned, the data can be downloaded via the charging dock to BSXinsight.com
Bryan
Dear Bryan, I bought a BSXInsight. Is there a possibility to integrate the BSXdata with the .fit file of my ride registered through my Garmin (510) device (.fit file) ? How and where does it all ‘melt together’ ?
This look like a great product! If it’s possible to share one with my 2 running mates I’ll definitely get one; if not I probably rather won’t. As somebody wrote before, it seems a tad pricy for something you use 3-4 times a year. Not saying it’s over-priced – I appreciate the development costs of a novel product like this might have been high – but I can’t see this adding enough to my training to end up on the right value for money side.
What will the pricing for Team edition bee?
How will the thing react if using on more atheletes?
Sorry for offtopic, but…
What happened to “Week in review”?
It’ll return this weekend. The last few weeks have been just so swamped with Eurobike/Interbike that I just didn’t have any time left to get that out too.
I think I’m confused about what this device does and how its meant to be used. Going by Ray’s review it seems like the device is just meant to be used to make it much easier to measure lactate threshold and this device will then give you your heart rate zones to train in to be programmed into the decive(s) you train with. Nothing wrong with that in that those tests really aren’t cheap or easy to do on your own and sounds like this will make them much easier to do and after paying for the device basically free, making continual testing easier. So then there would be no point in wearing the device during a “normal” exercise session. Is that correct? Or is this device used for more then just threshold testing?
Team edition that was on kickstarter, this implied that the device couldn’t really be shared with others without getting the team edition. (don’t see it on your current web site though) Does that mean you and a friend can’t share a device to do threshold testing like what TomTom above wants to do?
Eli,
You are correct, this is a bench marking tool. We will admit we were a little aggressive when it came to KS deliverable items. To make the BSXinsight an every day wearable, that would have required much more in the way of testing causing a long delay in delivery. We made the decision to deliver a pedestal product, on time, that delivers a gold standard metric non-invasively for the first time ever. You are right, it is exactly like going to the lab multiple times and paying them $200 or so to get your fingers or ears pricked.
As for sharing. We also had the intent of offering a multi user edition, but with only 2 backers on KS, we decided to focus on delivering the Running, Cycling and Multi-sport versions and making them better. It is very difficult for you to share your device with others and not recommended as the data will be skewed from user to user.
Bryan
Bryan,
Maybe I am missing something but I don’t understand why a single device can’t be used to test multiple people? Does the device learn and store parameters to better interpret future testing for only one user?
I don’t understand why the device is not user agnostic as it is only interpreting a single set of test data.
-Yancey
As for sharing. We also had the intent of offering a multi user edition, but with only 2 backers on KS, we decided to focus on delivering the Running, Cycling and Multi-sport versions and making them better. It is very difficult for you to share your device with others and not recommended as the data will be skewed from user to user.
That makes no sense. What if one user is using it and stops training for 6 months and then uses it again? If it is somehow basing things off previous sessions then it will be just as skewed. I would expect each test to be standalone.
Is there any possibility to upgrade the device feature in the future? For example, first purchase the run edition and later upgrade to the multisport edition? That help me to make quick decision to jump onboard with the basic bundle and then move on with additional features.
One other potential market: gyms, esp for running. This is a lot of $ to figure out what 20 min all out can tell you, or NP of 2×20, etc. Running is tougher. But I don’t see shelling out for something like this, although I would pay a gym ten bucks to use it for a half hour from time to time just to confirm my testing. I’m speaking as a relatively geekiy recreational athlete and PTap user, not someone at the sharp end of his AG.
I am curious about how the paces were picked/planned. They seem somewhat randomly spaced (about 4% apart at the beginning and 6.5% apart at the end). But based on the blood test protocol, it seems like the spacing is important based on “look for two 1mmol increases over subsequent stages”. The size of the stages will directly affect where the jumps are.
The other strange thing is when I plotted Ray’s heartrate vs. speed (in m/s), the “inflection” at 5:42/mile is actually “low”, and the point at 5:21/mile is in-line with the other data points. You can kind of see it on the BSX plot above, but the X axis does not appear to be scaled correctly based on the pace. (It looks like the paces are equally spaced, when they are not actually.)
I still think this is a cool idea, but I’m not really getting the data analysis that was done.
Ray, for other “big data” projects, you have made all of the data available to your readers to play with. Is that an option here, or does BSX have the only copy of the recorded data?
I’ll defer to BSX to answer your other questions, however, as for the last line – I have no other data, but also have no problems if they can/are able to publish additional raw data from my test.
Hi David,
Thank your for a thorough analysis. You are correct that the pace axis is equally spaced, and hence not to scale. The graphs are used for purely illustrative purposes. All analysis is done in terms of speed and then converted to back to pace for the representation to the athlete. The lactate threshold is determined at the first stage with two successive greater than 1 Mmol increases in lactate concentration, so whether pace or speed is used on the independent axis, the result is the same. If you want to dig further and visualize infections in HR or RPE, then independent axis should be in terms of speed. We can confirm your observation that features in the HR vs Speed space are poor predictors of LT. This is evidence that the optical signal is critical to non-invasively predict the LT.
One other quick question, in the “raw data” plot, the break point is labeled at 1775, but the algorithm output is showing a value of much closer to 1600. (I assume the X axis on both plots is the same scale of seconds into the test.) Both “times” are approximately within the same pace (5:42) based on the paces in the estimated threshold plot.
Dustin,
Thanks for the response. But I think you missed my point for this part “The lactate threshold is determined at the first stage with two successive greater than 1 Mmol increases in lactate concentration, so whether pace or speed is used on the independent axis, the result is the same.”
Ray’s samples were taken at 8:34,8:13,7:53,7:30,7:03,6:40,6:22,6:03,5:42,5:21 min/mile.
Had they been taken at say 8:34,8:23,8:13,8:03,7:53,7:41,7:30,7:17,7:03,6:52,6:40,6:31,6:22,6:12,6:03,5:52,5:42,5:31,5:21 min/mile then it would have been much “harder” to get that 1 mmol jump per sample. By the way, I’m not claiming that you did it wrong, I’m just curious how the paces were chosen, because it seems important to get the data correct.
Sorry, I´m a cyclist coach from Spain.
Maybe I’m wrong with the utility of the device: Bryan do you mean that coaching can not use a device for a different cycling tests as I do with a traditional measuring lactate?
Thanks
Two things stand out to me:
1. The difference in price between the run, cycle & multisport models. It’s enormous and doesn’t really reflect the marginal cost difference between performing one or the other or both types of analysis. I’m well aware that value, price and cost are very different things, but if consumers perceive those differences to be badly misaligned, it just creates angst and dissatisfaction.
2. Like Elli & Yancey above, I’m also confused about why the devices can’t be used for multiple people. Given that Ray got perfectly satisfactory and usable data from a single test, I see no reason (other than different coding and pricing decisions, for which see above) that the product couldn’t be plausibly used in this way. For example, my WiThings scales can handle multiple users (automatically too!), as can my other fitness devices (with a bit of fiddling). Similar to point 1 above, if this is a restriction that is artificially placed on the device (and especially if that is intended to force an increase in the number of units sold, or to increase the price) consumers just feel exploited and will be happy to jump ship when the inevitable competitive devices show up.
So, my advice to the company would be: by all means protect your technology, and derive great margins from it, but win in the market by maximising the consumer benefit (=value), and align your pricing with that.
Hi Manuel,
BSXinsight was designed with a single user experience in mind. This experience includes everything from storing: profile information, personalized assessment ride/run recommendations, web based data storage for immediate accessibility and trending purposes, etc. After initial setup all information is available for quick retrieval and repeat bench marking.
That being said, the BSXinsight device can be sold, or transferred between users or by a coach/team. Keep in mind that the user experience is disrupted with this model so we do not recommend it.
Hope this clarifies.
Sorry for the confusion on this by the way. The FAQ article referenced is out of date and this example represents the fantastic learning process we were able to experience through participating in Kickstarter this spring.
In the months since successfully funding, we have worked closely with our early supporters to refine the final product based on their requests/inputs. That is the beauty of a crowdfunding platform that brings together hundreds of enthusiasts. Needless to say, this article was supposed to have been removed for updating but was somehow missed. It will be corrected immediately.
I agree with both of your points Flobble. Piggy-backing on your first point, if there really is a legitimate reason for the large price differences, they should simply lay that out thoroughly on their website so potential buyers know what they’re paying for. Looking at their site as it is right now, if I were a cyclist (I’m actually a xc skier and runner) I wouldn’t see any reason to spend $70 more for the cycling version over the running version. Same with the multisport version. I’d just buy the running version and additional smaller size sleeve for my arm.
To avoid posting this as a response to a few different threads here, I thought I’d consolidate.
Any chance the bsx people can post a list of what functionality you plan on having in the device at release and what functionality bsx plans to add through firmware or smartphone app? There seems to be lots of speculation and confusion here. So perfect setup for people to form false expectations which may produce good buzz now can backfire once people get the device. Seems like it will just do the testing Ray did above and only for one person. So for runners it would give you heart rate zones for future exercises and for cycling would give power zones to target for future exercises. The device is only used for doing these tests so no need to wear it for anything else. The ant+ functionality will just be used to receive information from other sensors for use during the test. This device won’t actually connect to any watch or bike computer. Is that correct?
On the web site you also say you can do:
1 – Pair with trainBSX.com for real-time speed up / slow down direction
2 – Also records muscle oxygenation changes
What does#1 mean? Just keeping you in your heart rate or power zone? Or is it something to do with the lactate sensor that is more advanced?
For#2, does this mean you will support the muscle oxygen ant+ profile? (Maybe the option to transmit that data over a different channel so watches and other devices that don’t support that profile can still use that data?)
Future possible added functionality is have the device detect and transmit over ant+/ble heart rate and cadence? Are there other plans of functionality too add to the firmware you didn’t have a chance to add so you could hit your target release date?
Eli-
Please see BSXinsight.com for full product functionality this fall. We recognize that the development has evolved since (because of) Kickstarter and have put all of our up-to-date information in one place. You can also see the following product video and brochure for additional information.
link to vimeo.com
link to issuu.com
You are correct on most accounts:
* BSXinsight is a performance bench marking tool.
* It’s meant to be used every 6-8 weeks to track progress and update training zones (this recommendation is based on the fundamentals of human biology)
* The Running edition will pair with ANT+ HRMs
* The Cycling edition will pair with ANT+ HRMs and power meters
* Please see previous answer regarding multiple users
trainBSX is our coaching platform which can sync with BSXinsight.com just like any other coaching platform. It is not required however. If the athlete chooses to sync with trainBSX, they or their coach can write training plans that will sync with compatible sports watches (e.g. Garmin 910XT) to trigger alerts when the athlete is outside of their target training zone. These training zones can be HR or power or pace based depending on the preferences of the athlete and the sport type. There is unfortunately no such thing as an ANT+ lactate profile at this time (yet..).
Muscle oxygenation changes are currently transmitted via BLE to the users smart phone for real-time visualization and stored in the web for post workout analysis. BSXinsight does not support the MO2 profile at this time. This is because sports watches currently do not support it either. We are members of the ANT+ community and are actively working with their technical groups to make this a more mainstream feature. This is an important advancement we would like to see the community make in the near future.
All these and other questions are clarified in the aforementioned resources.
Cheers!
Dustin
I’m not sure if I’ve understood this properly.
I am reading this and it seems;
(a) it is not measuring lactate mmol
(b) it “only” identifies the LTP or MLSS
(c) it is tied to a ramp test protocol
It doesn’t;
(d) support more than one user
(e) allow profiling of lactate during intermediate exercise
(f) broadcast ANT+ data that could be used by a suitable app/headunit
Is that right ?
Cheers
Mark
intermediate= intermittent.
Hi Mark-
BSXinsight is a performance benchmarking tool that measures an individual’s lactate threshold and personalized training zones. These are the most actionable and understandable elements of a lactate test. It does not display real-time mmol lactic acid values.
We are currently evaluating multiple models for more ‘field’ based tests as there are definite advantages to completing the test in the environment and terrain that one is used to training/racing in. Along with those advantages however come many limitations or difficulties both to the athlete and to the technology. For now, we highly recommend completing the assessment workout exclusively on a treadmill or trainer using a sort of ramp test as you indicated. This makes it much easier for an athlete to keep to a constant pace/power during each stage of their test.
Much like sharing accounts of your current sports watch are possible though not advisable, BSXinsight can be transferred or shared with other athletes. BSXinsight was designed with a single user experience however.
Since there is no such thing as a lactate profiles on ANT+ these cannot be broadcast. As you are most likely aware, thisisant has created an MO2 profile for muscle oxygenation but this profile has not been widely adopted by most display units either. We are members of the thisisant community and are actively advocating more widespread adoption of emerging training technologies. We recognize our opportunity to be your advocate for this shift and will keep you updated on our progress.
Thanks,
Really interested in this. As a coach, I would love to buy one and then be able to offer accurate, non-invasive lactate testing to my athletes on a regular basis at what I figure would be a very reasonable price point.
Keep us informed!
http://www.oxygenaddict.com
It is possible to do the test outside (in the track running or in the road cycling)? I prefer this (more specific) way of measuring performance.
Thanks.
Hi Nestor-
We are currently evaluating multiple models for more ‘field’ based tests as you suggested. We agree there are definite advantages to completing the test in the environment and terrain that one is used to training/racing in. Along with those advantages however come many limitations or difficulties both to the athlete and to the technology. For now, we highly recommend completing the assessment workout exclusively on a treadmill or trainer. This makes it much easier for an athlete to keep to a constant pace/power during each stage of their test.
I can’t understand the price difference between running/cycling/multisport versions.
Moreover, i believe the price should be 100 $ less to be appealing to greater masses.
I’m curious to know whether the app will display live date (such as current lactate levels) while preforming tests?
Thanks
Hi Clayton-
In its current version, BSXinsight can measure an individual’s lactate threshold and personalized training zones. These are the most actionable and understandable elements of a lactate test. It does not display real-time mmol lactic acid values.
Thanks,
I’m one of the KickStarter backers for this. When it was originally promoted it was under the premise of being an everyday wearable – replacing a heart rate monitor and footpod, whilst also giving you live feedback on your current lactate levels. Since then the marketing on it has degenerated into being more simply a direct replacement for a lactate threshold test. That’s obviously disappointing, but I’m still very much looking forward to getting my device, I do “field tests” for LT at the minute which I expect have pretty dubious results. Would I pay retail price for the BSX though, doing only what it does now? Not so sure.
Hi Chris-
Thanks again for being one of our early supporters on Kickstarter! We really appreciate it. I hope you were able to read our most recent update that explained the crowd-supported process which contributed to the design/development decisions of BSXinsight between conceptualization and completion. Information was taken both from market indicators and key players in the sports tech space who manage the digital ecosystems we athletes are presently training on.
If you have any particular questions I’d be happy to talk to you about it in person. We believe that the decisions have led to a far more valuable product and powerful tool in the hands of coaches/athletes.
Best,
Dustin,
As a cyclist : from reading all the replies here, I understand the BSX is currently only meant to be used on a fixed trainer in a standardized setting ( “Conconi like test”)
So, cycling outside on the road for 30 minutes with my BSX strapped on would not give me trusthworthy data ? And why not exactly ?
Likewise for me, although I’m very interested in getting hold of the device come December, it’s not clear to me what I’m actually going to use it for? Would I be right in thinking that based of the LT test on the treadmill that I can then plug that into the website to generate some sort of training plan based on the results.
Close. An LT test (whether the traditional invasive-type test with blood samples, or the BSX non-invasive test) will give you your training zones, not a training plan. You can use these training zones to construct a training plan, if you wish.
So the point of the trainbsx website is what in that case (over using Garmin Connect for example)? Think I have 6 months premium access coming to me as one of the Kickstarter backers.
Looks like one of the main features of trainBSX is the ability for coaches to design and monitor their athletes’ training plans and workouts on the website (in addition, BSX apparently also has a “dating service” for matching athletes and coaches). Garmin Connect does not have any of these capabilities. However, TrainingPeaks definitely does have these capabilities, and is considered by many to be the “gold standard” for coached athletes. So perhaps a better question is what is the advantage of trainBSX over TrainingPeaks.
Super interesting technology and approach to bring this to market. So much awesomesauce up in here imma need a roll of paper towels to clean it up. Kudos to the team.
I think a lot of people asking about price, multi-user, team version, etc etc are completely missing the point. I totally see these guys looking to exit with an acquisition by any number of the large multibillion dollar healthcare device makers (like phillps for example). Not sure if that is their strategy but that is the most obvious route in my mind. I just hope this doesnt go the way of the now defunce Zeo. Amazing tech that couldnt sustain a business.
I really dont see “end users” purchasing this in large numbers even at a quarter the cost. Better some kind of diagnostic service model where you pay $30 bucks and they fedex you out a device with a return envelope. I guess there is nothing stopping their customers from doing that…
Hi Ray,
1Q maybe it has been told already and I have missed that.
the calf sleeve appears to me like a compression one. compression sleeves are working on principle of delaying of the lactate effect. how BSX guys deals with this since the measure of lactate treshold is whate are trying to get but the sleeve self is working on thlactate treshold delay principle. or is the variance in this test that small that it is marginal for thcalculation?
cheers
Mike
Looking forward to see your comparison with Moxy. I am gonna decide which one after your review.
Yup, I had a good test with them. Do keep in mind though that the sensors are different and focusing on different things. Also keep in mind Moxy is $1,200 and is more about a pure sensor and raw data than BSX which is more about the data and the platform with guidance.
Just different things.
$999 now. (They just lowered their price)
I would be very interested to see the lower part of the graph and in particular the Aerobic Threshold.
As far as I understood that is not possible at the moment.
Is there any plan to have it available?
So far so good as an awesome and appreciated product. I’m a Nordic skier and runner. Per the photos, it looks like it’d fit fine with Nordic ski boots, but have you tried that combo? Please let me know. Thanks.
Hi All-
Just as a quick heads up:
You can now pre-order the BSX Lactate Threshold sensor via Clever Training. In doing so you help support the site, but also save yourself 10% and get free US shipping using coupon code DCR10BTF! All three versions are available from them, and will ship in December, assuming BSX hits their timelines. The three version are:
Runner version – $299
Cycling version – $369
Multisport Edition – $419
(Links at the bottom of the post up above)
International shipments of the BSX units are $29US for standard delivery, or $39US for express delivery. Thanks again for your support via Clever Training!
Very great reading here and it shows, how the regular athlete is involved in changes from classical approaches like lactate sampling and Vo2 testing to noninvasive and interesting new trends.
I work with NIRS isince many many years and it was jusrt available over great equipment for research ideas.
With the new technique we now have Insight and MOXY pushing the new fundamentally different directions in live assessment of activities.
As Ray mentioned MOXY is a very different tool.
Here very short: MOXY is used not to find a point or threshold, where something seems to reach a critical limitation. Whit NIRS /Moxy we look for the reasoning ,why the body reacts with a limitation. We look for limiter in the physiological family so that the body has to reduce motor unit recruitment for self preservation.
SmO2 muscle oxygenation is a direct feedback on utilizatin and energy availability , The other info is the tHb Total hemoglobin, which is a trend information on blood flow and as such a feedback on as well muscle contraction quality.
When combing this information we than can make some decison during a workout, whether I like to increase or decrease delivery of blood and as such O2 or whether I like to get more towards utilization and different approaches on ATP production.
As such we use nIRS daily on any clients, whether performance athlets or rehab patients to observe and guide daily workouts so we can control intensity and stay in the ” Zone ” Intervall / strength workouts , warm up and cool downs as well as endurance loads will be control with MOXY live steady from your garmin watch or over a screen in a fitness or rehab center. We do and run this daily and there are centers now in Europe and in Canada and some in the USA who have this as feedback for their clients.
Thanks so much for the great way you open a discussin on NIRS, which was always under the cover in some small groups of useres and researchers.
If I want to use the device solely for the purpose of finding my training zones (and verifying them every 4-6 weeks), will I need to pay for a subscription or will that information be available to me for free?
Regardless of whether it will be free or not, can you list the cost(if any) and different channels the data will be available through (app/website/other). If the data varies across channels please include information about that too.
Hi Linus-
There is no subscription required after purchase to determine your lactate threshold or personalized training zones.
Data is output to web based platform so you can view from any of your electronic devices.
Dustin
Hi. Has Moxy only three hours of battery? It seems very short time for some endurance sports…
Thanks.
6 hours: link to forum.moxymonitor.com
Many thanks, Eli. Greetings.
Eli thanks for teh feedback
Just short for teh regular reader here.
MOXY is used for any activity as it is a NIRS equipment. So no need to make it sport specific or for one person only. It is what it is, a direct feedback of Oxygen trends, whether you utilize more O2 tthan you can deliver.
As such it is a direct ( compared to VO2 and lactate which are indirect) feedback on ultilisation or delivery of blood volume and oxygen.
You use it therefor for what ever we used before indirectly but now directly to find your limiter ( cardiac, respiratory or muscular limitation of your performance, is it for endurance or strenght or interval..
With this information from a test or from a race or from a workout you can than create training concepts based on what you have to improve rather than what you speculative calculate with zoning ideas.
NIRS itself is the zoning feedback from workouts to workout. It tells you how long you go in an intervall depending your goal and it tells you when you are recovered depending on your goal. It is a training idea we work since over 15 years successfully in many differentsports it is now just affordable.
Can this device give live lactate readings in mmol/l and is this whole blood equivalents or plasma etc. Or can this only find inflection points such as LT1 and LT2 or MLSS?
Just curios, what about indoor-rowing on an concept2, combined with some indoor-cycling and sometimes some running… Which version would be adaquate/recommend?
Boris, here a link to some rowing information and discussion how we use NIRS in this sport. Great options now as we can use it live streaming from the boat to the coach in the boat or besides the rowing pool. We us a wasp for the moment but there are other options like WIMU or more.
The athlete himself can see it on a watch and or can give an upper and lower alarm like in a HR upper and lower limit during workouts like intervals or has the display in front of him as well. link to forum.moxymonitor.com
the oteher link shows you a nice discussion and some examples from rowing , where this specific athlete shows a restriction and limiter in his actual strenght of his leg muscles. ( Occlusion
link to forum.moxymonitor.com. )
I understand that this is meant to be used as a benchmarking tool like traditional LT tests, and that no watch maker currently supports real-time monitoring, but is real-time, watch-linked use something that will be possible in the future with this exact product? Or will it be a subsequently developed product that offers that functionality?
I’m undecided about whether I want to buy it as just a benchmarking tool, but I’d buy it in a heartbeat if it were going to work with a watch in the future.
So Wow… I’ve been a BSX Insight backer for a while now and I’ve been super excited about the product. Reading through the series of comments here, it could be pretty easy to look perspective on the positive and groundbreaking nature of this product.
But c’mon, it’s a first generation product that can analyze light patterns in your muscle to determine the exact moment when they become fatigued. Sure there are some limitations when we start thinking blue-sky possibilities.
But heck initial consumer GPS provided “selective availability” and now we can determine locations within less than a meter.
Go back and look at the first Garmins to market and note the few differences from the current FR920XT.
I think gadget geeks and so-called tech-athletes have got it pretty good with some of the stuff that has come out recently… maybe we’ve been spoiled a bit… we won’t question a new watch that provides us some “vertical oscillation” for $400 (which we aren’t even sure how to interpret) and yet we grill first to market technology like the Insight because it won’t do real-time display…
I like Chris O Brian’s interesting view. I just like to add some feedbacks. It is actually far of the first generation ideas of using light pattern. In fact it is over 1/4 century old in practical application. And we know nicely from many thousands of tests and countless studies what we can read out of NIRS and where we still have some limitation. It even is possible to get this readings over your cheap FR 80 Garmin watch already so you have the info live as you go and do an interval workout paced by NIRS for intensity / duration as well as rest periods in between. Same is used in strength training and it is used in any possible sport, from Swimming to cross country skiing it is worn already during NHL games , during tennis games, for figure skating to readjust the combinations of jumps, for cycling and adjustment in combination with bike fitting, for rehabilitation in any muscle injuries like ACL , hip replacements and knee replacement. For postural awareness and much more. NIRS is a simple cheap version to actually do individual physiological feedback information’s from oxygenation feedback to utilization , from delivery information of blood to potential reasoning why we see a drop in Stroke volume.. So yes fun to see technology advancing.
Thanks for the info, Feldmann. I had no idea there was an FR80. I knew that NIRS had been around a bit, but not >25 years… happy to see it just coming into the “consumer market”
I love that phone with the broken screen :-)
Chris O Brien you are welcome. Here some tidbits from the earlier days:
Centre for Sports and Exercise Science, University of Essex, Colchester, UK, bjonesa@essex.ac.uk.
Abstract
Portable near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) devices were originally developed for use in exercise and sports science by Britton Chance in the 1990s (the RunMan and microRunman series).
Even somewhat earlier : 1790
n The history of near infrared spectroscopic
analysis: Past, present and future –
“From sleeping technique to the morning star
of spectroscopy”
T. Davies
Norwich Near Infrared Consultancy, 75 Intwood Road, Cringleford, Norwich, NR4 6AA, UK
The history of the analytical use of near infrared
(NIR) spectroscopy is reviewed and its future
potential is assessed. This future is very bright
if sufficient new researchers are attracted to this
academically unfashionable spectroscopy.
“Glittering like the Morning Star, full of life,
splendour and joy”
Edmund Burke, 1790.
And this is a fun section:
In 1983 Professor David Wetzel wrote an article [1] for
Analytical Chemistry in which he described near infrared
(NIR) spectroscopic analysis as a “sleeping technique”. At
the time of the first international NIR conference held under
the aegis of the Intern ational Committee for NIR spect
roscopy (ICNIRS) in 1987 I referred to that paper and said
that it was “Time for the Giant to wake up” [2]. A gap of
a decade and the additional excitement of looking to the millennium
justify a further re-assessment of the potential of
NIR spectroscopy. I believe the “Giant” has woken up but
that the future of NIR spectroscopy is so important that we
can now see that the giant we had imagined is a pygmy compared
to the potential of NIR to influence all aspects of our
lives.
It woke up many years back and as mentioned, as we speak, it is used with live feedback during ice hockey games in downhill ski training and figure skating and much more.
boooo Coupon code “NOPRICKS14” is not valid. DCR10JKW! is alos not valid.
Did you get so many orders that you suddenly become pricks…;)
Taking under consideration that you can’t really tell mmol/L and your lactate threshold value is more of algorithm derived than than anything. I would argue this will work perfectly in all cases, I bet you do test in full TT position and results would be different from hands on the drops. it’s more of approximate LT number delivery via some math, similar as with 20 min FTP test. Maybe just show real life Sm02 value and and another sensor to place on non involved muscles.
Hi Sebastian-
When using the code DCR10JKW, you’ll need to do so without the exclamation mark. Also, that’s only good on Clever Training (which supports the site here).
Cheers!
Error on my side on the garmin . It is FR 70 not as I wrote FR 80
Thanks for the friendly correction to my e mail as well as thanks for the many critical but fair questions concerning NIRS.
Mr. DC Rainmaker did an assessment with another NIRS equipment many weeks back and I am wonderng and look forward to a critical and constructive feedback similar as he did with the BSX Insight so there is an ongoing discusion into a very bright future ( not just because it is a bright light) of new ideas on using Bio markers for individual training ideas and concepts..
Just reading more accurate through your great explanation of the test. You write , that you had a BSX on each side of you legs. Can you show us side by side the NIRS data raw example as you have in red from the one side. Thanks Juerg
I’d have to defer to the BSX guys on that one, I included all the raw data I had up above in the files. Though anything beyond that they might still have.
DC thanks for the fast response. Will be fun to see the datas from the BSX guys of your left and right calf NIRS activities as it can give some nice indication of symmetry in utilization as well as in blood flow. Will try to get a link of studies we did in that regard.
Preordered the multisport edition from Clever Training today, happy to finally be able to support your site :)
Thanks for the support Torstein, I appreciate it!
Is it compatible with Garmin fenix 2?
Any word on when these will start shipping?
This device works with Garmin watches. Is the BSX compatible with Garmin Edge cycling computers?
Hi all,
BSX just emailed stating that the shipping date will be postponed to January. Devaju for me. I am one of those who pre-ordered the Recon Jet and has waited for more than 1.5 years and still waiting!
I will NOT be surprised if BSX eventually ship their products more than a year later!
Ive seen it all. Those nicely phrased emails and reasonings concluding to the inevitability of delays after delays.
The emotional price we have to pay to support new product developments… Another disappointing winter…
I’d say BSX is in a much better spot than Recon. The key difference is that BSX has an actual product that they’re demonstrating actively with 3rd parties (as seen here). Recon, with Jet however, largely speaking hasn’t been letting 3rd parties test/use the product.
I’m also not happy with the way the release date being moved out is being handled. If regulatory concerns are holding you back, then why not ship to / in the countries where you don’t have issues and then let the rest know that that specific country is a problem?
Regardless, it looks like I’ll be putting up with being pricked a bit longer…would have liked to do a comparitive check with my coach, who also does my bloody LT test. In line with other posters, and having reviewed all the material BSX have made available, I’m also still unclear on what will be released in “V1” vs. “V2” and whether this means a physical hardware update, a simple (or not so simple) firmware update…or even when to expect what.
Transparency trumps all…and an update to the BSX web-site with a clear and realistic timeline / features/ use cases will be a great start.
I know they are talking to Garmin regarding connect IQ and so on…so I’m holding thumbs that it makes it to the FR920XT but that’s just it I know this because I e-mailed them directly, and they responded directly, not because this was put in a general update.
I’ve seen the device in action and don’t think it’s as useful as they make it out to be. The lactate threshold point (workload/HR) is only a small part of the equation… you can track improvement with any race and use a formula to estimate appropriate training zones based on your race time. If you are interested, hop over to my blog…
link to astpcoaching.com
Sorry for the delay in responses guys. Half of the BSX team has been busy traveling the country providing demonstrations to high level coaches, athletes and retailers while the engineers and devs have been working LONG days getting everything finalized.
I am going to blanket some things, others from the team will provide more specifics.
US and Canada based orders are going out the first week of January. We had set backs with backed upped ports as well as with the CE stamp, which is delaying international shipments.
As for connecting to devices like Garmin etc. We had a very productive meeting with Garmin in November. That is all that can be disclosed at this time.
You can use the device daily to view your oxygenation data POST workout currently. You simply doc your device, and the raw data will be visible on your dashboard and can be exported as a .csv file.
Adam ST. Pierre…as a person with your background, I would put a * with your advice of just using different races to provide estimated training zones. You can do that, but how accurate are they going to be? Was it windy? was it hot or humid? was the course hilly? Were the conditions the same in the next race. Yes, you can get an estimate I agree wholeheartedly. In our scenario, you get your LT and subsequent training zones, of which you can adjust to your preferred percentages / # of zones.
We have validated with N = > 700 athletes to date, and we are finding LT in the same stage as the blood test to 96% accuracy. The
lactate and SmO2 comparison
Hit submit before finishing the statement. If you click on the link “lactate and SmO2 comparison. You will see an example of our data (blue data, which in this example is not smoothed) compared to that of a blood based test (the red line) and you can clearly see three different planes that correlate directly. Flat line, slight curve and dramatic curve. You can also see in our data where we left the BSXinsight running after the test, this particular athletes recovery period.
I agree that using races to estimate LT deserves an *. Anytime you use a formula (such as using 70% of LT for your easy days) it deserves an *. So what I’m saying is run a race to determine your * training zones or use the BSX Insight to determine your * training zones. My point of contention is that the actual lactate concentrations at each workload are important and that formulas do not accurately predict training zones. You have excellent correlation at lactate threshold, but there is more to a lactate profile test than lactate threshold. The training zones you estimate from LT may be close enough for most individuals to use, but I think and actual lactate profile is still very valuable. Use the 700+ samples you have and come up with an algorithm that tells you lactate concentration (even if you have to enter in some known values) at each workload perhaps. I think your technology can be very useful, but I don’t think the current product is of much use.
Appreciate those comments Adam.
Someone above posted about the comparisons to the first GPS units and the first this or that piece of tech. We are launching a product that currently does something that has never been done before non-invasively. We will call it a Cadillac. The next iteration will be the Ferrari and then onto the Lamborghini.
The first run is geared towards your middle of the pack age grouper on up to the pointy end. There are millions and millions of endurance athletes that simply do not get their LT done for several different reasons. Cost, pain, inconvenience, having to repeat it 3-4 times a year.
We have produced something that is simple and actionable…well and repeatable.
I agree that for the elite of the elite like yourself, Neal and Rob (well and because you have access to, and conduct top level testing) it is something that you will wait for further generations of the device that can give you real time actionable data.
We are very excited about some of our newest findings with actual mmol/L data.
Thanks again for your insight Adam.
Any chance you could clarify if this device will support any ant+ profiles? (I.e. broadcast them) I remember you saying optical heart rate wouldn’t be implemented due to time but I also remember talk the device might support the muscle oxygen profile. Is that happening at release or in a planned firmware update or has it been cut as a feature? Thanks
Right now we are only receiving, not broadcasting. That will be a future feature.
You can see all of your SmO2 data on your bsxinsight.com dashboard and is available for export through .csv
By way of a firmware update or do you mean a future version of the hardware?
Eli,
What I am hearing from the team is by way of firmware update.
Bottom line, we want to provide the best user experience possible.
Thanks, from my perspective limiting the feature set at initial release is good if it let’s you make sure those features work well with a good experience but would be nice to know about what is planned through firmware updates verses if I want that functionality I should hold off buying cause this hardware can’t support it. Like the garmin stuff that can’t be talked about, can it at least be mentioned if this is a firmware thing so buying the device now will allow it in the future assuming it doesn’t fall through?
I’m sure you’ve noticed how some companies seem to just add new features to new devices even if the old device could support it while others like pebble keep with the same hardware and just keep adding to the firmware.
Thanks
Eli,
You are spot on and hence, why we have made our business decisions around just that. We wanted to release a pedestal product device that provides you with something that has never been available before (non-invasive)
We are launching with a Cadillac, iterating towards a Ferrari, and then the Lamborghini.
Bryan
It’s talk like that that makes me think this initial Cadillac release will do lactate threshold testing an all the coming features you talk about will make me go out and buy another car. So if I want some of the extra functionality I should hold off on buying unless I want a garage full of cars. Remember the pebble now has much more functionality now then when it first came out, but it is still the pebble.
As in your analogy suggests you get what you buy and new features will only come with a new model year or different model as that’s how cars work because other then the Tesla you never get updates to the car besides recalls to fix things. Which is why I wonder which model you are following.
Just like any gps watch or other piece of endurance tech: they launch, push updates, eventually come out with a newer and better device, push updates, eventually come out with a new release. (see Garmin 310 and not 920, Timex trail runner to ONE GPS)
We will fall into that same scenario as we continue to research, develop and iterate.
Almost all garmin fitness products ship feature complete with just bug fixes and if they need to add support for a new garmin device (virb, vector) to better sell the other device. See the issue I have is you mention some future functionality:
-broadcast data over ant+ in real time (don’t say which profiles you might support)
-connecting to garmin devices
Is this for future devices or are these things we can expect to be added to what is sold now?
Eli,
Feel free to give us a ring at 281.789.8555 and we can personally chat.
Hi Brian, I think some of the questions just put forth by Eli would be of interest to all of us, re: firmware updates.
Thanks
Yes, I think it would be best if you spelled out what “future” features can be added via firmware vs what will require a whole new device. It’s sounding to me like it’s best for everyone to hold off now as the majority of what didn’t make it into the initial release will require completely new hardware.
It’s important to remember this is a completely new product so overspending now might sound great now but won’t seem so good down the line
I pre-ordered mine yesterday through Clever Training. Since I’m a few weeks behind on my winter training program due to coming down with a chest cold, I plan to get the device and use it (with it’s protocol) for my baseline test, and test again in 6 weeks, and 12 weeks to evaluate progress and adjust training zones. I’m excited to try the new technology out.
Preorder doesn’t mean shipping. Their last update was Kickstarter backers will get their device shipped mid to late January.
At this point I’m considering cancelling the order I placed in September 2014. 15 Dec shipping didn’t happen, early Jan shipping didn’t happen, Mid Jan shipping hasn’t happened and end Jan shipping hasn’t happened. Right now, not being a U.S customer I have no idea when to expect anything.
Hello,
This definitely looks interesting. Couple of questions,
Any update on availability?
Will the mobile app also give lower LT (i.e. aerobic threshold)
Going by their updates on kickstart backers should be getting theirs mailed out starting this week: link to kickstarter.com
I don’t think they will be shipping till April. They haven’t gotten their certification yet and it seems they are putting these devices together one at a time. They don’t have their apps available yet for IOS or Android.
Honestly, I don’t know why they keep stringing it along. It’s better to under promise and over deliver than over promise and under deliver.
There is no way, that December date could ever have been achieved. Just like there was no way their January, or even February dates will be achieved (they don’t have certification yet and that can take time). Maybe by March it will go out to “kickstarters” and by April it will go out to the over paying customers. Too bad by then trainer season will be over for most of us.
I got my USPS tracking info today and I’m a kickstarter supporter
Android apph link to play.google.com
Any folks who ordered via Clever Training were sent the following last night:
“BSXinsight: Lactate Threshold Sensor
Thank you for your pre-order of the BSXInsight Lactate Threshold Sensor. We have been notified by the manufacturer that they are in the final stages of assembly and expect to ship inventory to our warehouse the first week of March. Once we receive the shipment, we will fulfill orders within our queue in the order that they were received. When your order is fulfilled, you will be updated with a shipment notification and tracking information for your convenience. If we receive any updated information from the manufacturer or any additional changes, we will be sure to notify you at that time. Thank you for your patience with regards to the release of this product.”
If it’s March for the CT guys then it will be…well, who knows how long for the international orders. I’ve just requested a cancellation of my Insight order and a full refund via the store.bsxinsight.com site. Lets see how long that takes.
Hmmm,
Not pleased with the delay. That is the information i received:
”Dear
First and foremost, thank you again for your enthusiastic support. We are energized by the overwhelming positivity and encouragement from each of you that we receive on a daily basis.
As many of you know, the first batch of BSXinsight devices were shipped out last week! These orders went to our early Kickstarter backers. In the excitement of this tremendous milestone, many of you have been asking “when are you shipping my device?”
We had hoped to begin that process in January along with the Kickstarter orders. But since this was our preproduction run we made the strategic decision to limit our initial quantities. This allowed us to learn from the first run and work out any kinks or problems. In retrospect this was unequivocally the correct decision and one which will result in you receiving the highest quality product.
What does this mean to you? A slight delay to next month. We apologize for this slight shift in the date but BSXinsight is a highly technical product with unparalleled accuracy and one which requires the highest standard of manufacturing. We want your product to be as good as it can be and want you to know that we are dedicated to continually making it better.
Moving a release date is not a decision we take lightly and is a choice we make only when we know it is in the best interests of the product and our supporters. Thanks to everyone for your understanding and we assure you these few extra weeks will be well worth it when BSXinsight does arrive in March.
Finally, we will be sending weekly updates as we work towards the next ship date. We want to keep you immediately informed of all progress. One of the first will include some very exciting news regarding unadvertised functionality that we have just added.
Please be sure to watch our Facebook and Twitter feeds for more updates and news along the way as well.
Sincerely,
The BSX Athletics Team”
Reinhard,
You failed to mention that you just placed your order 7 days ago. We apologize to those who have been waiting much longer. We made a strategic decision to place a smaller batch run so we could iron out any wrinkles in the assembly line process so we could better present that process to the final assembly house for our large batch order.
I am not trying to make an excuse here, but we wanted to make sure that we deliver you the best possible product. And with any new tech, we do find bugs or improvements to implement along the way. We could have chosen to send out a product that we were not 100% satisfied with just to meet a timeline, but we decided to take a little more time to perfect things. We are a team of 9 individuals working long days and nights to get you your BSXinsight.
If anyone has comments or concerns that they would like to direct to us, please send a note to info@bsxinsight.com. We are also usually online for a live chat through the website during normal business hours central standard time. The only time we are not is when all hands are on deck assembling and shipping units.
With a new product some delays are expected. I think the biggest issue folks have is that you gave completely unrealistic dates. You shouldn’t be doing small batch runs now to finalize the assembly line. All that, plus certification, should have been completed before you tossed out a date. It’s all about managing expectations.
In all honestly, I never expected the December date to be met, however, I did expect it to have been ready to ship in January.
After the posts about having to wait for certification and perfecting the assembly process, I’m kind of shocked December or January was ever mentioned as a possible date.
So now I get to read unboxing posts from the lucky few that have actually gotten one already. Most likely by the time this is ready to ship I’ll be outdoors 100% and won’t use this till next winter.
This is not really a BSX specific problem but a crowd sourcing problem. All Kickstarter campaigns are started before a product is anywhere close to a production state and that is when they tossed out the December date. You should have seen the delays with the Pebble watch
If it was a kickstarter that would be one thing. I didn’t hear about it (or place an order) till it was advertised as a pre-order with an expected Dec 15th ship date.
I ordered mine on the 7th of November, and received the same email as everyone else yesterday saying that things were delayed.
I’m in the International shipping group, so I’m guessing that (on current estimates) that means late March/early to mid-April.
In terms of how I feel about that, it’s a bit contradictory – I’m annoyed, but only because I’m excited about the prospect of getting it.
I’m sure it will show up, in an ideal world I’d love it to drop through the letterbox tomorrow, but that’s not going to happen and I suspect we all knew, or at least suspected, that being the early adopters of an as-yet un-released product wasn’t a guarantee that it would hit it’s projected RTM.
If its a kickstart project it will be late, especially if its a completely new company with new technology. The Mio when that was on kickstart was delayed from when they were planning to ship but was still a good product. Technology in general is delayed. Who got a Garmin 920 on the date it was supposed to be released? Was the Vector pedal on time?
Please don’t bring Mio in as an example! I bought their first gen product and it simply didn’t work – HR would drop from believable (~155 bpm) to unbelievable (~55 bpm) during a quasi-steady state interval, until you power-cycled the unit.
Got mine yesterday.
Got mine today! I’m not sure yet if I’m only supposed to used it for a LT test every 6-8 weeks or if I’m supposed use it daily; the instructions aren’t terribly clear and support is currently just a web FAQ – not unexpected for such an early stage product.
Has anyone else used yours yet? Has anyone been able to display the BSXInsight’s data in realtime on a watch or is that simply not possible at this point?
I do not know how BSX works but if it is another NIRS device than you should be able to see it on at least a laptop or on a tablets or a home computer screen when you do a workout. NIRS is simply a collection of feedbacks from the situation of Hb and how much O2 you may have loaded ( actually on Mb and Hb )
There are NIRS equipment on the market since long time and there are very small devices out since a while like Portaman from Artinis in the Netherlands which sends signals over a very long distance so you can have a rower in a rowing boat on the lake and you as a coach can see his O2 reactions and needs. This device can show an incredible great information on a lap top with even three different penetration depth . Than there is a simpler version out there for practical users , but I am biased on that one.
So for many on here the technology is not new at all it is just nicely package but it is used and available since a long time. Great to see now an additional one BSX in the market and time will tell, which of the all great equipment’s can be used for what you as a customer like to use it. Hope we get some great feedback from the first BXS users and how they use it in the workouts and for other actions besides running and cycling like for interval workouts and for strength workouts..
OK, the thing is VERY frustrating. I’m sitting in a pool of sweat writing this… I tried to do an assessment on my bike. Yikes!
First, they have GREAT instructions for putting on the sleeve like “PLACE your BSXinsight into the sleeve pocket using the large inside opening.” Thanks a lot, for that I really didn’t need directions. Then their website for setting up your profile is buggy as hell (at least via Chrome and Safari on OS X). I finally fought through that.
The iOS app is decent, and I was able to pair it… then it in turn could pair to my Stages and Scosche. (Actually, I had to move the HRM to my wrist to get it close enough to my calf to pair.) Fine. Then it asked me all sorts of questions, e.g. my conversational and 40K power numbers. No idea of how to set those, so I just guessed (180 and 140W). Then it tried to kill me! Check out link to strava.com for the blow-by-blow…
My config: bike on KICKR, but used Stages PM and Scosche Rhythm+ as HRM connected to their device. Strava tracks came from same devices on Edge 810. (KICKR power meter hooked up to iPad, but not connected to anything else.)
Anyway, it walked me through 60..280W in 20W increments. I stopped it a little bit after it wanted me to go to 280, and then it had the nerve to whine about not having enough data. NO feedback, zip zero nada.
Bottom line: I think it’ll be a great device. I hope. I hope. I hope. BUT: they really need a good youtube video and a much better onramp to using this beastie.
I think it assumes the 20 watt increments are true increments. Your watt chart looks like a slowly increasing line without any flat parts. Maybe they need to hold the power more steady so set the KICKR to erg mode and set its power to each interval the bsx software wants
For 40k power look at: link to strava.com and see what type of power you can hold for an hour with conversational being chatting with someone on a bike ride what your power looks like
I think Strava does a lot of smoothing (or I was), but the real effort was more or less incremental. It said it was mad because I didn’t do enough segments.
(Side comment… I think I can finally use my Stages to run Erg mode. link to forums.transitions.org.au)
My hour FTP number is 180W, at least according to Strava. (Yeah, I’m an old guy.) I told it that for my conversational power number, and 140 for my 40K.
I could see the oxygenation number go down to 70%, which was kind of cool. Anyway, I’m not sliming these guys — once I get over the learning curve, I suspect it’ll be useful. Maybe when I recover, I’ll try different numbers and pay more attention to the protocol it designs for me.
Use erg mode on the trainer to get the power curve to look more like steps and set the conversational power lower to around 90 and see what happens. (thinking the session needs to start with some lower power intervals so it can get a baseline of your lactate levels to be able to see how they increase)
Eli is right on both accounts. BSXinsight needs a minimum of seven stages (warmup stage + 6 after) to properly calculate results. That doesn’t mean stopping after seven, but rather make sure you have the proper amount of stages before you hit the big wall. Also, the power levels should look like steps as Eli alluded too.
We are working on a few more videos to give more clarity into the testing protocol.
Maybe you so aerobic and your anaerobic threshold nearly VO2max?
So if cardiovascular system is a limiter the test fails.
Going onto BSX Insight’s facebook page opened up some more info, but not quite enough. The first post is a youtube video to help get you started. It glosses over the part that nailed me, at least for the bicycle assessment. link to youtube.com
I already sent this question in to info@bsxinsight.com but they don’t seem to answer their emails.
There was a blog comparing the BSX to the Moxy and it mentions that the BSX reports relative blood oxygenation whereas the Moxy reports absolute blood oxygenation levels. So Absolute makes sense, but what exactly is the relative blood oxygenation levels relative to? The start of a recording session?
Is it reporting relative blood oxygenation due to a limitation in the hardware? software or just because it needs relative oxygenation for the LT algorithm?
I’d try the Moxy folks, they seem to be more knowledgeable about blood oxygenation and could probably explain the difference. Sadly the bsx doesn’t seem ready for showtime. There are some posts in the wattage forum explaining the differences that will be observed depending on which muscle you use a NIRS device on. For cycling they really shouldn’t be using the calf.
I would say it may be too early to tell how useful bsx will become at muscle oxygen. BSX seems to be concentrating on just the lactate threshold data right now and trying to do that well. That does seem like a good focus with LT testing costing ~$100 per test when BSX makes a test “free” so big market while focusing on muscle oxygen will bring a much smaller market. So in the short term Moxy is much better for muscle oxygen based on what the devices can do right now, but don’t know if you can say BSX won’t get better.
(Also if muscle oxygen based training catches on I’m guessing other companies will make products too driving the prices down, or at least driving Moxy to charge less)
Hi,
Is anyone made a comparison with BSX vs traditional lactate measuring device during an incremental step test?! I mean the values are in 100% correlation?
Umm…that’s what the post is about. ;)
They claimed 97% accuracy
do i have to have the phone with me whilst running?
Good morning it will be possible to have data and recording of BSX directly on watches garmin with IQ?
Just in case anyone was curious, units are not shipping yet. Most likely not for another 4-5 weeks…..
Before the end of the month right?
They’re shipping for Kickstarter backers already. For retailers, they plan is by the end of the month. Here’s the update from Clever Training that went out on Friday to folks that ordered via that route:
/////
BSXinsight: Lactate Threshold Sensor
Thank you for your pre-order and continued patience for the release of the BSXinsight Lactate Threshold Sensor. We have spoken with the manufacturer and confirmed that they are still on track to have the items at our warehouse and ready to ship by the end of March. Once your order has been processed we will notify you with the available tracking information, until then we will provide weekly Friday updates. If anything changes on the product availability we will be sure to let you know. Please feel free to email sales@clevertraining.com if you have any additional questions regarding your order.
/////
Yes, sadly shipping in March now became the “end of March”. Pre-order folks will not see it before April.
Looks like they won’t make March after all. No clue what the holdup is this time but they seem to keep taking pictures of devices ready to ship.
I will have to disagree with you Richard…
We shall see if they start sending out tracking numbers. Still, it’s a bit of semantics at this point even if they print out labels since they really aren’t going out today. They really should have had these things packaged up and ready to go first thing. I know if it were my company and I had delayed shipments 4 times, I’d make sure they were ready to go. From all their pictures you would think these things have been sitting around in boxes for days waiting to be packaged up. Seems like they are intentionally dragging their feet while they work out some kinks with their software. Perhaps if they were more upfront about why they are holding this all back, folks would be a little more accepting.
I received an email today which implied they shipped:
By now you should have received a tracking number for your BSXinsight which will be arriving very soon. Now is the time to prepare for your first lactate threshold assessment so you’re ready when it gets to your door!
I did not however receive any tracking info, so either they missed my order or someone was a bit optimistic and clicked the send button too soon.
Has anyone received tracking info?
Same here so I messaged them on their online chat and they told me their “online auto generated email system jumped the gun by 24 hours.” They also said they were in the middle of fulfilling order and I should receive my track number soon. A few hours ago I did! Hope this isn’t an April Fools joke, I can’t wait to start testing!
Can’t wait to read about your test results!
I’m sure it’s not as straight forward as you make it seem. With any new technology you’re going to experience delays. I agree more communication would have been better but I doubt these people are as cynical as you’re making them out to be. I’ve been to their office and was amazed that they only had 7 people doing everything, even though they were super busy they took the time to sit down and talk about BSXinsight, and how to incorporate it into my training. Very friendly and look forward to seeing how they develop.
Ps- Being able to track your training sessions is about to be released.
I don’t think they shipped yesterday. Mine certainly didn’t ship.
What is your order number? Maybe that has something to do with the delay?
It was in the upper 100ds. I ordered in October. I contacted them via chat and they have an automated reply saying that if you haven’t gotten a tracking number now you will get it either today or tomorrow. So doesn’t do us any good, but they clearly missed their end of March date and I probably won’t get mine till late 2nd week of April or even 3rd week.
Considering all the delays they had, you would think they would have hired some temps for a day or 2 to finish up the shipping of all their pre orders.
Richard, I didn’t seem to find your order in our system. Did you order under another name? This way I’ll be able to tell you which day we will be shipping yours out.
The primary reason for the delay is that we made modifications to BSXinsight based on the information we learned while building out the KickStarter versions (which we did ourselves – not a manufacturer). From there we expedited a large order of unit fabrication and have been fulfilling orders 11 hours a day as units arrive in our office from the manufacturer.
Yeah, this is starting to get annoying now, I ordered last year to set zones to train for an event that looks like it’ll arrive before the BSX unit.
Agreed, they really blew it for this season. April is too late since most folks will have already started the race season. On the positive side, maybe they will have it out before September. Or should I say August since that would really be August 31 to them.
The new BSX app will now determine your aerobic threshold in addition to your anaerobic threshold. This update SERIOUSLY improves the usefulness of the device, particularly for marathoners.
Interesting discussion. I think I find myself kind of in the middle: interested in being supportive of a firm that’s pushing the envelope on what can be done to help athletes train better, but a bit concerned on what is “real” vs “hype”, and not sure if all reasonable (I think) questions have been answered to make a solid buying decision, at least at this time.
One thing that was a bit troubling is, the website and discussion here clearly states that the device is meant to be used in regular 4-6 week intervals on a trainer or treadmill, yet all the pictures and promotional materials show athletes using the device “in the field”, as if it’s appropriate to use it as a day to day, real-time tracking device. I don’t think it rises to the level of duplicity, but is confusing messaging at the very least.
Ray, this is where you become SUCH a valuable resource. If the marketing and messaging was a little clearer from the manufacturer, I would’ve purchased with no reservations. I did indeed end up purchasing, but I’m definitely more concerned that it could be a “risky” purchase, with thoughts of needing to return it if not happy. Having put my money down I guess suggests I’m optimistic; here’s hoping BSXInsights follows through!
I’ve got the unit, and will be doing my first two tests over the next two days. I’ll be looking at the unit from two perspectives – one is mine as a ‘user’, and the second is also in the framework of how a coach might use the data. My coach is eager to start digging into it – to separate usefulness from hype – and perhaps I can even sucker him into writing a piece within the review.
So here is the thing. The device is capable of tracking muscle oxygenation similar to how the Moxy does it (although it’s still unclear as to if the device measures absolute or relative oxygenation – they have NOT answered any questions about this and seem to be intentionally avoiding it) and could in theory communicate with an ANT+ device that supports oxygenation profiles. I think they were originally planning on supporting those protocols, don’t know if they actually do at this time. I suspect that could be added via firmware at some point.
As far as the usefulness of the device or LT in general is a debatable topic. Some camps say that your FTP or CP is all you need. Others will argue that it’s hard to do a true accurate FTP test (most seem to do 20 minute tests which are about as accurate as using the maximum HR formula). 95% of 20 minute power might work for some people, but it’s probably wrong for more people than it is right. Thus being able to get your LT could be valuable and or more convenient than doing a 1 hour FTP test.
With all that being said, I don’t know if these guys just have poor management or don’t know what they are doing. Their marketing material is clearly wrong and hasn’t been updated. If you google it you will find more articles discussing the outdated feature set (showing it being used all the time which is what was originally planned).
Regarding your question, Charles…
via Erin Lockwood’s recent review:
“The BSX Insight is meant to be used every 6-8 weeks to re-establish your training zones and see how you are improving based on the data it provides you with. It is not meant to be used every day.”
This was more perplexing to me:
“The one problem I had while taking my first test was I felt that my numbers were too low, so I contacted the company to ask them about this data. They (BSX) answered my questions, suggested what to do during the next test in order to get a more accurate number and even let me know what my body was saying according to the device.”
Shouldn’t it be intuitive enough that I don’t have to “hack the system” to get an accurate reading?
Marvin,
Allow me to give you the complete story for why Erin experienced issues during her first test.
When we followed up with Erin she admitted to not adhering to the test protocol fully by not completing the test (which requires you to go to exhaustion). She completed the stage she assumed was her LT and stopped, we were able to see that in the data collected by BSXinsight. Similar to doing a blood LT test, when using BSXinsight to do an LT assessment test Erin should have completed stages past her LT to get accurate results. There was no issue with BSXinsight or processing the data.
Not completing the test protocol is clearly bad, but let me ask this question:
Lets just say she couldn’t continue after hitting the level that she did? Would you then argue that the LT it determined was correct? There are some folks that are at extremely high Lactate levels even at their FTP. It is conceivable that they could hit exhaustion at a power/pace just slightly above.
Shouldn’t the test be looking for the inflection point where Lactate has a huge increase? Wouldn’t the data from her test, even stopping too soon have show that?
Steve that’s a great clarifying question. First, I would say that if she couldn’t continue after hitting the level she did, then she would be at exhaustion (obviously). From that BSXinsight would have the necessary data to determine her LT.
It is looking for that inflection point in your muscle oxygenation (similar to that of lactate in a blood test). Here is a FAQ page written with a nice graph to show you what the raw data should look like. With Erin, she stopped the test just after her oxygenation reached the peak. If you’re looking at the FAQ graph, her data looks similar to if the FAQ athlete had stopped at the 18 minute mark. Which is not enough data to complete the full “curve” of what the oxygenation data should look like, and therefore not enough data to give an accurate LT result.
Allow me to add some ideas and thoughts to this interesting discussion.
In many cases O2Hb or HHb , or depending what NIRS equipment you may use SmO2 or TSI % or Hb difference can react , but do not have to react, similar like many blood vlaues. In the discussion here it is lactate, but you could take epinephrine or adrenalin or norepinephrine and other datas, indicating a change in performance and or intensity.
NIRS data indicate what they are, informations as a trend or in some equipment as an absolute value on the change in O2 bound to Hb or Mb. If we use HHb ( deoxygenated Hb ) than we may see an increase in the values at some intensities, where the body delivers less O2 than he actually needs or is able to utilize. If NIRS uses O2Hb ( oxygenated Hb ) than the trend would show a drop in O2 Hb., if they use SmO2 than you would see a drop in the graph . If they use Hb diff than you would see a drop as well..
Now we can have a situation, where lactate may increase as it often happen at a higher intensity but O2Hb or HHb may not chnage at all or in fact we may see an increase in O2Hb or a decrease in HHb.
This can easy be produced as a fun experiment by simply playing with respiration so you shift the O2 diss curve to the left. O2 Hb will increase but lactate as well. . So next is, that NIRS will tell you whether you have a Delivery limitation or a Utilization limitation. Beginners often show a utilization limitation. Top athletes can show a delivery limitation. In the case under discussion , this person may in fact has pushed very hard and had simply to quit as she may have a Utilization limitation. So she delivers perfect O2 and actually so much , that she has no problem to maintain a high level of oxygenation, but she has a limitation to use all what she delivers so she will increase O2 independent energy production as only so much can be utilized over O2 dependent help. We see using NIRS since many many years often cases, where O2 Hb or HHb simply do not drop despite a very extrem increase in lactate or epinephrine and other blood markers.
.. So the question for me is how we than can use a high O2 Hb or HHb level or SmO2 or TSI level to correlate with a chnage in a metabolic marker like lactate is.
Lactate is NOT produced due to hypoxia or a dropping of O2levels as we by now most of all learned to accept..
If we like to have a more in depth discusson and if you like to see graphs we can go to MOXY monitor forum. to have an open and fair discussion.
At this point, I would have to say the information is interesting, but also a bit overkill.
Based on current research, no one has conclusively shown that training at an exact wattage level or even an exact % of FTP or LT achieves a specific result in all athletes or is guaranteed to train x systems at the maximal possible rate.
With that being said, as long as you can get a close approximation of your LT, that is good enough to base your different zones.
So at the end of the day, all LT is showing is a point where you are above a sustainable effort. Does it matter that Lactate is a lagging indicator produced as the result of hypoxia or elves? No, all that matters is that you will not be able to hold that effort much longer than 1 hour.
Unless you can conclusively show that training at a specific power that achieves say a 57% blood oxygenation level will achieve result x better than training at 55% or 61% then I think you are barking up the tree of over complexity.
Steve,
wowww thanks for that incredible and for me the first constructive feedback on this page here.
Absolutely agree and it is perfect written. and all in english and not in my Swenglish (swiss and english) you make the absolute perfect point.There is in fact no study done which shows what the change will be when training at any % intensity, whether it is based on wattage, HR lactate levels or SmO2 levels at all.Reason: we are not a machine, we are a physiological system with daily sometimes extreme changes in how we are able to delivery energy ( cardiac system , respiratroy system capillarisation reaction like reflex vasoconstriction and vasodilatataion or how we utilize energy over changes in O2 diss cuvre and so on.
This is exactly the reason why NIRS technology can be a potential game changer in sport and any activity.
It is already an extremly efficient tool in rehabillitation. Let’s give you an example.
65 year old cardiac patient comes in my offcie for a cardiac rehab.
Goal : Increase and redeveloppment of his Stroke volume. So we have to find a daily optimal intensity not based on any % calculated but based on his daily reaction caused by many physiological reactions after food intake, post exercise reaction from yesterday, even barometric pressure due to changes in weather pattern. So the only way we can have a perfect contolled workout is with a hemodynamic live assessment like a physio flow , where we see live noninvasively his Stroke volume, his Ejection fraction % his systemic vascular resistance his cardiac contraction time. Now we pair this with a K42b and have as well his respiratory information like Tidal Volume and respiratory frequency and more important his pCO2 for information on his O2 dissosiation curve reactions, which is crucial for O2 loading in the lung to the blood and O2 release from the blood to the tissue. Now you add a NIRS and we originally started with the incredible great Portamon wireless and super small and we have live feedback, when one of the vital organs start to limit blood supply and as such oxygen supply to nonessential body parts like noninvolved muscles and later involved muscles.
The absolute first reaction on some problem in energy delivery is in non essentiial body areas like noninvolved muscels.
We will reduce blood flow there over a reflex vasoconstriction and therefor we reduce O2 delivery towards this areas as well. The first place we see this is over NIRS live feedback.
. Now true all this is overkill and if I have 10 patients a day I never could do all of this.
BUT I can use a NIRS equipment and see :
Drop in tHb as an indication of blood flow in a noninvolved muscle as an early sign, that delivery starts to be limited at this current intensity. Than I can see, whether SmO2 drops at the same time as a sign of reduction in O2 delivery in a nonessential muscle group. Following this reaction at a current intensity we will have if we increase intensity the next NIRS reaction by seeing a drop in SmO2 even in the involved muscles due to many different resons. This many different reason can be traced back because over many years we did all the above, collected hundreds of datas by having all the above equipment on patients and athletes and finally can use live NIRS to trace in most cases back, what is limitation at the current intensity and what will be triggered at that current intensity. Is it a stimmulation for the cardiac system ( SV for example ) is it a stimmulatiion for utilization or stimmulation of mitochondria density developpment or vasuclarisation. Now this intensity may be differentt tomorrow due to the stress we aplied today so again we use live NIRS to get the same physiological stimmulation and NOT the same physical % calculated performance
So real application. The client comes in, applies 2 MOXY’s on anoninvolved and one on a involved muscle,has a HR monitor on and 5 min later can see his live feedback on a big screen on the wall, he starts his cardiac workout. He can see numbers or traces and in some cases when the weather is nice he may go for a walk outside,he has an alarm from a Garmin watch telling him, when SmO2 starts to go into a critical level so he can adjust intensity accordingly. that is it. a live daily optimal load to hope we can improve not just his performance but even more important his stuctural situation in this case rehab of his heart.
Is it done in Sport absolutely: we have whole icehockey teams training as a team but individual load. Example interval.
1. Warm up to reach optimal individula Oxygenation and optimal individual blood flow.
2. Start interval all at the same time.
Player a has a arterial occlusion after 16 seconds so he stops and he has a reloaded CP SmO2 information after 56 seconds so he goes again all out till he desatruates down to the first load or reaches again arterial occlusion so this time after 19 seconds so he rest this time it takes 45 seconds for reloading and he goes again. After set 6 he can’t anymore push to reach arterial occlusion so training set is over.
Player b will be different different length of load different lengt of recovery different numbers of sets,but all did an all out load to reach arterial occlusion but very different stimmulation needed
This is live observed by the coach on a small tablete with 8 players at the same time so 2 coaches 16 players 16 optimal indvidual loads.
Now you move this into the game and you know which player has to come of the ice and which one can not yet go back on the ice. Is that a game cnanger.
Watch for some top teams and what the assitend coaches have in their hands. ?
Steve thanks for your realy great point as it is exactly why NIRS is NOT a lactate analyzer nor can it replace any lactate analyzer. it is what it is it measures changes in O2.do we deliver more than we need, are we on a homeostasis or do we use more than we can deliver. This in some equipments as an absolute % level like SmO2 . Than you add the trend only in blood flow and therefor supply changes and you have a cute little tool with an incredible live feedback potential.What it needs is an outside the BOX idea and a more critical look, whether physiology can be calculated over formulas or whether physiology takes place just now as we speak
Got a nice email with the question:
Can we back up at least some of our crazy stroies.
Answer is yes most of them and here just a short version of some of the many papers out there supporting the use of NIRS since a long time and some very newer version of people jumping into this fascinating field.
Michael J. Joyner and Darren P. Casey
Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; and Department of Physical Therapy and
Rehabilitation Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
L Joyner MJ, Casey DP. Regulation of Increased Blood Flow (Hyperemia) to Muscles
During Exercise: A Hierarchy of Competing Physiological Needs. Physiol Rev 95: 549– 601, 2015; doi:10.1152/physrev.00035.2013.—This review focuses on how blood flow to contracting skeletal muscles is regulated during exercise in humans. The idea is that blood flow to the contracting muscles links oxygen in the atmosphere with the
contracting muscles where it is consumed. In this context, we take a top down approach and review the basics of oxygen consumption at rest and during exercise in humans, how these values change with training, and the systemic hemodynamic adaptations that support them. We highlight the very high muscle blood flow responses to exercise discovered in the 1980s. We also discuss the vasodilating factors in the contracting muscles responsible for these very high flows. Finally, the competition between demand for blood flow by contracting muscles and maximum systemic cardiac output is discussed as a potential challenge to blood pressure regulation during heavy large muscle mass or whole body exercise in humans. At this time, no one dominant dilator mechanism accounts for exercise hyperemia. Additionally, complex interactions between the sympathetic nervous system and the microcirculation facilitate high levels of systemic oxygen extraction and permit just enough sympathetic control of blood flow to contracting muscles to regulate blood pressure during large muscle mass exercise in humans.
Austin, how many steps I must do after my FTP?
The main drop on this at 290watts, FTP ~ 260, if i stop at 280 can you determine FTP?
Great question. I will say that it’s not how many steps/stages you go past your FTP, as to how many stages you complete during the test and pushing yourself to exhaustion. The minimum number of stages required is 6, plus the warm-up stage at the beginning.
The second to last paragraph on this FAQ page should give you some more information.
Ok, that’s good! I’d rather do 2 low level steps and 1-2 after my last FTP measurements, than 3 with a pain.
The Inflection point in the graph at LT is not so evident, so i thought that the main drop is a must for some calculation to predict the LT inflection.
Not a problem! That’s the amazing thing about BSXinsight, it doesn’t matter if you’re just getting in shape or winding down your race season. BSXinsight’s algorithm adapts to your physiology and level of fitness!
Is it exception or rule? Shouldn’t the H+ concentration (decr. pH) shift the dissociation curve right and display smo2 drop on the graph?
I was hoping BSX would write a feedback on this interesting trends with see with NIRS. So I like to give some feedback on this from my point of view.
a) True H + change towards a lower pH would shift the disscurve to the right and as such help to release O2 from Hb, so HHb should go up easier or O2Hb dropping or if you have SmO2 SmO2 would drop as well. ( some care has to be made when there is a big chnage in tHb) Now do not get lost, keep in mind, that pH changes H + changes , but pH may not change just because we see an increase in lactate. An increase in lactate can in some situation mean an increase in H + and a potential drop in pH but it does not has to be always the case.
We can see an increase in lactate without a change in pH as long the system can keep H + in balance ( help buffer H + and lactate is one of a great buffer helper together with other options.
So we can have an increase in lactate but no change on H+ and therfor no change or minimal change in SmO2.
2. NIRS placing.
NIRS is great but it just only measures what happens in the muscles we have it placed.
Remember: NIRS does not measures lactate, it can’t it measures changes in O2 and gives trends in blood flow over tHb.
So if the calf muscle, due to technical way you run for example ( heelrunner ) or you are a forefoot runner, or in cycling you may drop your heel or tipi toe out of the saddle or what ever you just do, you get a feedback on the result of this muscle involvment and that’s it. Lactate if tested in your finger is a systemic left over of an energy source, lactate, which as well helps under other situation to buffer and maintain H+ balance ..So your calf musce may be not severely involved in a hard workout and as such my not show a severe or clear drop in SmO2.. That’s why NIRS is so great, you than simply place it on a muscle you think is one of the main contributor of the performance and you have a better chance to see a clear drop in SmO2 as an indication of a shift indelivery to utilization situation. Some may name it SmO2 break point.
3. ONe more point , which is interesting wiht NIRs, it gives us feedback on delivery and on utilization.
So once you know the Limiter in your physiological systems and it may be a local utilization limitation so you have a limit how much O2 you can turn arround, but you have an excellent delivery system Cardiac , Resp and so on you simply may deliver far more in the tested area, than you actually can use so SmO2 ill stay very high, as there is never or minimal problmes with delivery and always enough O2 in that tested muscle but other muscels involved in the activity are clearly overloaded and utilize or can utilze more than wee can deliver.
So here just a few points why SmO2 may drop or not despite a change no change in lactate . Hope that helps and was clear enough in my “swenglish ” swiss and english
Thank you for such a detailed response. Yes, the increase
in lactate and high values of lactate doesn’t mean an increase in H+ (in the blood, but what we have in muscle cells), so do you mean the extreme level of lactate or extreme increase in lactate?
Austin, how many steps I must do after my FTP?
The main drop on this at 290watts, FTP ~ 260, if i stop at 280 can you determine FTP?
The right answer: bsx will determine the threshold (but it won’t be near a lactate threshold) it’ll be lower. You must do as much steps as you can, the last step must be in max HR, pain and other pleasures.
My results (i have the same ):
day, LT/AET, watts
16 apr: 232/247, stopped at 320w (complete 300w)
25 apr: 217/237, stopped at 300w
16 may: 207/234, stopped at 280w
23 may: 236/254, stopped at 320w
In the last test i also haven’t reached max HR (184-186) , it was only 173. So I have doubts if I completed 320w step, how would it affect the bsx thresholds? but it’s impossible (physiologically) to repeat the test again immediately.
All tests were performed in the same conditions as much as possible the same week day, time (except the first), sleep, nutrition, training intensity during the week, a rest day before test.
Austin, can you share the graphs (bsx raw data) last test to compare?
oleyhe
both actually, increase in lactate levels as well a speed of increase in lactate.
Here what we can se with NIRS when we use multiple NIRS on one athlete
Placement>
1 NIRS on left calf
2 nd NIRS on right calf
3 rd NIRS on left vastus lat
4 th NIRS on right vastus lat
5. NIRS on right delta pars acromialis
Now what we did is step test and changing bike technique in left and right leg so for example drop heel on the left side and tippi toe right side.
At the same time I had SEMG on left and right calf as well so to see,whether it was not just a position change but in fact a change in motor unit recruitments.
Why > because we could have a positional change without a higher recruitment pattern and than NIRS feedback would change and we could make the wrong conclusions.
Very short summary of this case study.
We have very different HHb O2Hb SmO2 and tHb results in left and right. depending on position.
Now depending on efficiency of the position we have changes in lactate but we never know which muscle really contributed how many lactate to the result in the finger. It is simply the end result of lactate who reaches the finger tip and that is it. We never know ho much really is used before it reaches the finger nor due we know, whether it was produced due to what some may call anaerobic reasons or not.* anaerobic reasons are more the exceptions than the rule
Now we may completely overload the right calf due to the very inefficient position we may choose and as such the muscle may even create a at least venous of sometimes even arterial occlusion. We can se that with any good NIRS on the trend in tHb.
tHb will increase in case of a venous outflow restriction and than may gt flat in case of an arterial occlusion. There has to be a certain reaction after we stop to know, whether it was an occlusion trend o a vasodilatation due to increase in cardiac output. Now the answers are all given with NIRS assessment , which is the beauty of this devices…
Now lactate and pH will react accordingly. In an occlusion situation we have no outflow and sometimes no inflow so H + can go nowhere so it is intracellular and in the local pooled blood and the balance is gone and ATP splitting has its challenge. so your muscle simply quits.
In all other muscles you may as we always do even at rest , create lactate, you may use it to move H + out of the cell into the circulation. You therefor can maintain Balance and kep going. Now you have to deal with H+ in the circulation and bed sides other options respiration is a nice helper by getting rid of CO2.
Example> we have regular trained athlete, who can move all out effort a VE of 165 L of air. a certain % will be CO2. To stay normocapnic he will have to remove a certain amount of CO2. If the muscular activity now produces far more H + and he should ventilate a VE of 240 L/min but he is not trained to do that he will accumulate CO2 will get hypercapnic and H + will be very high in the blood but ultimately in the cell as ell and performance as t drop or end.
Now in te latter stage we have a high lactate and a high H + so low pH. If he now is able to move 240 L/min VE in fact we have athletes who can move 300 L/min, than he can keep H + longer balanced in the cell can keep performance going and we have a balanced H + in the cell but an ongoing increase in lactate in the blood as he can use the lactate as a H + shuttle and as well as energy source and the ATP levels can be maintained on the needed level..
In other words>
When we work with for example hockey player and we can improve their respiration they can maintain a longer all out performance as well they have a much faster recovery when on the bench due to al this interactions between H + lactate and O2 disscurve reaction of loading and unloading of O2 from lungs to blood or from blood to muscle..
If you have a NIRS you can easy make for yourself a demonstration
We use this in our workshops . Bike or run just below what some people will call lactate thresholds. No matter which of the 25 different lactate threshold ideas you may use. Simply go a speed you can therforr sustain for 30 to 60 min. So you could take FTP 60 or 20 or what ever you believe in.
Now go 15 to 20 mn so your physiological systems are balanced HR RF watt and O2Hb or SmO2 and if you have a NIRS who gives tHb stable tHb Some as well would name it MAXLASS.
Less crazy names simply feel ypu work but very great feeling.
Now take a lactate sample.. Optimal as one sample really says nothing, take 2 sample , one by 8 mn and one by 15 min. In a max lass or in a balanced situation the sample should be fairly close to the same result plus minus 0.2 mmol when you use a point of care analyser. This is the accepted and often seen variation. This is a problem for some threshold concepts , as we can have plus minus 0.4 range so it can be difficult to say where certain lactate reactions may be as well as we look at step length.
Now assuming you ave a stable good performance.. Start hyper ventilation so get rid of more CO2 than needed for 2 – 4 min and than test lactate. than go back to balance for 5 to 10 min test lactate than try to hypoventilate much harder to do and test lactate. You will be surprised on the result despite a fixed wattage and you will be surprised on the NIRS O2Hb reaction. It is on of the simple workshops demo to throw a lot of open questions towards all of us as we all learned a different story on lactate, than hart we know now it is. So the classical ideas on lactate use like lactate tolerance trainings are still out there but why would we have to learn to tolerate lactate, when we start to accept that lactate is a very great product and nit what I was many years back .
Hope this gives you some feedback but as usual much more new questions when we look more critically into the relation ship of the different physiological reactions.
Physiological reactions change daily and hourly and using a point based on any testing is a great concept to make it easy but with todays technology we much rather look daily live where and how we react due to the workout we did yesterday or the food we took in , the barometric pressure change and so on.
Now in the past we had to do that as lactate or VO2 and other methods are all indirect feedbacks and we had to hope . With IRS we have a direct feedback. So in 3 hours I will do a ride in Joshua tree national park. very hot today slightly altitude and very different than Canada so I have 2 NIRS on and will adjust my intensity accordingly. My goal today is to do a vascularisation workout. So high CO without overloading the cardiac system, and good vasodilatation help over CO2 so slower and deeper breathing than usual but avoiding shift of O2 diss curve to the right so I will look live on tHb and SmO2 reaction as well as HR. I have a small cellphone size tablet on my handle bar and se that all live in front of me. I may be super slow but who cares in may age anyway.
day, LT/AET, watts
16 apr: 232/247, stopped at 320w (complete 300w)
25 apr: 217/237, stopped at 300w
16 may: 207/234, stopped at 280w
23 may: 236/254, stopped at 320w
This are great datas and may help many of us to have some critical thoughts.
1. Power zoning versus physiological live feedback help to possible adjust power to the physiological feedback.
2. The question, whether when we use a single test point like LT or FTP or 220 minus Age or any formula. and than take a calculator versus having the advantage of newer technology, which give us live feedback for physiological defined zonings .
Just as a simple example to this above post and his HR reaction in one of his tests.
When we use any current great NIRS equipment ,than we are able to get pretty close to an individual information on current performance limitation reasons.
Depending on the workout we may have done yesterday we have a different physiological reaction today by the same wattage or performance in any sport.
Example>
The limitation is a cardiac output limitation with a tendency wo compensate with HR when SV reaches a current limitation.
So I may plan a Stroke volume stimulation workout.
Therefor I workout today to actually use the physiological reaction from my workout today so I can have a Stroke volume workout stimulation tomorrow.
The result will be , that today I may have by 200 wat 167 HR and tomorrow I have by 200 watt 153 HR.
Meaning that I create a more efficient cardiac out put and as such I will have as well a higher maximal end wattage today.
So using if possible power and using live feedbac on bio markers will be a nice individual approach to a better quality of a workout with the information I look for.
Now using NIRS I have this now always ahead o me.
NIRS is a direct or as direct as we can go for the moment feedback with as usual its own limitations.
The question than comes up. Why would I use a newer direct technology and degrade it back to a 40 plus year old squeaky concept of 25 different versions of LT ideas, when |I can see live now , what was never possible before with VO2 or lactate or any other tool .
Why would I test for a point information every 6 or longer periods of time, when we all know , that we have daily changes in physiological reactions. So why not trace live energy demand and supply and adjust depending on your workload the intensity accordingly to todays physiological reactions.
Lots of interesting questions now show up in many great discussion forums and yes we have often more questions than answers. That is the great advantage from any point test no discussion as 80 % form 100 are given as a clear result. But is it a clear stimulation when looking form a physiological idea of training .
Juerg, it’s another situation. This is an issue with algorithm BSX use to determine *-threshold. I could continue to perform the test, and stopped just because completed a sufficient number of steps and it was above my FTP.
Today I suffered up to 340w and bsx results were 247w – AET, 263w – LT. If I stopped at 280w, I would have received near 207/234. It looks like they take a %% of the final step and are looking the inflection or smth. at this segment. It would be interesting to take a look at the smo2 data.
Also during the test CO2 concentration increased from 490ppm to 1600+ppm in the room (~50m3) despite of open windows, 40cm fan on full speed and 12C outside, which certainly affects the results )
sorry for the late response, I was at the ACSM in San Diego so no back in the airport and I love to read your last feedback.
Reason. My long explanation is not looking anymore data.
My explanations or better put thoughts would be more relevant, if your test data would be the result of a physiological feedback created by your body..
Now based on your feedback we have to ask some interesting questions..
This questions relate to any type of physiological testing.
Question.
Does the protocol I choose combined with the equipment I may use create a test result I like to create, or does the physiological reactions can take lace despite the protocol .
Example.
Famous one.
Igo all out for 300 m. I take immediately after 300 m a HR a Respiratory frequency and the well know lactate level.
Question. How is the lactate value immediately after 300 m. What is the level after 2 min 4 min 6 min and perhaps 10 min..
Once you give a possible answer we have to ask . Why
After our answer to why we have to wonder, whether the test 300 m we did is a great idea to assess HR RF and lactate as it suppose to be during the run in that intensity.
You can create many ideas and test, where the result is what you may like to see, but it may be not the result of the physiological response but may be created due to the test protocol design.
The body is a physiological team with some great team players like the heart the respiratory system , circulation and many more.
Each team member tries , if given the time to be a part of a great work * survival ( and in sport we may name it performance.
Your cardiac system may react initially with increase in frequency due to lack of preload ability and once blood volume is moving better you may recorrect HR down as Stroke volume is now more effective.
Many more options in this direction.
This is called functional reaction which if given time than can get some help from a structural ability.
Same holds true for design of workouts. Do you like to create a functional stimulation or o you like to repeat functional stimuli to hope to create a structural change..
To optimize this workouts it is nice to know , what is your current limiter and how does this limiter can be supported to a certain degree with some compensation from stronger trained systems.
The most famous example in exercise physiology is the miss concept of VT * ventilator threshold is equal to lactate threshold . This can be close but it now has to be close.
It all depends on limitation or compensation ability of the respiratory system.
Now when using NIRS we have very similar situations.
If you have a great developed delivery system, but a less optimal developed utilization situation than you may deliver a lot of O2 in fact more than you are able to convert to maintain ATP but you still use more energy than you have to use for a short time before you quit an O2 independent helper.. Now in NIRS we see that as we have cases, where in any protocol step test we have a minimal and sometimes no clear drop in O2Hb so no breakpoint is easy to see.. On the other side we may have a nice lactate level situation in the blood, as lactate was helping us to maintain H plus balance intracellular by helping to buffer H plus *MCT1 and MCT 4 ideas.
Now on the other hand we may have a sever drop in O2Hb but lactate actually drops as well. * O2 disscurve shift idea(.
In short summary
Your data suggest, that the LT or AET or what ever points you try to find are not created by a physiological reaction and or reasoning but are forced upon you due to the test protocol respectively your choice to go all out or not.
This opens the question , whether the LT you have under any situations is a reliable point to than be used with a calculator to find physiological zoning.
With todays technology of direct feedbacks like NIRS is that would be a very big step backwards to the stone age of lactate testing.
Physiological assessments should be given us answers on the physiological systems and zoning should be build on this feedbacks and not on a % calculation of a magical point we find due to a fixed test protocol..
Physiological reactions should take place as they occur and not at a point, where we like that they have to occur. Or in words of the fist great exercise physiologist Aristoteles.
When the facts proof the existing theory wrong, the theory has to be reviewed and not the way that we adjust the facts so the theory can be maintained.
From what I’ve seen online the last couple of days:
link to sporttechie.com
link to engadget.com
They still promote the ability to do measurements “on the go” during workout and not just threshold tests on treadmills and like?
I just got my tracking number, hopefully the import duty won’t be a nasty surprise.
Neil,
Depending on where you’re shipping to, import duties may end up not being charged at all. In South Africa for instance you can look up the commodity code for fitness equipment (hrms and the like are exempt here) and you should effectively end up paying only the 14% vat.
My BSX Multisport arrived yesterday, and once I’d retrieved it from the neighbours it went onto charge.
No customs charge, which was a pleasant surprise.
Booking in a couple of ramp tests for the coming week – does anyone know of a place in London which has a programmable resistance cycling rig?
I just received my BSX Cycling just now and Im from Singapore :)
Lucky you. I am in Hong Kong and according to BSX, FedEx won’t ship to HK. Which is odd, given the number of FedEx packages I receive.
What frustrates me most is that, according to BSX itself, sports stores in the US are receiving units. Meanwhile, original Kickstarter supporters (I am in the low 100 range) are not. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
I just did the BSX ramp test. had rested yesterday and three days before and did a 1 hr endurance ride two days before.
The BSX result suggested an FTP that is 20W lower than what I would get from the usual 20mins test. Im demoralised!
And Im in a dilemna which FTP number to use for training… The BSX suggested one or the 20mins test… 20W difference is night and day! argh.
Keep in mind many athletes can ride at 110-120% of their FTP for 20 minutes. Using a 20 minute test and taking 95% is more likely to be wrong than correct. If you are looking to improve your FTP, I would base your training on the BSX value. If you were to do say 2x20s at your FTP based on a 20 minute test, you most likely will get better at doing 20 minute intervals but not necessarily improve your true FTP.
Hi Jake,
I tend to agree with your observation. In this case, to equate both testing protocols, I will have to multiply my 20min average with 0.88! What a morale cruncher. And most of my future workouts will now on be lower in power since all my power zones will shift downwards.
Its hard to stomach but probably the right thing to do.
Whats your take, Ray?
I’ve only done the treadmill one, not yet the bike one (maybe this weekend, we’ll see given my flights).
I do tend to agree that it’s much easier to hold a 20min power number than some of the harder tests.
Received mine yesterday. Was on charge last night and did my run test this morning. Pairing the unit using the app and a Samsung Note 3 was hit and miss. Wahoo Tickr paired once in a “check if it does” last night but wouldn’t pair for the test this morning… showed up fine in the wahoo utility when I had a look there. Having to re-pair the devices for every test is a pain. Def something to look at for the next version of the software…also, from a usability perspective. Get the pairing out of the way earlier in the process…right after the bike/run test selection screen.
And I did try these steps:
link to support.bsxinsight.com
And
link to support.bsxinsight.com
I can’t really find a good forum where this device is being discussed (and I am the first person to post on their help forums!)
I did my test yesterday and it came up with 256. I’ve done 20 minutes at 320+ and over an hour at 280 in the past 2 months. Previously I set my zones off 95% a “typical” 20 minute effort, which is obviously a lot higher than 256.
If I follow the Coggin test protocol, my zones are much higher than what BSX thinks. Similar to someone above, but worse.
Certainly if I used the BSX training zones, I can just ride around all day in zone 5, which seems a bit weird. I also find the trainer much much more difficult than outdoors up a mountain, so maybe that is part of it.
I will retest in a couple of weeks and see if it is consistent.
I received my BSX Insight yesterday, charged it and did my first test last night. I tapered my training back this week, and checked my TSB to see that I was just barely negative to try to hit close to ‘zero’ (or fully recovered) prior to taking my test. I track my heart rate variability numbers every morning also-those showed I was well recovered and ready to take a test. So I ended up testing to the protocol, and sticking to it exactly to make sure I did it well. My notes and thought below:
First, I had to decide whether or not to ‘warm up’ prior to taking the test, like I would more traditionally do during a 20 or 30 minute constant power test (usually warm up for about 20 – 25 minutes before drilling the long interval). I chose to simply start from cold as I was concerned doing a ‘warmup’ may change my ‘resting’ blood chemistry, and the first step in the test was to establish the baseline chemistry. In hindsight, this was the correct approach.
During the initial interview questions, I was a little conservative in my answers of 40k TT power average and conversational wattage estimate-better to start too off a little lower than too hard.
Notes from the test itself:
I had my wife holding the phone as it stepped through the 20W increments during the test. She also controlled changing the resistance on the rollers (I use E-motion rollers) so I can do the easiest portion (60W for me) all the way to the hardest (240W for me) all without having to shift from my small front ring to large front ring. This was super helpful and helped the test run smoothly. She also was in charge of handing me my water bottle a couple times during the test to keep me drinking. Primarily though, she gave me the heads up when the 3 minute segment was coming to a close so I could focus on hitting a ‘lap’ on my Garmin Edge 810, and shift to the next gear to quickly dial in the new power level. It worked great.
A note about setting up a Garmin for taking the test:
I have 6 fields displayed on my screen as follows (from top to bottom): Power-3 sec avg for current power; next row down: Power-Lap (for my current lap’s average power-to ensure I’m targeting exactly the wattage that I’m supposed to for that 3 minute increment); next row down (2 fields): Cadence & HR (instantaneouse HR); Bottom row (2 fields): Lap time (to know how far into the segment I’m in) / HR-Lap (to see my average HR for the current lap). This is how I have set up my Garmin for all my interval work, which allows me to pace to wattage as closely as possible. Worked perfect for the BSX test!
Results: I hadn’t take a 20 minute test in a while, but suspected I could hold about 200-210W for a 20-30 minute effort if I was well rested, etc (like I was). The reported FTP (LT2) was 199w, so I’m a bit stronger than I was suspecting (good news) with a LTHR of 180 bpm.
My aerobic threshold (LT1) numbers came in at 175W & 171 bpm-both numbers I believe from doing intervals in the recent past.
Power zone recommendations from the test seemed spot on, though I’m not used to my ‘Sub-Threshold’ zone encompasing the actual test value in the range (my range was 180-208). I would have call this just ‘threshold’, for Zone 4-then I agree with that wattage range. Supra-Threshold (zone 5) is more like V02max and lines up with my V02max zone that I’m used to.
I was glad to see that my endurance zone (Z2) has been adjusted according to my test, so I know where I need to be for endurance rides. I was surprised to see that zone 3 (tempo) was completely below my LT1 number-perhaps that’s no surprise and just reveals my ignorance in where to place that zone?
Overall, I’m very please with my test, and BSX in general. I think it’s a great product and I’m super excited to have a ‘non-subjective’ way to re-evaluate my progress. It get’s old constantly guessing if I did my best effort for a 20-30 minute effort, how my 20-30 min power corresponds to my ‘true threshold’ power, what number to use to set my zones, etc. For that clarification alone, the BSX Insight has done a great job with what I’ve seen already.
Sean
Update: Yesterday I retested after a 5 week training block (pretty intensive). I planned to retest this coming week, but due to travel, fatigue, and weather, I ended up with a lighter training load towards the end of last week. As such, my TSB gradually recovered to near zero-meaning the time was optimal for me to test again, so I decided to test yesterday afternoon.
After a dedicated threshold training block designed by my (former) coach, I was pleased to see the training in the correct (BSX test based) zones paid off. My LT1 wattage improved from 175w up to 191w, with my LT1 HR staying about the same 171 bpm initially and 172 bpm yesterday. My LT2 numbers likewise showed a nice gain from 199w initially up to 217w yesterday and my LT2 HR came down slightly from 180 bpm to 178 bpm.
I have updated my zones and plan to start training with the new zones this week! So far, I’m really happy with the BSX device and how it provides me with an objective power vs LT number on which to base my training zones.
A couple notes: I did not end up using the default (Coggan?) zones for HR because I’ve historically used a more ‘Karvonen’ based set of zones (where you subtract out your resting HR, rather than assuming the lowest HR to be ‘zero’). Also, my gains were pretty substantial for a short amount of time. I have a theory as to why: I’ve actually been hovering around the 200-210w threshold power range the last several seasons, but haven’t ever set my zones based on anything higher than 200w. Also, I’ve done very little V02max interval training (which I started to incorporate the last 2 weeks of my last training block). I think my body has been ‘saturated’ and ready to step up a level, and the V02max intervals are helping to very effectively boost my FTP in relatively short order-witnessed by a pretty large increase in my LT numbers.
One other thing: I know in the world of 280-360w threshold athletes, my numbers may seem pretty diminutive, however, I should have added the other factor: I’m a short, small male. My initial test weight was 132.2 lb, and my weight yesterday was about 130.4 lb. Thus my initial BSX test result was 3.32 w/kg and my test yesterday was 3.67 w/kg. I’m hoping to gradually build up to 4 w/kg, but don’t have a timeline or expectation on when to expect to get to that level.
I will say though, that having the knowledge of where I tested out using the same method / device has been helpful for me to know that I can safely increase my training zones and be able to manage them. This, in and of itself, has made the purchase of the BSX all worthwhile for me. I am not interested in real-time O2 numbers at this time, so simply having a repeatable protocol to follow and test results, based on the same measurement (with whatever perceived flaws or limitations may theoretically be present) is all I was hoping for from the BSX device. In other words, this has served the purpose of blood lactate testing for me, just as promised by BSX-and for that, I’m a satisfied customer. :-)
what steps you’ve completed in watts (from to)? and have you reached max hr?
Olezhe,
First, I use the iphone app on my iPhone 6+ (just in case anyone is wondering). So far, I have not had any connection problems at all.
To answer your questions, the first test started me off with a 3 minute segment at 60w, then proceeded with a protocol up to 260w. During the first test, I only made it 1 minute into the 240w segment, before voluntarily terminating the test (I was beat!). I hit close to my max HR during the test (190 bpm), but not the highest I’ve seen (ever) (193 bpm).
The second test, I was in a bit better shape. The app set me up to start again at 60w for the ‘baseline’ reading, and set up segments up to 280w. I was able to complete the 240w segment, but mis-shifted going into the 260w segment (I chalk it up to fatigue / mental error). I probably would have lasted less than 1 minute into the 260w segment. Anyway, my max HR for the second test was 187 bpm. I likely would have come close to the 190 bpm on the second test again, but it was sheer willpower to continue into the 260w segment, and I messed up the shift, so I wasn’t able to continue (nor did I want to, especially after the missed shift). Hopefully on my next test, I’ll be able to spend more time in the 260w step-if not even complete it. That’s my goal anyway.
Hope that helps?
Sean
It seems that bsx-thresholds depend on how many steps you completed even after your LT.
I’ve edited bsxinsight data example to show what I mean. The green lines where I stopped and green ellipsis is where bsx-thresholds determined. If the algorithm based on your physical reaction and search for some special inflections, then it must not depend how many steps you’ve completed after LT.
Nice observation. I can not give an answer n how BSX solves this physiological problem or reaction. What I can tell you is, that when using NIRS you can have very different reactions depending on how hard you may push a load or step test lets try in simple words t explain what I mean.
Your body as in most people has some stronger abilities and some weaker, depending on how you use the body. Some are stronger in the upper body some are weaker compared to the lower body.
Some may have a very great developed respiratory system compared to their muscular system and so on..During any decent length activity you will always first reach the limit of your weakens team member.. Now in a step test the point , where you may reach this weakest link is , where you the first time kind of feel you have to work to maintain the performance. Now depending on your personality or what ever you may not like that feeling and decide this is hard and quit. .. So you did not asked for some support * compensation ( from team members or systems, which could still work harder and therefor help you to maintain the same or even a next higher level..
If you , like in your last case decide to push harder than you have to integrate compensators and the trend in NIRS as well as for sure in lactate is very different.
This changes NIRS tracing dynamic as well as lactate accumulation and utilization dynamic and as such the comparison between both will look very different and Break point if they exist are on very different intensities.
Now this can happen as in your case due to the design of a protocol combined with your daily motivation plus physiological situation, but it will happened always during any ride you do outside on your bike.
In the past , despite that e know that since. a long time , we had to make some compromises. we use a range of a HR zoning or a range of performance feedback and hope the range was or is good enough to believe we are in a specific stimulatory physiological zone. The dream would be to have a live feedback, whether we have to adjust the performance down or up to be in our target training zone.
Any test we do or numbers we calculate miss that option. NIRS is most likely the first tool we have , where we can get closer to this dream.
looking live, whether we have more O2 delivery than we need , whether we are in balance or whether we use more than we can deliver.
So it is all about the old idea of aerob* O2 ( and anaerobe * not enough O2 ( to put it vry simple.
So why would I go and use something, who is indirect perhaps more or less connected with this idea, when I directly can watch the O2 situation with NIRS . Why would we defend this days 25 different LT concepts , who all look , where this magic change O2 and not O2 takes place and use complex ideas and theories, when I can watch.
Why would I need for every person a different NIRS when it simply gives you feedback on O2 trends no matter on what body the equipment is placed on.
Why would a NIRS care whether it is cycling or running or rowing or strength workout
when all what it is doing is alive feedback on O2 trend.
Do we simply try to maintain a great old idea onLT and force NIRS into this theory
or is there a good question to be ask, whether we may have to review this theory as technology may have advanced in what we can see and therefor can learn.
This was what I may have suspected. If this is true than what is the BSX Insight for when you can simply calculate your FTP based on which stage and how much time into the last stage you are in.
The BSX Insight should give you the same reading irregardless of which step(above your FTP) youu terminate. Else, the BSX insight is flawed.
Thats why I would like to see the grapgh data of my test to see whether the BSX Insight is doing a proper job!
I request an explaination.
This comment is NOT a critic on any test ideas or equipment but it is a thought on physiological reactions or perhaps better dynamics when we try to use protocols to find something..
As mentioned before it is all about energy supply and demand to maintain a crucial ATP level for survival.
So it is easy to understand, that when I design a protocol where I increase by 1 km / h step after 3 min or I design a protocol where I increase by 2 km/ h per step , that the sudden demand at each increase is different and therefore the supply reaction will be different.
So at each 3 min step change we have an immediate demand for more energy but we have a lag time of the delivery systems like HR ( or better CO ) and VE from the respiration side of delivery but as well as release of CO2. We have a different reaction locally due to the muscle compression which will be different depending on step increase. So NIRS will react live accordingly and you vey easy can see that.
The delay in delivery will create a bigger demand on the local available energy and as such we have to hope for some great support of O2 independent energy supply as well. If load and the step length time allow it the delivery system will finally pick up and establish a new higher load balance of supply and demand.
We reach a new sustainable SmO2 plateau or a stable O2Hb and HHb situation and hope fully as well therefor a stable blood flow.
All this reactions will create a very different load and step length dependent picture in any type of assessment , where we collect data’s like lactate or VO2 or blood sugar , ammonia epinephrine or any blood values.
All the above have an additional big question mark. That is the time delay when the substance shows up in the cell than moves to the blood , than may be used on other areas in the circulation ( like lactate ) before we actually test the left over concentration in the finger tip or earl lobe or where ever we decide it is practical to take a sample.
All this is one of the reason , why we discuss the idea of threshold and here on lactate threshold.
There is no doubt a direct connection between the performance , increase or decrease in performance and any metabolic marker, no matter whether it is called lactate or what ever.
The fascination of lactate threshold was historically easy to understand, as lactate was the bad ugly and trigger of all performance drop and end of an exercise intensity.
The fundamental shift of what lactate seems to be form a great energy source to a shuttle object to move energy and more completely asks for a review of our nice created classical theories.
I mentioned before the question of a lactate tolerance training . Who would have to tolerate the fact to get free money. Hard to believe we have to tolerate that we may in fact enjoy it.
The reasoning of cooling down to get rid of lactate or lactic acid. Why would I use a great source of energy in between a set of a game or tournament when I can store it and have less problem to reload energy storage of food intake. Many more interesting questions.
From a marketing point of view and in the stage we are today with reviewing and working on interesting new concepts on direct energy supply and demand feedbacks we see with live NIRS we clearly tend to try to go back to an established but possible not optimal theory of lactate threshold.. The fact to be able or suppose to be able to test lactate noninvasively is super exiting but do we really need lactate to fond out where we have more O2 perfect O2 and not enough O2 for ongoing performance. Again why test an indirect substance, which has many other reasons to change besides O2, when we can directly assess the trend in O2 now with NIRS.
It is absolutely true, that the simplicity of having one point using it as 100 % and than calculating intensities is a much easier concept to grab than when we have to look at our own bodies reactions and this in some cases daily as it can change sometimes a lot due to the training stimulation the day before.
This is why when using NIRS now we have to look at the individual trend and as it is now super affordable and live we will see more and more coaches using this interesting concept. Nice is to combine it with your current ideas and experience and than starting to ask critical questions, when comparing the feedback information you get form what we did in the past and what we can add for the future.
Here to end a simple example how we use NIRS live.
High school PE lesson for aerobic strength. ( sounds a crazy concept.)
Aerobic means for us using O2 for the load.
So as soon we not use anymore optimal O2 respectively see live the O2 supply runs out we stop.
Better the student stops as not all stop at the same time. It depends on the effort they put in. They have to try to deoxygenate as low as possible. Than wait for re- oxygenation and the set number is given depending on the goal of the coach. a) may be re-oxygenation is the goal so as soon they can not reoxygenate anymore the workout is over.
So student 1 has a today established deoxygenation level of 25 SmO2 % and a reoxygnation level of 80 SmO2 %.
Now he starts and he decides not to push himself hard. So it takes him 38 seconds to reach the target. Student 2 decides as he is highly motivate to go hard so he reaches his target in 26 second.
Now both wait till they are up on their reoxygenation target.
The highly motivated student relaxes great , the other fools around..
You as a coach do not care as physiology takes care on this.
The ” good ” student has to go again after 48 seconds the as well good not motivated student is happy as he has a longer ” break”. You see where this goes.
The “good “student is finish with his workout after 6 sets and moves on to some other task like for example coordination training or technical training to have a better tripling ability or he plays with other students who are finished as well. The to highly motivated student will have much longer before his body tells him that is it.
It is the individual concept off learning . It is not that the coach tells where the student has to go it is that you pick up the student where he is and what can be done now to create for him a personal best based on what all is included in creating persons best.
The fun part is that in the next lesson the not as ” good ” student is highly motivate to get over with thee workout as he likes to play or do nothing and he suddenly has a very different way how I he approaches the strength workout.
Far of the topic we started out but direct related to what we try to do, when we integrate direct bio markers in the market. Look forward and perhaps at least avoid moving backwards to an established but perhaps squeaky concept of LT.
Thanks for sharing your data example with BSX. This is so nice as we can much easier follow some thoughts :
1. take the end of step 200 watt for example and than step 220 watt.
You can see that the increase in lactate is getting close to 1 mmol per 3 min step.
That means, as lactate has a time lag the lactate values we read out where created and most likely higher values not as we see it in the analyzer but some unknown time span before we take it.
So in your case if you would at 200 watt or 220 watt decide to increase the step length to 5 min the lactate curve we see will have a very different dynamic.
O rit just could be, that after 3 min a value of 1.8 mmol may when taken 3 min later by the same wattage be 1.5 mmol now or may be higher.
It all depends, whether the delivery systems may pick up to support the O2 supply more and than we may see after an initial increase in lactate a drop as time goes on. The 3 min step length in this case may be by a certain intensity to short to give all supply systems time to see, whether they still can be a part of the O2 delivery team or not.
If the supply system can reach again an efficient balance of O2 delivery and utilization than in a NIRS trend SmO2 or HHb or O2 Hb will after an initial reaction ( SmO2 and O2Hb will show a dropping trend and HHb will show an increase. ) in some NIRS equipment you may see some contradiction in this reactions.
Now if we reach again a supply and demand balance than SmO2 can be flat or in some cases, where we even are able to sy supply more O2 than needed SmO2 will again go up.
You can follow this trend slightly in your example.
If you do the same but in 5 min steps you see it much nicer.. Now if we can reach again a O2 balance or even oversupply , than the lactate dynamic will change as well. Problem. The short 3 min time section often does not allow us to see that change and for sure not if it is a small change.. Therefor we may see an increase in lactate at each step but we see due to its live feedback a very different dynamic when looking at NIRS feedback. Now this is true under the assumption, that I do NOT change the muscel activity dramatically during the steps.
What do I mean.
There is in running a very common situation, that when running slow and perhaps uncomfortable slow I may be a heel or more middle foot striker. As intensity increases and I move the center of gravity for running more forward than many runners and even more on a treadmill will start shifting more to forefoot running. If we as we should for performance comparison increase the treadmill to an 1.5 % incline we nearly have every runner going to forefoot.
So when we tested NIRS on different locations than we see, that the calf is a great place but as well has some major feedback problems as explained above. Now remember any systems has its weak parts.
So NIRS with a single unit on one calf picks up what it can, trend on O2 supply and demand on the calf. That is it.
So the lactate we test in a running test on the finger it may partial be coming from your one NIRS tested calf , but it may as well can come form many other in running involved muscle’s.. So technical change of activity, where the muscle where we place a nirs can be involved could change the dynamic and as such the lactate dynamic and NIRS dynamic may go in the opposite direction.
Example. We used 6 NIRS in cycling assessments. always left and right leg. 2 on knee extensor, 2 on hip extensor knee flexor and 2 on calf.
The cyclist where instructed to bike with a heel drop in the right leg and a tippi toe position on the left leg.. We looked at wattage production or performance contribution of left and right leg as well as SEMG activity. We added just for fun non-invasive cardiac hemodynamic, VO2 data collection as well as Lactate to the data collection.
Summary : As you can easy understand in a step test they got to an end performance and the lactate was up, so was VO2 so was SEMG and so was CO. What was very different ,as you can imagine, is the dynamic of left and right NIRS data’s as well as SEMG activity in the different muscles.
Now depending what you like to proof with your theory you could take the data of NIRS from the right leg if it fits your lactate dynamic and your lactate threshold idea ( remember you may have to choose from 25 different lactate threshold concepts ) but one may fit your theory. And if this does not work you can try to see, whether the NIRS reactions form the other leg may fit your theories.
The fact in physiological reactions is, that they only make sense, when they are showing up independent of your protocol and theory . So if I have to create a certain workload in a protocol and if I do some small changes in this workload or protocol and we are not able to repeat the LT or what ever I look for a point, than the questions is whether we assess a physiological reaction or whether we please a specific designed protocol which fits our theory. So when you look the great data’s we see than keep this ideas in mind and try to see how the 2 discussed values , lactate and SmO2 will be influenced by the discussed options.
Ray, I have just received mine from CT. I bought the Multisport as I am a triathlete. I am confused about which test protocols would you recommend for both bike and run. I also would like to know if you would use is for a daily workout outside of the tests. As usual thank you for all you do for us!!
im cyclist buy i want to buy iy multi sport but include test time or protocols
Any chance you will be doing your full review soon?
hi, in my bsx I can see the lactate concentration marker??
I bought the multisport edition and i think, at the moment, it’s the best way to throw away money…
they said that you can use daily, but after month, there’s no way to use it except for the test.
then there are a lot of problems to pair ant+ sensor with the app. i spent 30′ to be able to star the test (and with other apps, the pairing has no problems)
hope they will update everything
Same problem with the run test again. Pairing is a major issue. Suspect it also dropped out on the last set…what was reflected on my HRM910xt for HR was not the same as the display on the phone…HR therefore not trust worthy and therefore useless.
I had the opportunity to test out pairing and discovered
– Samsung S6 with Android 5.02: BSX pairs, but not HRM
– Samsung S5 with Android 5.0: BSX pairs, but not HRM
– Samsung S3 Note with Android 4.4.2: BSX pairs, HRM pairs as well
l
Maybe time for BSX to update their app to – what I suspect – support devices with Android 5 (i.e. Lollipop).
I have this problem initially. I think the manual did not phrase this properly. You should be able to pair irregardless of which phone you use or which app.
You HRM is not pairing with your phone. It is pairing with your BSX insight.
Take out your bsx insigt from your leg sleeve pouch and bring it nearer to your hrm and pair them. Same goes to your power meter. Take out your bsx insight and bring it next to your powermeter and pair them.
Initially I made the wrong them of bringing my phone close to the hrm and power meter instead. This does nothing to improve pairing. Your phone only communicates with the bsx insight to control it but not with other ant+ devices.
Let me know whether you can pair ur devices after this!
Thank you Lukman! That is right, we’ve seen increased success with connecting HR monitors and power meters when the BSXinsight is moved in close proximity.
The elephant in the room, really, is treadmill accuracy for the running test.
I go to a pretty fancy fitness club. They have 4 or 5 brands of treadmills, including some models by Woodway, and Matrix Fitness, maybe 30 units in total. All of them with different levels of calibration, in terms of pace and distance.
Depending on which unit I run the test on, I get different results that vary by 30-45 seconds per mile. That is a huge difference.
Since I have no way to know which treadmill is accurately calibrated, I have no way to know which assessment is correct.
I have no doubt the algorithm works, but unless you own a calibrated treadmill, you won’t be able to trust your results fully.
I remember this name and it was a great critical comment he offered on another NIRS page.
His points are well taken and it is one of the big discussions between physical performance and physiological feedback.
The great step forward with any NIRS devcie is exactly that. It is not a question of absolut performance but rather a direct live feedback what and how the physiological reactions are now,today with that specific activity I like to do.
So you have immediate feedback for example, whether the intensity you choose creates a delivery limitation or a utilization limitation.
You can see , whether you have a relative free blood flow and therefor free supply of O2 but as well free out flow of CO2 and other substances you may look for, like lactate.
Or you can see, that the performance you do may create an complete occlusion so you have no inflow but as well no outflow.
You can see, whether your effort allows to deliver more O2 than you need , whether you are in a balanced situation or whether you have a time limitation in the intensity you choose due to the higher utilization rate than what you are able to deliver.
Last but not lest you will see whether the limitation is more locally or more systemic.. How much more can we dream of and this is why NIRS is a game changer no matter what equipment you choose to use.
helpme please, I have problems connecting my bsx running with heart rate polar RCX3.
Santiago,
BSXinsight only pairs with ANT+ HR and power meters. For a directory of all ANT+ compatible devices visit here.
Pairing an HRM is a major major issue with this device.
I have now attempted 14 times to get an evaluation done with HRM included. Not a single attempt was successful, in only two cases the HRM actually connected, but was lost already in the first few minutes. All HRM (Garmin, Viiiva, Wahoo) showed up as ANT+ devices on the Endomondo on Samsung Galaxy S4, S5,S6 and Note 3.
As much as I like the discussions about the relevance of BSXinsight testing protocols, I have a hard time to further tolerate their product support. In the space of four weeks trying to communicate, I did not receive any meaningful reply (other than generic links to their support website).
So if I could ask the company representative present on this tread to address the pairing issues head-on? No testing results clearly nullifies any reliability and comparison discussion.
I would definitively feel better about my USD 400 investment if the device and the HRM would start to pair reliably. Maybe supporting HRM via Bluetooth if the ANT stack proves too much of a worry?
Roland,
Sorry you haven’t been successful in connecting your HR monitor. The FAQ links our support team sends out is to help troubleshoot all known issues and provide quick solutions to problems our customers are having. If you are still having issues please reply with your email address and I will have our support staff follow up with you.
I have now used my for 2 test. The first worked perfectly!
Booth the bsx and the hrm paired up directly and waere connected all the time.
During the period in between I remember an update to the app, an uppdated to make the pairing process better.
For the test the other day, I was not able to pair at all first. After a couple of tries it finaly paired with the BSX. The Hram I tried to pair for one hour. It never worked. I tried with other apps on the phone and there were no problems.
I Think we really needs an uppdated app!!!
I use Samsung Galaxy S5….
Johannes,
Did you make sure and fully charge BSXinsight prior to attempting your assessment? If so, please contact our customer support (info@bsxinsight.com), we’d be more than happy to help you troubleshot the issue.
I’ve sent an e-mail…
The unit was fully charged.
Still can’t pair, still can’t get a usable result. This product is a DUD. Worst 400USD I’ve spent to date.
Etienne,
I see that you have 3 successful tests completed and have not attempted to start another one since April 22nd. Email us (info@bsxinsight.com) and let us know what the issue is you are having.
Hi Austin,
E-mail on its way.
Summary:
Hi Austin,
I’ll respond to you via e-mail too. But a quick summary.
I’ve tried to do tests a couple of times. What you are seeing on-line are 3 tests that were actually attempted because these were the only times I could actually get the HRM to pair or were frustrated enough to forego the HR data.
Test 1: Run – No HR data. Couldn’t get the HRM to pair.
Test 2: Bike – HRM paired and seemed ok. I “sort of trust” this test…”Sort of” because of test 3:
Test 3: Run – HRM paired and seemed ok. However there was a mismatch between what was being displayed on my FR910XT and my phone at the same time, and the HR result is also lower than what I would have expected it to be but in line with what I would expect if the HRM had “dropped out” at some stage during the test. The HR displayed on the phone was stuck at a lower value where the HR displayed on the Garmin unit was way higher.
I’m travelling over the next couple of weeks, but if you give me some things to try I’ll take the unit along and make some time to give it another go.
Regs,
Etienne.
Awesome Etienne! We’ll take a look at those items and help get everything sorted out!
So, did I miss something or was the full review of the final product posted yet?
Not yet Blake, but we are eager to hear what Ray has to say about it!
I got a few emails over the last few weeks asking me how the LT concept from BSX is used.
Meaning the idea of 1 mmol increase in 2 follow up steps.
.As I do not know what they exactly use here the question.
Example.
Here a number example.
.Step 1: 1.4 mmol/
step 2 1.4 mmol/
step 3.1.6
step 4. 1.9/
step 5.2.8
step 6. 3.9
step 7. 5.4
Question is the concept looking for the first 1 mmol increase or the one in the middle.
so in the above case. :
Is the “LT” by step 5 , so 2.8
or
by step 6, so by 3.9
Thanks for the clarification,
I may not be able to explain clear what I am looking for with the LT idea BSX is using so if somebody can help me as I have no clue how to show graphs in this section I can show you from examples from BSX why I am confused on what they may use as LT criteria.
Thanks for the help.
Ray, are you still contemplating a review of the BSX? Or you have ditched it already?Just curious,… not hearing anything about it, is that meaning you have lost interest? not working?
thanks!
6co
Still in the queue.
The BSX folks and I have been playing appointment tag trying to get a conference call scheduled (mostly my fault, my schedule has been a nightmare the last 10 days), as there are areas I’m looking for clarity on – such as how exactly the unit/site (technically) will be used beyond just doing the tests (meaning it was envisioned as a day to day training tool).
Hallo Ray, great to have this feedback.
Remember the question we had on your original test where they had a BSX left side and rigth side.
Can you check in your conference call , whether they can show us the raw data from both legs as I never got a feedback on this questions.
Second , as Istill look for a feedback on the LT ideas they used > Is it 1 mmol increase 2 times in a row and than is the LT the first point where we have the 1 mmol increase or is it the one in the middle.
Thanks for the great discussion on here.
Juerg
May be it is my “Swenglish” Swiss and english , that I can not get a feedback.
So lets’ try here the question again: The definition of the LT used by BSX is based on the website the below wording .
LT2 – Anaerobic Threshold
Technically speaking, anaerobic threshold correlates closer with the onset of blood lactate accumulation or in other words the transition from “steady” to “rapidly increasing” lactate workloads. You are said to have crossed lactate threshold when blood lactate concentration increases by at least 1 mmol/L in two consecutive stages.
Does that mean in a value example :
Step 1 . 1.2 mmol Lac
Step 2. 1.0 mmol
Step 3 . 1.2 mmol
Step 4. 1.4 mmol
Step 5 . 2.3 mmol LT 2 ????
Step 6 . 3.4 mmol LT 2 ????
Step 7 . 4.9 mmol
Step 8. 7.1 mmol So by step 5 . 2.3 mmol we have after that always more than 1 mmol increase per step.
According to the above definition from the BSX site we would have somewhere here LT2 ?
Is it by step 5 so 2.3 mmol as after this we have 2 step with more than 1 mmol increase ,
Or is it by step 6 as we again have 2 steps followed by more than 1 mmol increase
Thanks so much for the clarification from anybody .
Still in the works or have you still not been able to get through to the bsx folks yet?
The key aspect of the ANT+ sensors pairing is that it’s not the phone or tablet which has to pair with the ANT+ sensor, it’s the BSX sensor itself who needs to pair with the ANT+ sensor. It would have saved me a lot of time and aggravation had the instructions clearly spelled this out. Lukman has made this observation here on May 30th.
I was able to pair and successfully run the assessments this way: I paired the BSX sensor first then brought the sensor in very close proximity to the HRM sensor, and the tablet confirmed the pairing in 5-10 seconds, then put the BSX sensor in its sleeve and then started the assessment.
I found a similar solution, but it seems as if the HRM drops out after some time, almost as if it loses the connection but the HRM values are kept as at the last recorded value – I haven’t been able to confirm this or a solution to it.
Still waiting for BSX to get back to me after my e-mail (see above) and their initial reply saying they’ll investigate…
I am now in the same boat as Etienne. Pairing has become a nightmare and once I finally got it to pair, it put me through the whole test only to say “Sorry, we lost one or more signals, you’re f*cked, try again later.”
THANKS FOR NOT TELLING ME DURING THE TEST.
This is the most rage inspiring product I’ve ever owned, so that’s something.
And yes, of course, all my various ANT devices work fine (I own at least 6 ANT+ HR straps and a half dozen receivers.)
Samsung Galaxy S5 Mini.
Same problem here, pairing is an absolute nightmare! I have completed 4 test after 30 minutes of frustration trying to get it to pair and only got a result 2 out of the 4!
I’m very proud of myself control for not throwing this thing through the wall!
If they can get the pairing issue fixed and polish up the app I would say it’s worth the money but as of right now NO.
Hopefully the pairing issue will be at the top of Ray’s list of questions for the final review.
So another week down and still no response from BSX – unless you count the automated Zendesk response saying “We haven’t heard from you so we’re closing this if you don’t respond”…to which I responded that I’m waiting for BSX…to which I haven’t heard anything further.
Seriously, don’t buy this unit unless you have an appitite for frustration and poor service.
The original reason for choosing the Insight over the Moxy was price. The local currency vs USD exchange rate is a killer. In hindsight, the Moxy would have saved me plenty of hassle I think. Judging by what I’ve seen on the Moxy forum and Jeurg’s responses here I think the depth of information and support makes spending the difference between the well envisioned but poorly executed Insight and maybe not as “cool” looking but well supported and actually functioning Moxy, worth it.
I actually got a response from Austin shortly after posting this. Some suggestions, all of which I’ve tried to no avail. However, while writing to him I thought of something else…but I can’t try it since I’m out of town on business. Maybe somebody else having the pairing issues can give it a go and let us know if it works for them. My reply to BSX below.
—-Snip—-
Hi Austin,
I’m very miffed. Things at this price point with this amount of marketing and hype should just work…particularly considering the intial shipping delays we had to put up with. I have browsed extensively and have seen and tried these solutions before.
What I understand is that my phone talks to the Insight using Bluetooth and the Insight talks to the HRM using ANT…and ANT is having the trouble going through my body. If that is indeed the case I have thought of something else to try re no 2, but since I’ve been away on business I haven’t been able to do so yet.
Some people have had success placing their HRMs on their backs – sounds weird I know….but Garmin even has a reference to it:
link to support.garmin.com
See bullet point 1, line 2:
”
•The HRM is to be worn with the logo right-side up, directly on the skin just beneath the breastbone.
Position the monitor on your back if heart rate readings are erratic.
”
So even though my HR is not erratic, this may give me the line of sight between the HRM and the Insight that I need to keep the two talking for the testing session. I’ll give this a try when I get home next week. Hopefully the HRM will still pick up my HR correctly if I position it this way.
Regards,
Etienne.
——Snip—-
Etienne, Thanks for the nice words.
Here just some feedbacks.
This is NOT a critic on anything, but rather a philosophical direction where exercise physiology and in specific practical applications could go in the future thanks to incredible advances we enjoy in technology.
The key word is bio markers.
My dream is still as pointed out in many discussions 20 years back a bio watch. A feedback where we see HR as a simple small feedbcak on cardiac output. RF respiratory frequency as a small feedback on VE and live oxygenation values combined with trends in blood flow.
We are close there with the latest Garmin watches where we now have HR and oxygenation live feedbacks.
We have additonally the early adpater of respiration feedback the original idea from NZ with Zephir which works nice and most likely it is a small step to combine . ( I am a technical dummie so always hope and know great tech brains can do it. )
So when I look back at the start of this evolving journey , we had all this great equipment combined.
NIRS and the early small great Portamon from Artinis combined with K42B a portable VO2 equipment combined with a physio flow which is a live hemodynamic feedback on nearly all you can dream of ,combined with SEMG from BTS Italy combined with many blood values and one of the top equipment for this is most likely I stat. ,and now even oxygenation feedback from the brain and you can see where we end up. A multitude of physiological data collections, but unfortunatley with a huge price tag. 150’000 $ +
So when we now go back to coaching and individual people like people with major health problems who like to try to do exercise, which make sense, to improve health ,. as well as the group of people enjoying health and try to stay healty, than the next step was to see, whether we can move back down to a simple tool and get as much feedback as we can get with the above toys.
True we will loose many specifc situations and yes we have the risk to create a cook book , but there are always some compromises to be made.
.
So MOXY is a NIRS in a price range which exploded the market for nIRS uses.
The next small portable but still not direct live on a watch great NIRS is Portamon . Price difference is big and any reader doing some search can or knows how big.
. The this years ACSM in San Diego showed the explosion of NIRS use in all fields and directions.
20 years back we had hundreds of poster presentation with lactate, today we have it with NIRS.
. Is there a connection. Most likely as lactate is an indirect feedback for possible metabolic situations in the body ,but has all the small disadvantages of lag time and other know open questions.
NIRS is a direct feedback on energy situations, so du you have a higher delivery than usage are you balanced and or are you spending more O2 than you can deliver.
Pretty straigth forward and simple ( I am biased ) but is that not what we all tried with older great ideas , looking for the magical intensity , where the O2 delivery starts to run into trouble.
So instead of finding the magical point we now see live trends where and how it happens.
VO2 at the mouth was great, but now we see O2 in the working muscels and or brain.
Lactate was interesting but since the 1985 open many questions and still has many open question.
Summary.
I do not know exactly what BSX is doing , but the company clearly helps, as it is a bloodless lactate analyzer .
MOXY is a NIRS. Meaning you can use it for anybody fo any activity anytime on any decent muscle with as usual some limitation due to penetration depth of the equipment.
The biggest user group now are game athletes like hockey player, soccer player and any personal trianer who likes to creat for his costomer an individual load recovery feedback for any kind of workouts from intervall to simple biceps curls.We use it live during races and events to see what really happens and what may limit performance.
To be able to do this you have a live feedbakc in the studio over a screen with mutiple users or you have a wtatch with ANT option and speed cadence options to see live SmO2 and tHB or you have a Garmin watch which now is the first watch , where you have actual SmO2 and tHb live as a number and or as a Graph.
You can use than a high or low level with alarm if you do for example intervall on your cross country skis and you can not watch always to the numbers.
What sounds wonderfull still has many weaknesses and that’s where we work on with a dedicated crazy group of people all over the world.
Thats’ why we show and explain all the weakness and strednght we see in NIRS usage and try ( not always successfull ) to give some answers to many great questions but in many cases we have no answers but just additonal question which alwayss help to move forward.
My big thanks goes to Fortiori the inventor of MOXY and Roger, the brain behind. I am just a lucky guy to have fun and push this ideas so I can use it in a very practical situation with my patients here far north in Canada some people would name it in the bush.
I am thankfull for Roger , that I could talk him out of selling the MOXY as a replacement for lactate assessment . Yes easier to sell but most likley not that close to the reality. MOXY is a NIRS and NIRS asseses and gives feedback on oxygenation trends, That is it. And even by giving this feedback we still are using many needed assumptions to get to what we see.
So many readers may confuse the 2 equipment but they are very different in what they achieve and for what they may be used as you can see.
Hope this makes some sense and please read my comments carefully as even if I try to be objective I am still biased as we all are.
Thanks to all readers on here who sent me daily e mails with some great questions. I hope I answer decently fast and hopefully as honest as I can answer with all the limitation I have. Juerg
Let me expand on my perspective, I was simplifying greatly when I compared Insight to Moxy and I think I have a pretty good understanding of the use cases for both, and don’t get me wrong, both are exciting. Due to miniaturisation, improvement in manufacturing processes and obviously supply and demand we are now able to get data only professionals could justify having before.
As others have pointed out, Insight should give you a pretty good idea of what your lactate levels are doing, if working as advertised, arguably more so than traditional testing because of the sampling frequency and repeatability of the tests (forgiving the treadmill calibration elephants etc….there is simply less that can go wrong with something like this). LT however, and for lack of a better description, is a “summary” of the processes going on inside your body. It is a well understood and correlated measurement that can be used to determine training parameters that either alone or in combination with other measurements (HR, Wattage etc.), enable you to modify your training like never before (unless you were one of those pros or serious amateurs).
Moxy on the other hand is able to give you the raw data, what you do with it and the actual impact thereof in your use case is pretty much up to you to figure out. There are some pretty good ideas of what the data means and what to do with it, but ignoring for a moment the amount of time MO measurement and NIRS has been around as a concept, the field is pretty much in its infancy in the way we want to apply it here e.g. performance improvement for the general athlete, not only rehabilitation or improvement for the elites.
As we learn more about the impacts and resulting change in behaviours we will be able to find more and more applications for the data in combination with other data, and the more accessible it is because of it’s affordability, the bigger the data sets become that we can work with. I compare it to what Firstbeat had to go through the first time HR data became available. By combining more and more sensor types, a more complete picture will appear e.g. things like movement capture, (as already done to some extent with moxy+bike setups), hrm, breathing rate etc). Take it another step further. Add other sensor types, like temperature, humidity etc…and the lab moves outside and an even MORE complete picture emerges for the day to day, amateur athlete. Exciting times indeed.
I made a clear decision to go with the Insight rather than the Moxy because firstly, I am spending enough on traditional LT testing to justify it and secondly, I work with a coach that knows what to do with this type of information. If I had gone the Moxy route I would have thrown myself and the coach into deep water, therefore the benefit wasn’t achievable in the time I had available when making the decision.
Having spent a lot more time on the Moxy forums and having the issues with the Insight that I am, the Moxy may have been a better choice because even if the practical application of the raw data is still unclear due to my own (and coach’s inexperience, if we had bitten the bullet and started simply measuring, thinking and making incremental changes (rinse and repeat) I would have had…pardon the pun…REAL insight by now (remember the shipping date when I ordered was supposed to be late 2015…delay delay delay receive..now we’re already 6, almost 7 months into the year and I still don’t have a usable result).
To summarise.
If Insight performed as advertised it would make a good substitute for traditional LT testing, with some interesting possibilities regarding “daily use” scenarios (that were also advertised but not realised). It is the comfortable, safe route with incremental benefits.
If you are the type of person or coach that is data driven, analytical to the extreme and willing to spend the time to learn what to do with vast amounts of information – and to hopefully add to a body of knowledge, then the Moxy would be the better choice.
As it stands now, I have a relatively expensive doorstop if BSX can’t get the device to give consistent and reliable data…well, it’s too small for a doorstop unless I really wedge it in there, but you get the idea.
I’ve been very critical of BSX, and to be fair, part of their feedback the last few days is that they have been on-boarding additional staff members to help deal with these and other issues. Hopefully we’ll get to see some improvements and a working (permanent) solution soon, however, as soon as my finances allow, I’ll be ordering a Moxy (or three) too.
Hi Etienne,
Just read your post here and thought my experience might be helpful. I’m having all those issues too with connecting the BSX to ANT sensors (while the ANT sensors are connected to and showing values on my cycling computers, so it’s definitively a problem with the BSX app).
I actually had pre-ordered the BSX while it was still being developed, but got myself a MOXY before the BSX was delivered after reading on the Dallas Cycling Center blog and seeing that the MOXY seemed to be potentially more useful and at least more interesting. Meanwhile I’ve added to a total of three MOXYs and can confirm that they are working reliably, their support is helpful, and the data seems to be useful, although it requires more knowledge to make full use of the data.
One note though: While the MOXY gives a reading of between about 10 and 85% SmO2 for myself, another more advanced cyclist I tried it on had a range of 0 (!) and about 90% on his Vastus Lateralis. I do think the readings are correct, but, if your SmO2 drops quickly to single digits, I’d find it more difficult to interpret the data, so I would recommend starting with just one. (I do know though that I am getting higher values higher up on my VL, so, I might have been able to get a more useful range of values with him by placing the MOXY higher up.)
Also, a useful assessment protocol with the MOXY will likely take longer than the 30-40 minutes of the BSX (minus the time you need for connecting) which may be an issue for testing many cyclists in a row or for extreme short distance track athletes.
Hope you will be more satisfied with the MOXY too.
Takura
Thanks for the nice feedback.
I do not like to take over this section here, but your observation of the SmO2 reactions are great and true. If you like to get some thoughts ( not answers ) really on this please come to the MOXY forum and we can show you some interesting ideas and share informations with people all over the world, who help all of us to undertstand and intergate NIRS into the mainstream population as an additional or new tool in exercise physiology.
. Cheers Juerg
Etienne.
Wowww thanks so much for this great feedback and very nice and very great and subjective summary of an interesting immerging field.
Juerg
Hello All –
I found the experience of running fast on the treadmill quite precarious, so I did something about it.
I created an audible pacemaker. This service creates an mp3 pace track that is tailored to the Tutorial Screen of the BSX Insight App. I hope others find this useful as I have.
http://audiblerabbit.com
Thanks,
Audible Rabbit
Does the bsx insight app control the wahoo kickr ?
Or do i need to have an other software running for the resistence.
No, it cannot. You must use another program.
So you use like trainerroad to make the program ? And then sync the training with the bxs app,
Like start them at the same time. I dont realy see how to do this ? Need to pair the heartrate to the Bsx and also the kickr to the bsx, Dont i walk into troubles when pair the kickr also to trainerroad ?
Or you just manually control the KICKR using the iPhone app.
Tried to use trainerroad to control the kickr instead of the wahoo app.
Just made an bsx program starting at 80 going up to 400w.
At this way i dont need to manually adjust the power while doing the test.
First i tought i needed an bluetooth dongle but i could connect all devices with ant+
Hello Ray;
I’m a postgraduate student undertaking the MSc Digital Marketing in the University of Southampton. I’m working on my dissertation which is about the consumption of wearable tech devices as fashion and I would be very interested to get some viewpoints from wearable tech users from different countries and cultures toward their adoption on wearables. So I need some perceptions of wearable tech users all around the world and need to do some interviews with the users about their experience with these devices. I read your review about BSX Insight and thought that it would be great to talk about your experience with it and it would be an interesting example for my dissertation as wearable tech become fashionable. I’m aware that you may have limited time and other obligations as well. However, if you can give me some information about your experience with BSX Insight, that would be much appreciated and it’d be very efficient to talk with someone who really experience these kind of devices. The interview will be made on Skype or another video chat platforms which preferred by you. If you are interested, could you get in contact with me from this email address? Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward hearing from you soon.
Kind Regards,
Atakan Baran Akgul
FYI BSXinsight has just pushed an app update on my Android Device. As I am travelling for quite some time, I do not have access to the device at this point in time. Should there be users here of the new app, maybe you could report whether connectivity has indeed improved, as claimed by the App update.
Thank you!
Just did my first test today. I used the new Android app.
It took me about 20-30 minutes to connect all devices. So annoying. Furthermore, as I control my Kickr with my bike powermeter I can’t tell which PM gets actually connected. Therefore, I had to switch off the Kickr. But when I plugged in the plug again I was too far away from my bike (1.5 m !!!). Connection lost. And so on, and so on. Sometimes it would lose the connection event though I was holding the pod right next to the HR/PM. I looked like doing some yoga getting all the devices close.
I don’t know why but it did not log my heart rate during the assessment. The device showed as connected. So I did not get an estimate for my LTHr (which I’m actually not interested in).
One should be able to specifiy the ANT ID. Or see at least which devices are connected.
The pre-assessment questions: does anyone know what the “conversational power level” is? For mountainbikers weekly mileage is irrelevant. Why not ask for weekly training time?
The positive aspect: the estimated FTP was spot on with my 0.95 x CP20 field test. However, the aerobic threshold is at about 95% of FTP for me? Can I sign up for the next Ironman now? Or is this a different AeT?
And then of course: I want to see the raw data! Really, I want to see it! Not just the FTP value.
My verdict at the moment: don’t buy yet. This is not a mature product yet. I don’t know if this is just a software issue or if hardware plays a role to. As a consumer you would not know. Given the very high price tag I’d say do not take the risk to get exploited as beta tester.
What are others experiences with the new firmware and app update?
Had massive connection problems before update (even when moving the device close to power meter and HR sensor) that rendered the device pretty much useless; one ride so far with the new firmware and it connected without any problems.
Disappointed that the update to the app is kind of minimal, still no display of power or power meter ANT+ ID or the ability to select power meter (this matters if there is more than just one ANT+ power source, e.g. when using the KICKR) and no raw data to analyze afterwards (just the live relative SmO2? display in the bottom right of the app).
So BSX have announced that the features they touted, including real time data, for Generation 1 of the device will only become available in Generation 2! And what a surprise, no firmware upgrade for Gen1 so if you want these features you have to buy the Gen 2 device!!!
Hello Ray,
I would be interested in what you think about the recent announcement of BSX Insight regarding the Generation 2 device. I’m not sure if I shall feel robbed or if this is simply the risk I have to face being an early adaptor.
Thanks
Boris
For the Gen2 device, you’ll see my post on it within the next 15-20 mins. Just finishing up editing.
Hoping the BSX people who were monitoring this thread start monitoring the new post on the V2 hardware
I’ve had some very bad experiences (detailed above).
That said, I did my first “painless” BSX LT check on the bike last night. Not sure if it was a fluke, but the unit paired first time and stayed paired with both the HRM and the Kicker. Strange thing is, nothing had changed that I’m aware of.
With some luck the G1 unit is nou actually usable (although not up to scratch vs what was promised and introduced in the G2).
Still eyeing the Moxy for future use…
The G1 had a bad antenna design so its signal was weak. So anything that improved the signal would help
Ray in image 25 is that graph displaying tHb or SmO2?
Is that working so good ? what is the accuracy of measurement ?
very interested in box insight equipment ,, based in uk , any recent updaters
The product has been discontinued. :(