Re: RC: Re: overweight an issue? - Weight vs. lean mass

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/26/00 3:27:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
suendavid@worldnet.att.net writes:

<< > More rapid fuel depletion, higher heartrates, slower recoveries, higher
 body
 > temps, earlier substrate cascade, mechanical stressors, reduced
 biomechnical
 > efficiency, increased likelihood of injury, etc.
 >
 > ti
 
 
 More rapid fuel depletion, probably.  But again, if there's *enough* to fuel
 the horse for 100 miles, does it matter whether the gas tank is now only a
 quarter full or half full.  The horse is still in Auburn.
 
 Higher heart rates, slower recoveries, higher body temps, earlier substrate
 cascade---maybe.  If so, if its a significant difference, over a course that
 long and in that many horses, wouldn't you reasonably expect to see slower
 times to completion, higher incidence of metabolic pulls, lower completion
 rate that would relate to such metabolic stress.  Wasn't there.  Didn't
 happen.
 
 Mechanical stresses, reduced biomechanical efficiency, increased likelihood
 of injury---agreed on all those points.  I've pointed out several times that
 increased combined weight led to higher incidence of lameness.  But it
 wasn't necessarily simply due to rider weight, you had to also look at the
 increased body weight of the horse himself.
 
 Susan G
  >>


So, we agree on what should happen. But the observatons didn't tally. And 
don't tally with other observations in humans and horses and mice and 
bluegills. So, maybe, just maybe, some of the assumptions made in the design 
and implementation of the experiment are incorrect. And maybe some of the 
conclusions drawn from the data are incorrect. And maybe the data massage 
methods have gone awry. 

If I were your professor, I'd be telling you "go do it again".

ti