Ice Baths

GampDub

Hey,

I play football and as we coming near the end of the season and the brighter evening our league in the infinite wisdom have been scheduling 3 games a week for us lately - Sat/Mon/Wed... its tough going on the aul legs and my hamstrings are screaming for a rest.

I have another game tomorrow and just wondering if anybody has any experience with ice baths. Would it be beneficial to have one this evening in for my legs to help them recover a bit better before tomorrow?

Or is a good hot bath with Epsom Salts/Radox just as good?

Also does it have to be ice cold to be beneficial or would a c bath run from the cold tap do the job???

Thanks

connollys

as far as I know the optimum time to use an ice bath is directly after you've finished exercise.
From ice bath, to hot shower and back to ice bath 3 times is what we used to do for the football.
i was skeptical and didnt bother first few weeks but tried in one night and couldnt believe the difference the next day.

ErinGoBrath

GampDub wrote: »

our league in the infinite wisdom have been scheduling 3 games a week for us lately - Sat/Mon/Wed... its tough going on the aul legs and my hamstrings are screaming for a rest.

Let me guess...UCFL??? We're in Div 1, same both. Our lads are dropping with injuries left right and centre.

Absolutely disgraceful on the league's behalf.

GampDub

AUL Actually... we are 4th in the league (best hope is for 2nd really) and still in two cups! Q-Final tomorrow - just praying it doesn't go to extra time!!!

papajimsmooth

I think the British Journal of Sports Medicine did a study where it showed that ice baths increase recovery time.

WHIP IT!

papajimsmooth wrote: »

I think the British Journal of Sports Medicine did a study where it showed that ice baths increase recovery time.

Can only speak from personal experience, but I've found them hugely beneficial any times I've used them.

brianthebard

A contrast shower might be a handier and possibly more effective method, you turn the water on hot as high as you can handle for a minute or so then switch to cold for min, repeat a few times. You can direct it onto the muscles most affected with the shower head.

itsallaboutheL

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Can only speak from personal experience, but I've found them hugely beneficial any times I've used them.

Me too

brianthebard wrote: »

A contrast shower might be a handier and possibly more effective method, you turn the water on hot as high as you can handle for a minute or so then switch to cold for min, repeat a few times. You can direct it onto the muscles most affected with the shower head.

This is what i was going to suggest.

brianthebard

I find them very handy after a deadlift or squat session actually, to just turn the hose on my lower back or quads for a few mins switching between hot and cold, gets the blood moving.

Jonny303

i really recommend them. ive found the bath/shower far better than just a hot/cold shower but its not always the most practical. i started now after a good deads/squat session. using a (cleaned) wheelie bin and just chnge the water every so often in it

nice_guy80

crucial is a good warm down after the game - dynamic stretching

sit in ice bath for at least 30 secs
hot shower for 30 secs
repeat three times. (plunge pools are great for this - also can be done at home with loads of ice and cold water...)
should be done within 20 minutes of finishing exercise.

then take a recovery shake to help get food to the muscles quickly. followed by a good dinner and lots of sleep.

rubadub

brianthebard wrote: »

You can direct it onto the muscles most affected with the shower head.

An interesting test would be doing a load of squats and just treating one leg, to see if there is a difference in DOMS.

brianthebard

rubadub wrote: »

An interesting test would be doing a load of squats and just treating one leg, to see if there is a difference in DOMS.

Rather you than me lol, sounds like it would make the dom'd up leg feel that much worse. I did it on my back a little earlier and the muscles are much more relaxed its nice to have an easy fix like that to use.

Will Heffernan

Got asked a question about this so thought I would answer it here rather than just by PM.

In short with regard ice baths.

The entire vote is not in but on early returns it appears that:

cold water immersion is best and that 10-15mins of immersion is the sweet spot with regard timing.

cold water alone is significantly better than contrast immersion.

cold water and contrast immersion beats doing nothing by a country mile

these conclusions are made with regard performance in power and sprint repeatability.

GampDub wrote: »

Hey,

I play football and as we coming near the end of the season and the brighter evening our league in the infinite wisdom have been scheduling 3 games a week for us lately - Sat/Mon/Wed... its tough going on the aul legs and my hamstrings are screaming for a rest.

I have another game tomorrow and just wondering if anybody has any experience with ice baths. Would it be beneficial to have one this evening in for my legs to help them recover a bit better before tomorrow?

Yes...that would help...post exercise is best...as soon as is practicable.

Or is a good hot bath with Epsom Salts/Radox just as good?

A hot bath would actually appear to be contra indicated at this stage.

Also does it have to be ice cold to be beneficial or would a c bath run from the cold tap do the job???

Thanks

Irish cold water in winter I would imagine would be plenty cold enough.

Will Heffernan

connollys wrote: »

as far as I know the optimum time to use an ice bath is directly after you've finished exercise.

Correct.

From ice bath, to hot shower and back to ice bath 3 times is what we used to do for the football.

I know from experience that 'feels' better and it is what I've done myself previously but this is no longer considered best practice in professional sport.

i was skeptical and didnt bother first few weeks but tried in one night and couldnt believe the difference the next day.

I've also always been sceptical but there is starting to be more and more valid data to back it up.

Will Heffernan

papajimsmooth wrote: »

I think the British Journal of Sports Medicine did a study where it showed that ice baths increase recovery time.

There has been a few studies like that. The studies that have the most data 'like' that were designed to be scientifically rigid but not so easily applied practically.

That is...attempting to illicit DOMs via heavy eccentric loading on what is basically a leg extension machine and then applying ice packs to the area and then retesting 48hrs later.

More of the recent data has been collected 'in the field' or in some cases actually 'on the field' in pro sport...as in studies that have been conducted during actual training cycles in professional sport.

Will Heffernan

brianthebard wrote: »

A contrast shower might be a handier and possibly more effective method, you turn the water on hot as high as you can handle for a minute or so then switch to cold for min, repeat a few times. You can direct it onto the muscles most affected with the shower head.

That's pretty much exactly what I used to do and advise.

The current research would tend to indicate that it isn't very effective.

Will Heffernan

nice_guy80 wrote: »

sit in ice bath for at least 30 secs
hot shower for 30 secs
repeat three times. (plunge pools are great for this - also can be done at home with loads of ice and cold water...)

It appears getting no respite is actually the answer...stay immersed for 10-15 mins is what the literature is pointing towards.

should be done within 20 minutes of finishing exercise.

That's also what the literature is pointing towards....that is...the sooner the better.

nice_guy80

Will Heffernan wrote: »

It appears getting no respite is actually the answer...stay immersed for 10-15 mins is what the literature is pointing towards.


That's also what the literature is pointing towards....that is...the sooner the better.

correct
but who has 15 minutes to sit in an ice bath or plunge pool, especially when other people want to use it.

I've actually increased my stints in the ice bath to 2 minutes, if I can stick it.

cc87

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17461391.2011.570380

thought id link this, new study.....ice baths not so good from this.

I think its a personal thing, some people love them and they work, some hate them and they dont work

Cill94

Ice baths/packs do not help your muscles recover from training - it's a myth. For your body to heal anything there needs to be blood flowing to the area. Applying cold things to a muscle draws all the blood away from it and, in my experience, only makes it stiffer. There's just no logical/scientific base for using ice for anything other than temporary pain relief. Most studies being done now support this, and this one indicates that icing even slows down the recovery process http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/publishahead/Topical_Cooling__Icing__Delays_Recovery_from.98090.aspx

Heat is best because it moves blood into the area. Massage/foam rolling is good too. One other thing to note is that the likes of Deep Heat also don't work. It open the capillaries close to the skin, which also draws blood away from the muscle, and gives the burning sensation on the surface of the skin.

Will Heffernan

Cill94 wrote: »

Ice baths/packs do not help your muscles recover from training - it's a myth.

Ummmm actually....it's not. Your statement is completely unsupported by current data and research. For a start putting together the topical application of ice packs and immersion in ice baths together is like putting the 100m and 10,000m together for the purposes of research as they are both run on a track.

For your body to heal anything there needs to be blood flowing to the area.

This is completely false and displays no understanding of human physiology and healing at all.

Applying cold things to a muscle draws all the blood away from it and, in my experience, only makes it stiffer.

This statement is fine...you should of added this disclosure to the rest of your statements.

There's just no logical/scientific base for using ice for anything other than pain relief.

This is a complete fallacy.

Most studies being done now support this, and this one indicates that icing even slows down the recovery process http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/publishahead/Topical_Cooling__Icing__Delays_Recovery_from.98090.aspx

Actually most studies do not indicate this.

Heat is best because it moves blood into the area. Massage/foam rolling is good too. One other thing to note is that the likes of Deep Heat also don't work. It open the capillaries close to the skin, which also draws blood away from the muscle, and gives the burning sensation on the surface of the skin.

I don't even know where to begin. The only reason I am even bothering to reply is because the statements you are making are just plain dangerous and the thought that some people might naively follow your advice actually scares me.

Show me ANY evidence at all where the application of heat is indicated in improving recovery post exercise.

Will Heffernan

cc87 wrote: »

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17461391.2011.570380

thought id link this, new study.....ice baths not so good from this.

This statement I can agree with. As in this study doesn't show much in the way of variability between cooling modalities.

BUT

Have you actually read the study? Were the subjects trained or untrained? Did you see the intensity of the testing protocol?

This is one study and you have to ensure that you look at studies as a whole rather than cherry picking them in an attempt to support your argument.

For example....If I made the statement 'The effect of anabolic steroids on muscle hypertrophy and growth were found to be purely psychological' and then posted the link to one scientific abstract that supported my statement would you believe me or would you find that a little disingenuous?

I think its a personal thing, some people love them and they work, some hate them and they dont work

This I disagree with but as you've stated that it is your personal opinion rather than in anyway backed up by huge amounts of data I suppose it is fine.

I think based on the research currently available that your opinion is incorrect and that it is more like...some people love them and they work, some hate them and they still work.

Cill94

this is a pretty good video on the subject of ice vs heat

Will Heffernan

Cill94 wrote: »

this is a pretty good video on the subject of ice vs heat

You are joking right?

That is not a pretty good video on the subject. It's an advertisement.

You are not helping your argument...the fact that he doesn't actually understand exercise physiology in not really a great start either.

What about if I stick up some videos of Chuck Norris and his Total Gym discussing it's superiority over traditional resistance/weight training?

What about if I stick up some videos of people and their vibro plates discussing its superiority over traditional resistance/weight training?

I am talking about the preponderance of actual scientific data not some pseudo scientific advertisement by some dudes selling equipment.

I actually find that video offensive in it's stupidity....I feel noticeably dumber after watching it.

Cill94

Will Heffernan wrote: »

I don't even know where to begin. The only reason I am even bothering to reply is because the statements you are making are just plain dangerous and the thought that some people might naively follow your advice actually scares me.

Show me ANY evidence at all where the application of heat is indicated in improving recovery post exercise.

How wude. The thought of someone believing you when you say heat application doesn't help your muscles recover is, well... lol

http://hookedoniron.com/home/thermal-therapy-for-muscle-recovery

http://orthopedics.about.com/od/overuseinjuries/tp/Musclesoreness.htm

http://www.musculardevelopment.com/articles/training/3536-turn-up-the-heat-for-muscle-mass-by-robbie-durand.html

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/29108.php

Will Heffernan

Cill94 wrote: »

How wude. The thought of someone believing you when you say heat application doesn't help your muscles recover is, well... lol

http://hookedoniron.com/home/thermal-therapy-for-muscle-recovery

http://orthopedics.about.com/od/overuseinjuries/tp/Musclesoreness.htm

http://www.musculardevelopment.com/articles/training/3536-turn-up-the-heat-for-muscle-mass-by-robbie-durand.html

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/29108.php

OMG LOL

You are quoting 'hooked on iron'? You are quoting 'muscular development'? I am not getting my knowledge from...about orthopaedics.com or medical news today.

For every dumb website you want to throw up talking rubbish I will put up a link to an actual paper.

Cill94

Will Heffernan wrote: »

You are joking right?

pseudo scientific advertisement by some dudes selling equipment.

I actually find that video offensive in it's stupidity....I feel noticeably dumber after watching it.

The guy with the cap has worked as a physio for most of the top sport teams in America. The guy in the orangeish top has a doctorate in physical therapy and a masters in kinesiology. There is nothing 'pseudo science' about that. I think they know more than you, and I think you need to get off your imaginary high horse.

Also, care to point out what equipment is being sold? Only piece of equipment they recommend using is a hot tub lol

Will Heffernan

Cill94 wrote: »

The guy with the cap has worked as a physio for most of the top sport teams in America. The guy in the orangeish top has a doctorate in physical therapy and a masters in kinesiology. There is nothing 'pseudo science' about that. I think they know more than you, and I think you need to get off your imaginary high horse.

Also, care to point out what equipment is being sold? Only piece of equipment they recommend using is a hot tub lol

OK...you won...I tried to fight it but your scientific documentation and the strength of that video won me over.

I am wrong you are right. We can just leave it there. You know your right. I know your right. I am sure everyone that reads this post will be blown away by the strength of your argument.

Kudos to you sir or madam. Well played.

Cill94

Will Heffernan wrote: »

OMG LOL

You are quoting 'hooked on iron'? You are quoting 'muscular development'? I am not getting my knowledge from...about orthopaedics.com or medical news today.

For every dumb website you want to throw up talking rubbish I will put up a link to an actual paper.

:rolleyes:

Go to the bottom of the page there bud. You'll see a nice list of what's called 'references'. Among these you will scientific backup for what is described on said pages that you are intellectually above reading. I'm not going to copy and paste each individulal one to accommodate your weak attention span.

Will Heffernan

Cill94 wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Go to the bottom of the page there bud. You'll see a nice list of what's called 'references'. Among these you will scientific backup for what is described on said pages that you are intellectually above reading. I'm not going to copy and paste each individulal one to accommodate your weak attention span.

Brilliant.

Have you read any of them by chance?

Like this one?

Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2012 May 29. [Epub ahead of print]
Effects of Water Immersion on Post-training Recovery in Australian Footballers.
Elias GP, Varley MC, Wyckelsma VL, McKenna MJ, Minahan CL, Aughey RJ.
Source
Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living, School of Sport and Exercise Science, Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE:
We investigated the efficacy of a single exposure to 14-min of cold water immersion (COLD) and contrast water therapy (CWT) on post-training recovery in Australian football (AF).
METHOD:
Fourteen AF players participated in three weeks of standardised training. Following week 1 training, all players completed a passive recovery (PAS). During week 2, COLD or CWT was randomly assigned. Players undertook the opposing intervention in week 3. Repeat-sprint ability (6 x 20-m), countermovement and squat jumps, perceived muscle soreness and fatigue were measured pre-training and over 48 h post-training.
RESULTS:
Immediately post-training, groups exhibited similar performance and psychometric declines. At 24 h, repeat-sprint time had deteriorated by 4.1% for PAS and 1.0% for CWT but was fully restored by COLD (0.0%). At 24 and 48h, both COLD and CWT attenuated changes in mean muscle soreness, with COLD (0.6±0.6 and 0.0±0.4) more effective than CWT (1.9±0.7 and 1.0±0.7) and PAS having minimal effect (5.5±0.6 and 4.0±0.5). Similarly, after 24 and 48 h, COLD and CWT both effectively reduced changes in perceived fatigue, with COLD (0.6±0.6 and 0.0±0.6) being more successful than CWT (0.8±0.6 and 0.7±0.6) and PAS having the smallest effect (2.2±0.8 and 2.4±0.6).
CONCLUSIONS:
Australian football training can result in prolonged physical and psychometric deficits persisting for up to 48 h. For restoring physical performance and psychometric measures, COLD was more effective than CWT, with PAS being the least effective. Based on these results we recommend 14-min of COLD be used following AF training.
PMID: 22645174 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

or this one?

Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012 Jul 3. [Epub ahead of p
rint]
Consecutive days of cold water immersion: effects on cycling performance and heart rate variability.
Stanley J, Peake JM, Buchheit M.
Source
Centre of Excellence for Applied Sport Science Research, Queensland Academy of Sport, Brisbane, Australia, j.stanley@uq.edu.au.
Abstract
We investigated performance and heart rate (HR) variability (HRV) over consecutive days of cycling with post-exercise cold water immersion (CWI) or passive recovery (PAS). In a crossover design, 11 cyclists completed two separate 3-day training blocks (120 min cycling per day, 66 maximal sprints, 9 min time trialling [TT]), followed by 2 days of recovery-based training. The cyclists recovered from each training session by standing in cold water (10 °C) or at room temperature (27 °C) for 5 min. Mean power for sprints, total TT work and HR were assessed during each session. Resting vagal-HRV (natural logarithm of square-root of mean squared differences of successive R-R intervals; ln rMSSD) was assessed after exercise, after the recovery intervention, during sleep and upon waking. CWI allowed better maintenance of mean sprint power (between-trial difference [90 % confidence limits] +12.4 % [5.9; 18.9]), cadence (+2.0 % [0.6; 3.5]), and mean HR during exercise (+1.6 % [0.0; 3.2]) compared with PAS. ln rMSSD immediately following CWI was higher (+144 % [92; 211]) compared with PAS. There was no difference between the trials in TT performance (-0.2 % [-3.5; 3.0]) or waking ln rMSSD (-1.2 % [-5.9; 3.4]). CWI helps to maintain sprint performance during consecutive days of training, whereas its effects on vagal-HRV vary over time and depend on prior exercise intensity.
PMID: 22752345 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

or this one?

Int J Sports Med. 2012 Jun 21. [Epub ahead of print]
Effects of Cold Water Immersion and Active Recovery on Post-Exercise Heart Rate Variability.
Bastos FN, Vanderlei LC, Nakamura FY, Bertollo M, Godoy MF, Hoshi RA, Junior JN, Pastre CM.
Source
Universidade Estadual do Norte do Paraná - UENP, Physiotherapy, Jacarezinho, Brazil.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the potential benefits of cold water immersion (CWI) and active recovery (AR) on blood lactate concentration ([Lac]) and heart rate variability (HRV) indices following high-intensity exercise. 20 male subjects were recruited. On the first visit, an incremental test was performed to determine maximal oxygen consumption and the associated speed (MAS). The remaining 3 visits for the performance of constant velocity exhaustive tests at MAS and different recovery methods (6 min) were separated by 7-day intervals [randomized: CWI, AR or passive recovery (PR)]. The CWI and AR lowered [Lac] (p<0.05) at 11, 13 and 15 min after exercise cessation in comparison to PR. There was a 'time' and 'recovery mode' interaction for 2 HRV indices: standard deviation of normal R-R intervals (SDNN) (partial eta squared=0.114) and natural log of low-frequency power density (lnLF) (partial eta squared=0.090). CWI presented significantly higher SDNN compared to PR at 15 min of recovery (p<0.05). In addition, greater SDNN values were found in CWI vs. AR during the application of recovery interventions, and at 30 and 75 min post-exercise (p<0.05 for all differences). The lnLF during the recovery interventions and at 75 min post-exercise was greater using CWI compared with AR (p<0.05). For square root of the mean of the sum of the squares of differences between adjacent R-R intervals (RMSSD) and natural log of high-frequency power density (lnHF), a moderate effect size was found between CWI and PR during the recovery interventions and at 15 min post-exercise. Our findings show that AR and CWI offer benefits regarding the removal of [Lac] following high-intensity exercise. While limited, CWI results in some improvement in post-exercise cardiac autonomic regulation compared to AR and PR. Further, AR is not recommended if the aim is to accelerate the parasympathetic reactivation.
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
PMID: 22722961 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

or this one?

J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2011 Dec;51(4):609-15.
Effects of cold-water immersion and contrast-water therapy after training in young soccer players.
De Nardi M, La Torre A, Barassi A, Ricci C, Banfi G.
Source

University of Milan, Milan, Italy - massimodenardi@alice.it.
Abstract
AIM:

Recent studies have investigated the importance of recovery strategies after training session, including hydrotherapy and cryotherapy. However, only a few studies have focused on cold-water immersion (CWI) treatments in team sport disciplines. The present study investigates the effects of CWI and contrast-water therapy (CWT) on the performance of young male soccer players during a week of training.
METHODS:

Eighteen young soccer players participated in the present study (age 15.5±1.0 years, weight 61.8±3.0 Kg, height 175.5±4.0 cm and training experience 8.1±1.0 years). They were involved in a four-day study with recovery using CWI or with CWT after each training session by using performance tests and small-sided games. We measured uric acid concentration, leukocytes, haemoglobin, reticulocytes and creatine kinase changes in the blood, axillary temperature, rating of perceived exertion after a training session, heart rate during exercise, performance tests (counter movement jump, repeated sprint ability and 5' shuttle run).
RESULTS:

No significant difference were reported between groups when different physiological tests were used; CWI and CWT did not negatively influence the performances of the athletes. The principal effect of CWI was a reduced perception of fatigue after the training session. The use of active recovery protocols based on cold water or cold/thermoneutral water did not induce modifications of inflammatory and haematological markers in young soccer players.
CONCLUSION:

The beneficial effect of a reduced perception of fatigue can improve training and competitions in young soccer players.

or this one?

Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2011 May;90(5):356-63.
Effect of cold-water immersion on skeletal muscle contractile properties in soccer players.
García-Manso JM, Rodríguez-Matoso D, Rodríguez-Ruiz D, Sarmiento S, de Saa Y, Calderón J.
Source

From the Sports Training Analysis and Planning Laboratory, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (ULPGC), Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (JMG-M, DR-M, DR-R, SS, YdS); and Physiology Laboratory, Faculty of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, Technical University of Madrid (UPM), Madrid, Spain (JC).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:

: This study was designed to analyze changes in muscle response after cold-water immersion.
DESIGN:

: The vastus lateralis of the dominant leg was analyzed in 12 professional soccer players from the Spanish 2nd Division B using tensiomyography, before and after four cold-water immersions at 4°C lasting 4 mins each. Core temperature, skin temperature, and heart rate were monitored.
RESULTS:

: A significant interaction (P ≤ 0.05) was found in muscle deformation between control conditions (5.12 ± 2.27 mm) and (1) immersion 3 (3.64 ± 2.27 mm) and (2) immersion 4 (3.38 ± 1.34 mm). A steady decrease was also observed in response velocity (immersion 1, -7.3%; immersion 2, -25.9%; immersion 3, -30.0%; immersion 4, -36.6%) and contraction velocity (immersion 1, -11.5%; immersion 2, -22.1%; immersion 3, -35.0%; immersion 4, -41.9%), with statistically significant differences (P ≤ 0.05) in relation to the reference values commencing with the third immersion. No significant differences were found between control conditions in subsequent exposures to cold water for the values of response time and contraction time. Sustained time and reaction time showed an increase during repeated exposures and with longer exposure time, although the increase was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS:

: This study shows that repeated cold-water immersions (4 × 4 mins at 4°C) cause considerable alterations to muscle behavior. These alterations significantly affect the state of muscles and their response capacity, particularly in relation to muscle stiffness and muscle contraction velocity.

or this one?

Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010 Dec 4. [Epub ahead of print]
Short term effects of various water immersions on recovery from exhaustive intermittent exercise.

Pournot H, Bieuzen F, Duffield R, Lepretre PM, Cozzolino C, Hausswirth C.

Research Department, National Institute of Sport, Expertise and Performance (INSEP), 11 avenue du Tremblay, 75012, Paris, France.
Abstract

In order to investigate the effectiveness of different techniques of water immersion recovery on maximal strength, power and the post-exercise inflammatory response in elite athletes, 41 highly trained (Football, Rugby, Volleyball) male subjects (age = 21.5 ± 4.6 years, mass = 73.1 ± 9.7 kg and height = 176.7 ± 9.7 cm) performed 20 min of exhaustive, intermittent exercise followed by a 15 min recovery intervention. The recovery intervention consisted of different water immersion techniques, including: temperate water immersion (36°C; TWI), cold water immersion (10°C; CWI), contrast water temperature (10-42°C; CWT) and a passive recovery (PAS). Performances during a maximal 30-s rowing test (P(30 s)), a maximal vertical counter-movement jump (CMJ) and a maximal isometric voluntary contraction (MVC) of the knee extensor muscles were measured at rest (Pre-exercise), immediately after the exercise (Post-exercise), 1 h after (Post 1 h) and 24 h later (Post 24 h). Leukocyte profile and venous blood markers of muscle damage (creatine kinase (CK) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)) were also measured Pre-exercise, Post 1 h and Post 24 h. A significant time effect was observed to indicate a reduction in performance (Pre-exercise vs. Post-exercise) following the exercise bout in all conditions (P < 0.05). Indeed, at 1 h post exercise, a significant improvement in MVC and P(30 s) was respectively observed in the CWI and CWT groups compared to pre-exercise. Further, for the CWI group, this result was associated with a comparative blunting of the rise in total number of leucocytes at 1 h post and of plasma concentration of CK at 24 h post. The results indicate that the practice of cold water immersion and contrast water therapy are more effective immersion modalities to promote a faster acute recovery of maximal anaerobic performances (MVC and 30″ all-out respectively) after an intermittent exhaustive exercise. These results may be explained by the suppression of plasma concentrations of markers of inflammation and damage, suggesting reduced passive leakage from disrupted skeletal muscle, which may result in the increase in force production during ensuing bouts of exercise.

....I've stopped here only because I am bored now.

I've actually got these studies at home and unlike you I've read them.

WHIP IT!

I like icebaths

Will Heffernan

...just in case you find another video of a dude in a tight t-shirt dropping knowledge bombs and then afterwards saying stuff like...'did that just happen?'

I'll post some more.

Eur J Appl Physiol. 2005 Dec 22;:1-9 [Epub ahead of print] Related Articles, Links

Post-exercise leg and forearm flexor muscle cooling in humans attenuates endurance and resistance training effects on muscle performance and on circulatory adaptation.

Yamane M, Teruya H, Nakano M, Ogai R, Ohnishi N, Kosaka M.

Laboratory for Exercise Physiology and Biomechanics, Chukyo University, 101 Tokodachi, Kaizu-cho Toyota, 470-0393, Aichi, Japan, myamane@cnc.chukyo-u.ac.jp.

The influence of regular post-exercise cold application to exercised muscles trained by ergometer cycling (leg muscles) or handgrip exercise using a weight-loaded handgrip ergometer (forearm flexor muscles) was studied in human volunteers. Muscle loads were applied during exercise programs three to four times a week for 4-6 weeks. Besides measuring parameters characterizing muscle performance, femoral and brachial artery diameters were determined ultrasonographically. Training effects were identified by comparing pre- and post-training parameters in matched groups separately for the trained limbs cooled after exercise by cold-water immersion and the corresponding trained limbs kept at room temperature. Significant training effects were three times more frequent in the control than in the cold group, including increases in artery diameters in the control but not in the cold group. It is concluded that training-induced molecular and humoral adjustments, including muscle hyperthermia, are physiological, transient and essential for training effects (myofiber regeneration, muscle hypertrophy and improved blood supply). Cooling generally attenuates these temperature-dependent processes and, in particular, hyperthermia-induced HSP formation. This seems disadvantageous for training, in contrast to the beneficial combination of rest, ice, compression and elevation in the treatment of macroscopic musculo-tendinous damage.

or this one?

Auton Neurosci. 2010 Apr 17. [Epub ahead of print]
Effect of cold or thermoneutral water immersion on post-exercise heart rate recovery and heart rate variability indices.

Al Haddad H, Laursen PB, Chollet D, Lemaitre F, Ahmaidi S, Buchheit M.

Laboratoire de Recherche, EA 3300 <<Adaptations physiologiques à l'exercice et réadaptation à l'effort>> Faculté des Sciences du Sport, Université de Picardie Jules Verne, F-80025, Amiens, France; Laboratoire de Recherche EA-3832 << Centre d'études des transformations en activité physique et sportive >> Faculté des Sciences du Sport, Université de Rouen, F-76000 Mont Saint Aignan, France.
Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effect of cold and thermoneutral water immersion on post-exercise parasympathetic reactivation, inferred from heart rate (HR) recovery (HRR) and HR variability (HRV) indices. Twelve men performed, on three separate occasions, an intermittent exercise bout (all-out 30-s Wingate test, 5min seated recovery, followed by 5min of submaximal running exercise), randomly followed by 5min of passive (seated) recovery under either cold (CWI), thermoneutral water immersion (TWI) or control (CON) conditions. HRR indices (e.g., heart beats recovered in the first minute after exercise cessation, HRR(60)(s)) and vagal-related HRV indices (i.e., natural logarithm of the square root of the mean of the sum of the squares of differences between adjacent normal R-R intervals (Ln rMSSD)) were calculated for the three recovery conditions. HRR(60)(s) was faster in water immersion compared with CON conditions [30+/-9beatsmin(-)(1) for CON vs. 43+/- 10beatsmin(-)(1) for TWI (P=0.003) and 40+/-13beatsmin(-)(1) for CWI (P=0.017)], while no difference was found between CWI and TWI (P=0.763). Ln rMSSD was higher in CWI (2.32+/-0.67ms) compared with CON (1.98+/-0.74ms, P=0.05) and TWI (2.01+/-0.61ms, P=0.08; aES=1.07) conditions, with no difference between CON and TWI (P=0.964). Water immersion is a simple and efficient means of immediately triggering post-exercise parasympathetic activity, with colder immersion temperatures likely to be more effective at increasing parasympathetic activity.

or this one...which was a review of a number of other studies?

Br J Sports Med. 2009 Nov 27. [Epub ahead of print]
What is the biochemical and physiological rationale for using Cold Water Immersion in Sports Recovery? A Systematic Review.

Bleakley CM, Davison GW.

University of ulster, Jordanstown, United Kingdom;

Cold-water immersion (CWI) is a popular recovery intervention after exercise. The scientific rationale is not clear and there are no clear guidelines for it use. The aim of this review was to study the physiological and biochemical effect of short periods of CWI. A computer based literature search, citation tracking and related articles searches were undertaken. Primary research studies using healthy human participants, immersed in cold water (<15 degrees C), for 5-minute durations or less were included. Data were extracted on body temperature, cardiovascular, respiratory, and biochemical response. 16 studies were included. Sample size was restricted and there was large degree of study heterogeneity. CWI was associated with an increase in heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory minute volume and metabolism. Decreases in end tidal PCO2, and a decrease in cerebral blood flow was also reported. There was evidence of increases in peripheral catecholamine concentration, oxidative stress and a possible increase in free radical species formation. The magnitude of these responses may be attenuated with acclimatisation. CWI induces significant physiological and biochemical changes to the body. Much of this evidence is derived from full body immersions using resting healthy participants. The physiological and biochemical rationale for using short periods of CWI in sports recovery still remains unclear.

or this one?

J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Aug 10. [Epub ahead of print]Click here to read Links
The Effects of Recovery Interventions on Consecutive Days of Intermittent Sprint Exercise.
King M, Duffield R.

Exercise and Sports Science Laboratories, School of Human Movement Studies, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, New South Wales, Australia.

King, M and Duffield, R. The effects of recovery interventions on consecutive days of intermittent sprint exercise. J Strength Cond Res 23(x): 000-000, 2009-The purpose of this study was to compare four recovery interventions following simulated team sport, intermittent-sprint exercise on consecutive days. Ten female netball players performed four randomized sessions of a simulated netball exercise circuit on consecutive days. Each condition consisted of two identical sessions (Session 1 and 2), with the recovery intervention implemented at the completion of Session 1. Participants performed all interventions involving: passive recovery, active recovery (ACT), cold water immersion (CWI) and contrast water therapy (CTWT). No significant differences (p > 0.05) were evident between conditions for exercise performance (vertical jump, 20-m sprint, 10-m sprint, total circuit time) during Session 2. Effect size data indicated trends for an ameliorated decline in 5 x 20-m sprints and vertical jump for CTWT and CWI, respectively. CTWT demonstrated a significant reduction (p = 0.04) in lactate post-intervention compared to ACT recovery. Further, ACT recovery resulted in a significantly elevated (p < 0.01) heart rate compared to all other conditions postintervention and demonstrated significantly higher (p < 0.01) rating of perceived exertion postintervention and muscle soreness pre-exercise Session 2. It is likely that while interventions may be applicable to team sport practices, the 24-hour recovery period between exercise bouts was sufficient to allow performance to be maintained, regardless of recovery interventions.

or this one which I will throw in because this one also looked specifically at hot water immersion as well as cold...and guess what it found?

Eur J Appl Physiol. 2007 Nov 3; [Epub ahead of print] Links
Effect of hydrotherapy on the signs and symptoms of delayed onset muscle soreness.
Vaile J, Halson S, Gill N, Dawson B.

Department of Physiology, Australian Institute of Sport, PO Box 176, Belconnen, ACT, Australia, jo.vaile@ausport.gov.au.

This study independently examined the effects of three hydrotherapy interventions on the physiological and functional symptoms of delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). Strength trained males (n = 38) completed two experimental trials separated by 8 months in a randomised crossover design; one trial involved passive recovery (PAS, control), the other a specific hydrotherapy protocol for 72 h post-exercise; either: (1) cold water immersion (CWI: n = 12), (2) hot water immersion (HWI: n = 11) or (3) contrast water therapy (CWT: n = 15). For each trial, subjects performed a DOMS-inducing leg press protocol followed by PAS or one of the hydrotherapy interventions for 14 min. Weighted squat jump, isometric squat, perceived pain, thigh girths and blood variables were measured prior to, immediately after, and at 24, 48 and 72 h post-exercise. Squat jump performance and isometric force recovery were significantly enhanced (P < 0.05) at 24, 48 and 72 h post-exercise following CWT and at 48 and 72 h post-exercise following CWI when compared to PAS. Isometric force recovery was also greater (P < 0.05) at 24, 48, and 72 h post-exercise following HWI when compared to PAS. Perceived pain improved (P < 0.01) following CWT at 24, 48 and 72 h post-exercise. Overall, CWI and CWT were found to be effective in reducing the physiological and functional deficits associated with DOMS, including improved recovery of isometric force and dynamic power and a reduction in localised oedema. While HWI was effective in the recovery of isometric force, it was ineffective for recovery of all other markers compared to PAS.

See that...I didn't include a single reference to any of those find academic and research institutions like bodybuilding.com, t-nation.com or even muscular development

Will Heffernan

WHIP IT! wrote: »

I like icebaths

Personally I hate them and never use them myself.

ManannanMacLir

Kelly Starrett (the 'dude in the tight t-shirt') is one of the most respected voices in the area of sports injury prehab/rehab. Out of interest, have you heard of him and disagree with him or not heard of him at all?

Bruce7

Cill94 wrote: »

For your body to heal anything there needs to be blood flowing to the area. Applying cold things to a muscle draws all the blood away from it and, in my experience, only makes it stiffer.

Strange. When blood flows to my area it makes it stiffer, but when cold things are applied to it it becomes much more supple and mobile.

Cill94

Bruce7 wrote: »

Strange. When blood flows to my area it makes it stiffer, but when cold things are applied to it it becomes much more supple and mobile.

That's odd. Blood flow to the muscle warms it and should make it looser.

ManannanMacLir

Cill94 wrote: »

That's odd. Blood flow to the muscle warms it and should make it looser.

You do know he's talking about his knob right?

Will Heffernan

ManannanMacLir wrote: »

Kelly Starrett (the 'dude in the tight t-shirt') is one of the most respected voices in the area of sports injury prehab/rehab.

He isn't actually. That statement is just not true. I really don't want to get into this because it's pointless. Some of the stuff he comes out with is fine. I like a lot of the stuff he's done mainly because it is the same stuff I've been doing for 20 years now.

I was writing mobility and stability work into programs in 1993...and do you know why that was...that's because Geoff Damm, Harry Wardle and Julian Jones told me to and showed me how to back then. They did so because it was common practice. I can name a lot of people who are actually the most respected voices in the area of sports injury prefab/rehab and Kelly Starrett wouldn't make my top 100.

Because it is new to you...because crossfit says it's cool...because the interweb says so doesn't make it true.

How many strength and conditioning coaches of Olympic gold medallists can you name without google that are famous on the internetz? How many of the strength and conditioning coaches of premiership football teams can you name?

Now how many Kelly Starrett's and Charles Poliquinn's can you name?

Being good at what you do isn't a prerequisite to being famous on the internet.

Out of interest, have you heard of him and disagree with him or not heard of him at all?

I've heard of him because people have mentioned him. I don't have strong feeling toward him positively or negatively. If he's encouraging people to do more mobility work then that is great BUT PLEASE do not try and tell me that he's one of the most respected voices in the area of sports injury prehab/rehab because that is just laughable and insulting to people who actually work in the area.

Edit: That BUT PLEASE is not me yelling...that is me begging and pleading in a semi whining tone for people not to say stuff like that because it is actually upsetting.

ManannanMacLir

Jaysus, talk about a chip on your shoulder!

Will Heffernan

ManannanMacLir wrote: »

Jaysus, talk about a chip on your shoulder!

LOL. Really? That's what you think this is about.

This is how it seems to work here on boards.ie.

1. Someone says something dumb.
2. I try to tell them they are wrong.
3. They get upset because they lost some interweb cred (which as we know is super important) and decide to battle on with a dumb argument.
4. I have to go to greater lengths to explain and point out to them that what they said was incorrect and their argument is based on a lack of understanding and their incorrect assumption.
5. Everyone sort of cringes and just thinks I am mean.
6. Them or others will come back and make some sort of personal attack.

No one thanks me. No one seems to appreciates it.

Listen...how about you just take all you training, supplement and recovery advice from experts like Kelly Starrett and Cill94.

I won't mention another thing and will just go back to lurking here rather than trying to help and or trying to raise the standard of debate a little.

Peace out...consider my light well and truly back under my bushel.

Will Heffernan

Just so people don't think I am being a big headed meanie pants for no particular reason...here a few things that the experts in the video might want to consider...and you guys might as well...even the ones who just take the interweb as gospel.

1. There isn't much if any research that supports the contension they are making...that cold is bad and that heat is good and that a hot tub is better than an ice bath.

2. The application of heat packs will effect surface temperature of the skin but below 2 cm down the body temp will remain unchanged.

3. This thread was on 'ice baths' and was in relation to 'improving recovery from training'...ignoring that and now considering the application of heat either superficially by way of a heat pack or systemically by way of immersion (hot tub) you can look at these methods this way...say with a heat pack you will increase in superficial tissue temperature and will causes an increase in the cutaneous blood flow, for as long as the pack stays 'hot', due to peripheral vasodilation. If you want to go the route of the video and immerse yourself in hot water what you will also get is an increase in heart rate. This increase in heart rate may also actually reduce the stroke volume due to lack of cardiac filling time, but overall cardiac output will increase...that's fine.

4. With immersion in hot water and with this increase in cardiac output along with the decrease in peripheral resistance and an increase in the cutaneous and subcutaneous blood flow which will give you better permeability of blood vessels and better lymphatic drainage...you get better nutrient delivery and waste removal in the areas affected...this all sounds great right...and it is...when you are not injured...which is what is so dumb about what Starrett and whoever that other dude that is talking rubbish is saying if you happen to have an injury.
a) If it is just a heat pack you are talking about...these changes happen in the skin not the muscle.
b) If you do it via a hot tub as they suggested...what you will actually find is that blood flow in the muscle is reduced. Hot water immersion doesn't cause an increase in blood flow in the muscle...it decreases it. That's not helping get those macrophages into the muscle and everything else he said.
c) Cold water immersion actually does the opposite...in that it decreases peripheral blood flow and actually INCREASES the blood flow IN the muscle. So you get out...having increased the blood flow in the muscle...removed debris etc etc and all the stuff they are talking about and then your body clears it all away.

Just a little break here...do you follow what I am saying....what they are actually talking about shows that they have no idea what they are talking about and that as I said...they don't understand even basic physiology in this regard.

My guess is that they probably do understand it and they are just trying to be 'contrary' because saying dumb stuff as happens a lot in the 'industry' gets you a lot more coverage. Because what they are talking about is just 'dumb' anyone who has done even basic physiology knows it's dumb. That isn't me having a chip on my shoulder...that is just me pointing out the obvious.

These are not my opinions...if anyone would like the papers and or research that back this up let me know and I will send them to you.

d) They are talking about inflammation being 'good' and 'desirable' well the application of heat superficially or via immersion does achieve this this 'good' that they are talking about...in fact it does this excellently. The only problem with this is that inflammation and swelling have been well documented in delaying recovery time. What they are talking about is so good at increasing inflammation and swelling that studies have shown that hot water immersion of ankle joints after injury leads to a 25% increase in ankle size compared to a 2-3% increase with cold water immersion which unfortunately leads to increased pain and increased recovery time significantly.

I am not trying to be an a-hole. People say stuff here and others believe it. You guys watch videos of a guy like the one here and believe it. That scares the crap out of me.

Like I said...if someone wants to post up links to papers that demonstrate that I am wrong that would be great but I doubt very much that I've not already seen them.

On the flipside of that...if anyone doubts what I am saying just tell me what you've got an issue with and I will send you the research to back it up.

mushykeogh

Aaaahhhhhhh, all of a sudden, the monotony of Boards has been broken, the fireworks are back .

Ice baths were good, now they are bad, they will continue to be bad for a while before we realise actually, they were good after all!

Stench Blossoms

Will Heffernan wrote: »

No one thanks me. No one seems to appreciates it.

I appreciate you and love reading your posts as I know they aren't bullsh!t. Keep up the good work.

connollys

Stench Blossoms wrote: »

I appreciate you and love reading your posts as I know they aren't bullsh!t. Keep up the good work.

Seconded, always an interesting read Will, delighted to see you back posting recently.

Will Heffernan

Stench Blossoms wrote: »

I appreciate you and love reading your posts as I know they aren't bullsh!t. Keep up the good work.

connollys wrote: »

Seconded, always an interesting read Will, delighted to see you back posting recently.

Thanks peoples

I actually meant no one who is WRONG appreciates me...LOL.

I thought people would appreciate my change in posting style...I've tried not to call anyone a retard or an idiot...I've tried not to call anyone dumb (which has been really really hard)...I've switched to 'Incorrect' rather than just 'You're WRONG' but unfortunately and apparently I am still coming off as a complete d*ck with a huge ego who is completely condescending and obnoxious.

I suppose it doesn't matter how hard I try I can't hide my true personality.

nobbo

Will Heffernan wrote: »

I thought people would appreciate my change in posting style...I've tried not to call anyone a retard or an idiot....

When I was lurking about reading your posts I preferred when ya called em idiots, got a bit of a laugh while getting some decent info...

davmol

You are always appreciated on this site Will,although some dont say it.You dispel the BS and bro science that is all too common on this site and help us get down to the nitty gritty.

Some guys you counter are just hurt that they have been challenged and arent the big man in the gym anymore cos they have been humbled.

keep up the good work

WHIP IT!

davmol wrote: »

You are always appreciated on this site Will,although some dont say it. You dispel the BS and bro science that is all too common on this site and help us get down to the nitty gritty.

I'll agree with the first half of your sentence but not so much with the bit I've bolded. I find that the H&F forum is, mercifully, usually pretty much bro-science free... personally, I think keeping an eye on this forum is one of the smartest things you can do if you're trying to take your H&F seriously. There are some wonderful contributers here (Will included) who really know their stuff and the stickies alone are worth repeated visits. Tis a very valuable resource and has helped me immeasurably over the last 3/4 years.

Hammar

Indeed, your input is always appreciated on here Will.
The worrying part of all this, in the GAA section,the same poster started a ridiculous thread but stated

Cill94 wrote: »

I'm doing a Sport Science course

Now i'm not trying to flame,and i don't know what course/college it is,but you would have to question what exactly is being taught in some of these courses when this guy is coming out with such broscience.

Chancer3001

*jumps headfirst into the discussion*

Only thing Ive heard (from a decent source that is) regarding Ice baths is that they may actually stop the "little tears" in the muscle after a heavy session.

Stopping the tears isnt what you want though, becuase you need them to be built back up to get the muscle bigger.


I was only really listening to this conversation, not really taking part cos I have no intention in the world ever ever ever of jumping into an ice bath.

I think I'd die.