Hypoxic Chambers

Hi Guys
A member of the gym I run owns a company that sells hypoxic chambers; these chambers regulate atmosphere and recreate altitude training.

My question is how effective would these chambers be for assisting in fat loss?

I, like most (semi) educated trainers these days promote full body circuits (similar to Cosgrove’s style); but if using a chamber increases calories burned during a session then it’s obviously going to help, but does it help enough to justify the cost?

BTW -I haven’t even checked the price yet but I’m sure I’d be looking at $20k+

Any thoughts?
Chris

Are you saying that doing cardio at the sea level may help with burning fat than doing it 5000m above?

NO WAY is it worth it. You can get one of those little things you bite on that restricts your airflow for like, $20 and accomplish the same thing.

Just train more/harder.

Yup, if you train at altitude and compete at sealevel (think high level atheletes not fat joe schmoe) then yes altitude and hypoxic training would be for you. Most teams have “houses” and training facilities at a higher altitude, so when they compete, they can compensate with the increase of red blood cells natrually.

Why not incorperate swim sprints. Have you ever seen someone who is not a very good swimmer “attempt” to swim 25 yards? It looks down right painful because their lack of technique and blatant panic in the water gets their heartrates well above any threshold. Throw in the fact that most people cannot rotate to breath and you certainly cannot breath under water means they’ll be sucking wind/water after 25 yards of “swimming.”

[quote]Youch wrote:
Hi Guys
A member of the gym I run owns a company that sells hypoxic chambers; these chambers regulate atmosphere and recreate altitude training.

My question is how effective would these chambers be for assisting in fat loss?

I, like most (semi) educated trainers these days promote full body circuits (similar to Cosgrove’s style); but if using a chamber increases calories burned during a session then it’s obviously going to help, but does it help enough to justify the cost?

BTW -I haven’t even checked the price yet but I’m sure I’d be looking at $20k+

Any thoughts?
Chris[/quote]

My immediate hit is that it’s a gimmick. As another poster said, useful for competitive athletes trying to get that extra edge at sea level or get up to snuff for high altitude comp, but not significant for the average gym-goer in terms of weight reduction - especially if they are already following proven regimens.

Some questions that come to my mind were I to be a prospective purchaser:

Am I going to charge people to use it?
How much does it cost to operate on a monthly or yearly basis?
Is that greater than what I could earn from it?
Would there be a market for it in my gym (would people be likely to use it)?
Does it actually work?
If it doesn’t actually work, would I still market it in my gym and charge people to use it?
How much does it cost to fix if it breaks?
How often is it likely to break?
How much space will it take up in my gym compared to possibly cheaper and proven-to-be-effective pieces of equipment that people may be more likely to use?
What am I liable for if someone is hurt by it (Anoxia is NOT something to fool with - many people become ill at high altitude due to reduced oxygen flow to the internal organs).

You’ve got to be kidding me. This is ridiculous.

[quote]eic wrote:
You’ve got to be kidding me. This is ridiculous. [/quote]

Anything but hard work. Why do it if you can buy it?

Never heard of using altitude training to lose weight. As far as using it for competition prep, you have to damn near live in the thing for several weeks to get the benefit, and then you will lose the benefit within 3-5 days of returning to sea level/ending use of trainer.

[quote]Brant_Drake wrote:
eic wrote:
You’ve got to be kidding me. This is ridiculous.

Anything but hard work. Why do it if you can buy it?[/quote]

Crazy as it sounds, in my opinion, if you are training world class athletes, then anything legal that will give them an edge would be something worth exploring.

Gilbert Arenas had a system installed in his home to make the entire house a hypoxic chamber. I’ve heard of other athletes using them as well.

You might lose fat, but you’d probably also lose muscle mass too. I wouldn’t put anyone in there except for elite runners/bikers. Even then it could be dangerous and not really beneficial. That being said, endurance athletes are weird and would probably pay for it. It would help if your gym already is large and has a lot of neat things like an indoor field.

British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol 31, Issue 3 183-190, Copyright © 1997 by British Association of Sport and Medicine

ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Physiological implications of altitude training for endurance performance at sea level: a review

DM Bailey and B Davies
School of Applied Sciences, University of Glamorgan, United Kingdom.

Acclimatisation to environmental hypoxia initiates a series of metabolic and musculocardio-respiratory adaptations that influence oxygen transport and utilisation, or better still, being born and raised at altitude, is necessary to achieve optimal physical performance at altitude, scientific evidence to support the potentiating effects after return to sea level is at present equivocal.

Despite this, elite athletes continue to spend considerable time and resources training at altitude, misled by subjective coaching opinion and the inconclusive findings of a large number of uncontrolled studies. Scientific investigation has focused on the optimisation of the theoretically beneficial aspects of altitude acclimatisation, which include increases in blood haemoglobin concentration, elevated buffering capacity, and improvements in the structural and biochemical properties of skeletal muscle.

However, not all aspects of altitude acclimatisation are beneficial; cardiac output and blood flow to skeletal muscles decrease, and preliminary evidence has shown that hypoxia in itself is responsible for a depression of immune function and increased tissue damage mediated by oxidative stress. Future research needs to focus on these less beneficial aspects of altitude training, the implications of which pose a threat to both the fitness and the health of the elite competitor.

Paul Bert was the first investigator to show that acclimatisation to a chronically reduced inspiratory partial pressure of oxygen (P1O2) invoked a series of central and peripheral adaptations that served to maintain adequate tissue oxygenation in healthy skeletal muscle, physiological adaptations that have been subsequently implicated in the improvement in exercise performance during altitude acclimatisation.

However, it was not until half a century later that scientists suggested that the additive stimulus of environmental hypoxia could potentially compound the normal physiological adaptations to endurance training and accelerate performance improvements after return to sea level.

This has stimulated an exponential increase in scientific research, and, since 1984, 22 major reviews have summarised the physiological implications of altitude training for both aerobic and anaerobic performance at altitude and after return to sea level.

Of these reviews, only eight have specifically focused on physical performance changes after return to sea level, the most comprehensive of which was recently written by Wolski et al. Few reviews have considered the potentially less favourable physiological responses to moderate altitude exposure, which include decreases in absolute training intensity, decreased plasma volume, depression of haemopoiesis and increased haemolysis, increases in sympathetically mediated glycogen depletion at altitude, and increased respiratory muscle work after return to sea level. In addition, there is a risk of developing more serious medical complications at altitude, which include acute mountain sickness, pulmonary oedema, cardiac arrhythmias, and cerebral hypoxia.

The possible implications of changes in immune function at altitude have also been largely ignored, despite accumulating evidence of hypoxia mediated immunosuppression. In general, altitude training has been shown to improve performance at altitude, whereas no unequivocal evidence exists to support the claim that performance at sea level is improved.

Table 1 summarises the theoretical advantages and disadvantages of altitude training for sea level performance. This review summarises the physiological rationale for altitude training as a means of enhancing endurance performance after return to sea level. Factors that have been shown to affect the acclimatisation process and the subsequent implications for exercise performance at sea level will also be discussed. Studies were located using five major database searches, which included Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index, Sports Discus, and Sport, in

in all honosty unless your an elite fighter/biker/swimmer/runner/ect. then you have no reason to worry about your O2 intake, last i heard Arnold and Coleman got huge and they never had to breath through a straw

[quote]rsg wrote:
Brant_Drake wrote:
eic wrote:
You’ve got to be kidding me. This is ridiculous.

Anything but hard work. Why do it if you can buy it?

Crazy as it sounds, in my opinion, if you are training world class athletes, then anything legal that will give them an edge would be something worth exploring.[/quote]

If you need this to get that “edge,” then you’re probably in the wrong business.

The only way I could POSSIBLY see this being legitimate is if you are (1) an endurance athlete who (2) has an upcoming competition at a high altitude and (3) it would not be possible/practical for you to train at that altitude.

Hypoxic training is very useful for anyone who benefits from increased aerobic or anaerrobic endurance. It’s not just for endurance athletes. Fighters and sprinters would be two groups of people for whom it would work well.

But no, $20,000 is ridiculous. There are other, far less expensive options.

This will have no impact on fat loss. It can impact performance. What you do is live high, and TRAIN low. Elite athletes, particularly in Colorado, do this all the time. It doesn’t impact fat loss.

Unless you’re Bill Freakin Gates or George What-the-hell Bush, you shouldn’t even think about spending $20k on some hypoxic chamber. Just get a nose clip.

[quote]duck_dodger23 wrote:
Gilbert Arenas had a system installed in his home to make the entire house a hypoxic chamber. I’ve heard of other athletes using them as well. [/quote]

yep. quite a few have them. lance armstrong had a portable system that he would take with him to hotels. it works

Hi Guys
Thanks for the responses and I’m sorry that it’s taken so long to post a reply; I haven’t had time in the last few days.

I appreciate the benefits for athletes which are well documented; although I wasn’t aware of the downside which one poster pointed out.

My facility is similar to a typical gym in that the members want to look better; we differ form a normal gym in that we’re very high end (expensive, luxurious, etc).

This means I have to keep my eye on tends and even fads and this is one I think could get popular; just look at the growing popularity of vibration plates!

As another poster said -everyone seems to be looking for the easy way out, and one day an easy way out will exist whether us exercise fundamentalists like it or not.

Once again -thanks for your comments.

Cheers
Chris

[quote]skidmark wrote:
Youch wrote:
Hi Guys
A member of the gym I run owns a company that sells hypoxic chambers; these chambers regulate atmosphere and recreate altitude training.

My question is how effective would these chambers be for assisting in fat loss?

I, like most (semi) educated trainers these days promote full body circuits (similar to Cosgrove’s style); but if using a chamber increases calories burned during a session then it’s obviously going to help, but does it help enough to justify the cost?

BTW -I haven’t even checked the price yet but I’m sure I’d be looking at $20k+

Any thoughts?
Chris

My immediate hit is that it’s a gimmick. As another poster said, useful for competitive athletes trying to get that extra edge at sea level or get up to snuff for high altitude comp, but not significant for the average gym-goer in terms of weight reduction - especially if they are already following proven regimens.

Some questions that come to my mind were I to be a prospective purchaser:

Am I going to charge people to use it?
How much does it cost to operate on a monthly or yearly basis?
Is that greater than what I could earn from it?
Would there be a market for it in my gym (would people be likely to use it)?
Does it actually work?
If it doesn’t actually work, would I still market it in my gym and charge people to use it?
How much does it cost to fix if it breaks?
How often is it likely to break?
How much space will it take up in my gym compared to possibly cheaper and proven-to-be-effective pieces of equipment that people may be more likely to use?
What am I liable for if someone is hurt by it (Anoxia is NOT something to fool with - many people become ill at high altitude due to reduced oxygen flow to the internal organs).[/quote]

Thank You
Some interesting points.

Cheers
Chris