Effect of cold exposure (-15 degrees C) and Salbutamol treatment on physical performance in elite nonasthmatic cross-country skiers

SINTEF, Nidaros, Sør-Trøndelag, Norway
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology 04/1998; 77(4):297-304. DOI: 10.1007/s004210050337
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The effects of whole-body exposure to ambient temperatures of -15 degrees C and 23 degrees C on selected performance-related physiological variables were investigated in elite nonasthmatic cross-country skiers. At an ambient temperature of -15 degrees C we also studied the effects of the selective beta2-adrenergic agonist Salbutamol (0.4 mg x 3) which was administered 10 min before the exercise test. Eight male cross-country skiers with known maximal oxygen uptakes (VO2max) of more than 70 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1) participated in the study. Oxygen uptake (VO2), heart rate (fc), blood lactate concentration ([La-]b) and time to exhaustion were measured during controlled submaximal and maximal running on a treadmill in a climatic chamber. Lung function measured as forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) was recorded immediately before the warm-up period and at the conclusion of the exercise protocol. Submaximal VO2 and [La-]b at the two highest submaximal exercise intensities were significantly higher at -15 degrees C than at 23 degrees C. Time to exhaustion was significantly shorter in the cold environment. However, no differences in VO2max or fc were observed. Our results would suggest that exercise stress is higher at submaximal exercise intensities in a cold environment and support the contention that aerobic capacity is not altered by cold exposure. Furthermore, we found that after Salbutamol inhalation FEV1 was significantly higher than after placebo administration. However, the inhaled beta2-agonist Salbutamol did not influence submaximal and maximal VO2, fc, [La-]b or time to exhaustion in the elite, nonasthmatic cross-country skiers we studied. Thus, these results did not demonstrate any ergogenic effect of the beta2-agonist used.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to compare peak (VO2 peak) and maximal (VO2 max) oxygen uptake, physical performance, and lactate accumulation [la-] in warm versus cold environments. The influence of inhaled air temperature and different warm up modes on these variables as well as arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2%) and pulmonary function were also studied. Two studies were performed. In study A, 10 males performed maximal exercise tests on a bicycle at +20°C and -12°C. In study B, 8 elite cross-country skiers performed maximal cross-country skiing tests at +13.7oC. Different warm up modes (continuous and intermittent) and different temperatures of the inhaled air (-8°C and +13°C) were used. In study A, we found significantly higher VO2 peak, peak carbon dioxide (VCO2 peak), peak ventilation (VE peak) and respiratory exchange ratio (RER) in +20°C compared to -12°C. In study B, we found significantly lower SaO2% at the end compared to the beginning of the maximal performance test. Time to exhaustion (Tex) was significantly longer using intermittent warm up irrespectively of inhaled air temperature. In conclusion, we found that VO2 max was affected by different environmental temperatures but not by different temperatures of the inhaled air and that intermittent warm up increased Tex without affecting VO2 max.
    Journal of Exercise Physiology Online 02/2012; 15(1):26-39.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In recent decades it has become obvious that anti-asthma drugs are frequently used in elite athletes in many kinds of sports and in cross-country skiers in particular. Amongst the athletes who joined the USA Olympic Winter Sports Team in 1998, one out of four had exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) and cross-country skiers were the most affected [1]. In a Swedish study of 42 elite cross-country skiers, more than half fulfilled strict criteria for asthma [2], and, in an epidemiological investigation conducted at Swedish upper secondary schools, in which pupils were accepted based on merit as skiers, 15% of the skiers had physician-diagnosed asthma and 18% were treated with anti-asthma drugs compared with 6% and 7%, respectively, amongst the controls [3]. Heir et al. [4] found that 14% of Norwegian cross-country skiers had self-reported asthma and 22% used anti-asthma drugs. During the last decade it has also been convincingly shown that athletes, other than skiers, have a higher prevalence of asthma compared with the normal population. Thus, runners (long-distance runners in particular), figure skaters, swimmers and athletes practicing other kinds of sport have an increased prevalence of asthma. It is highly unlikely that the asthmatic condition, which develops in athletes during their career as elite athletes, is identical to what is usually considered to be asthma in clinical practice, i.e. allergic asthma. Although the clinical appearance is similar in athletes and those with "classical" asthma, there are differences between the two groups. Thus, the skiers seem to have a weaker bronchial response to adenosine, lower levels of exhaled nitric oxide (NO), less airway eosinophilia and a reduced number of mast cells compared to a group of other asthmatic subjects [5, 6]. Whether subjects with "sports asthma" respond to anti-asthmatic drugs in a similar manner as subjects with "classical" allergic and nonallergic asthma has not been extensively studied. There are no clear data indicating a different response to anti-asthmatic drugs between athletes who have developed asthma during their career as athletes and nonathletic asthmatic subjects. Thus, there is no evidence supporting different treatment for EIB in asthmatic athletes and nonathletes. Treatment of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction The effect of drugs on EIB has been thoroughly studied in asthmatic subjects during the last 30 yrs. In this review, studies have only been considered if they have fulfilled certain criteria. Only controlled (placebo, and in a few cases comparisons between active Eur Respir Mon, 2005, 33, 73–88. Printed in UK -all rights reserved. Copyright ERS Journals Ltd 2005; European Respiratory Monograph; ISSN 1025-448x. ISBN 1-904097-22-7.
    01/2005; 33. DOI:10.1183/1025448x.00033008
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of high-dose inhaled terbutaline on muscle strength, maximal sprinting, and time-trial performance in trained men. Nine non-asthmatic males with a of 58.9 +/- A 3.1 ml min(-1) kg(-1) (mean +/- A SEM) participated in a double-blinded randomized crossover study. After administration of inhaled terbutaline (30 x 0.5 mg) or placebo, subjects' maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVC) of m.quadriceps was measured. After MVC, subjects performed a 30-s Wingate test. Sixty minutes following the Wingate test, subjects exercised for 10 min at 80 % of and completed a 100-kcal time trial. Aerobic contribution was determined during the Wingate test by indirect calorimetry. Furthermore, plasma terbutaline, lactate, glucose, and K+ were measured. Inhalation of 15 mg terbutaline resulted in systemic concentrations of terbutaline of 23.6 +/- A 1.1 ng ml(-1) 30 min after administration, and elevated plasma lactate (P = 0.001) and glucose (P = 0.007). MVC was higher for terbutaline than placebo (738 +/- A 64 vs. 681 +/- A 68 N) (P = 0.007). In addition, Wingate peak power and mean power were 2.2 +/- A 0.8 (P = 0.019) and 3.3 +/- A 1.0 % (P = 0.009) higher for terbutaline than placebo. Net accumulation of plasma lactate was higher (P = 0.003) for terbutaline than placebo during the Wingate test, whereas above baseline was unchanged by terbutaline (P = 0.882). Time-trial performance was not different between treatments (P = 0.236). High-dose inhaled terbutaline elicits a systemic response that enhances muscle strength and sprint performance. High-dose terbutaline should therefore continue to be restricted in competitive sport.
    Arbeitsphysiologie 08/2014; 114(12). DOI:10.1007/s00421-014-2970-2 · 2.30 Impact Factor


Available from
May 30, 2014