Dr. Luc (Luke) van Loon

So I think it doesn't make a difference for endurance or resistance type exercise.

The studies that I've seen is they either show no effect

And if they show effect, it's studies where it's not endurance exercise.

It's actually high intensity intermittent type exercise where there's also a huge damage effect and inflammation.

And I think there it can have a benefit to dampen that down and then acute performance afterwards is less compromised.

But that's something else than optimizing your training reconditioning.

I have no idea.

In this case, I mean, temperature, at least skin temperature was already quite normal, quite fast.

But the response over six hours was still visible.

So, I mean, these studies are hard to do because then if you actually would do it this way, I would like to take a biopsy at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 18, 22, and 24 hours.

And, of course, nobody wants to participate.

Not even the older subjects in our studies are going to sign up for that.

If we would do that two-week intervention study where you actually have the three sessions and the six training sessions and you have the six cooling sessions and then you have the six cooling sessions on the days that you don't have the training.

So you have three treatments, six training sessions with cooling, six sessions with cooling on the other day, and only the six training without the cooling.

That's a huge study, but I mean, I'll be interested to see what comes out after two weeks.

It will likely be less if you do it on the opposite day.

So waiting just on a recovery day is what you think is best.

Okay.

But I mean, that's the whole thing.

We always focus on muscle, but everything has to be optimal.