Is the VO2 Max Test Irrelevant?

In my almost forty year career in fitness I have worn three distinct hats; World Champion athlete, Coach/trainer to athletes of all ages, and Medical Exercise Specialist working specifically with people over Fifty, commonly well into their nineties.

Wearing the first two hats, VO2 max (the maximum amount of oxygen converted, measured in milliliters per kilogram of body weight per minute) is but one ingredient in the greater sport performance soup.  It is also mostly genetic.  It is a marker for identifying athletic potential in a given sport relative to the energy systems required of that sport.  Ironically, the more genetically gifted you are on the VO2 max front, the less likely you are to see improvement in that marker.

In certain fields of elite athletics, some examples being rowing, nordic skiing, distance running, VO2 max testing simply identifies if you have enough of that ingredient to put you on par with other elite athletes in that field, that you might then develop all of the other ingredients to produce a remarkable performance.

The other ingredients in this sport performance soup would be body shape,limb length, body composition, muscle fiber type and ratio, mental fortitude (the ability to handle pain), mitochondrial density, sarcoplasmic muscle density, myofibrillar muscle density, cardiac ventricular volume and force output, lactate threshold, anaerobic threshold, Category six baseline aerobic fitness, etc. Each of these ingredients is equally important, if not more important, than VO2 max depending on the given sport performance application.  Most of these ingredients are also more trainable than VO2 max.

Here are some examples:

#1 Offensive Lineman, 6’5”, 315 pounds.

You might expect #1 to have a high VO2 max, given his huge frame, associated lung volume and the fact that he is a professional athlete.  This might otherwise be a given if not for the OTHER ingredients and their far more relevant impact on his particular sport performance application.  This athlete needs to produce peak power for about two to five seconds.  His body is made up of predominantly fast twitch muscle fibers operating in the phospho-creatine energy system.  This means that during those two to five seconds his muscles are firing in an anaerobic environment; no oxygen required.  His VO2 max is practically irrelevant.

#2 Female Rower, 6’0”, 165 pounds.

This athlete will have a high VO2 max, not only due to her large frame and associated lung volume, but because of her genetic makeup and specific training (nature and nurture) to convert that oxygen for her particular sport performance application.  Over the Olympic distance of 2,000 meters she will produce peak power for six to seven minutes.  In this case, her genetically gifted VO2 max simply gets her into the clubhouse.  It will be her proportion of fast twitch and slow twitch muscle fibers, limb length, muscular power and mitochondrial density, Category six aerobic base and high anaerobic threshold that puts her on the podium.

#3. Male distance runner, 5”9’, 150 pounds.

This athlete will have a high VO2 max, especially relative to his size.  Over the course of 10,000 meters he will sustain peak power for about forty minutes.  Longer shin bones compared to femur length, predominantly slow twitch (highly aerobic) muscle fibers, slim upper body musculature and a massive Category six aerobic base will ensure a competitive platform for the distance runner.

So you can see, in just these three examples, VO2 max may be more or less relevant than some of the other ingredients in the sport performance soup, depending on the sport.  It is likely more impactful in the identification process (nature) than the adaptation process (nurture), where other ingredients are far more trainable and impactful.

Wearing the third hat, that of a Medical Exercise Specialist working with the aging population (that’s all of us to some degree) for the last 29 years, my opinion is that VO2 max testing as some form of longevity biomarker is practically irrelevant.  There are three main reason why:

#1 VO2 max is largely genetically predetermined and actual improvements, if any, are small.

#2 The identification of peak oxygen volume conversion and some corollary to functional application in activities of daily living is altogether nonexistent.

#3 The testing modality, whether treadmill, bike, rowing machine, etc requires a steep learning curve to achieve even base level proficiency.  All movement is specific.  If a rower tested on a bike and a runner tested on a rowing machine, they would get terrible scores because their bodies are not trained to take up oxygen for those neuromuscular patterns.

Just imagine how a deconditioned person in their seventies would fare on such a test.  It wouldn’t give them any usable information, and it might kill them in the process.

So what is the solution?
Stay tuned for the next installment where we will look at FitSpan’s FitScore longevity test for strength, balance, postural alignment (patterning), and power endurance.

-This post was authored by FitSpan’s own Medical Exercise Specialist and Chief Fitness Officer, Andy Baxter.