I thought this up as an alternative to C02 tables that should capture at least some of the benefits without so much time or discomfort. Does the following make any sense??
I think you can regulate your co2 saturation at whatever level you want by taking very shallow intermittant breaths. The idea is to breath enough O2 to continue but not breath enough to decrease the co2 level temporarily. I measure this by the pattern of contractions. As long as the contraction rate and strength as well as discomfort level are constant, I'm assuming co2 level is relatively stable.
As an example: exhale to relaxation (FRC) wait for contractions to begin and then breath (in then out) very shallow, one breath every 10 contractions. For me this breathing rate keeps my "apparent" co2 level constant and I can continue longer than I have tried so far. With a little experimentation, it ought to be possible to measure progress on co2 tolerance.
If this works well, it has the advantage of requireing less time and attentiion than tables as well a less discomfort.
This technique produces a steady moderatly high co2 level. Tables provide a rising but highly variable co2 level with high peaks. Can either one work as well?? What do you physiology experts think?
Thanks
Connor
I think you can regulate your co2 saturation at whatever level you want by taking very shallow intermittant breaths. The idea is to breath enough O2 to continue but not breath enough to decrease the co2 level temporarily. I measure this by the pattern of contractions. As long as the contraction rate and strength as well as discomfort level are constant, I'm assuming co2 level is relatively stable.
As an example: exhale to relaxation (FRC) wait for contractions to begin and then breath (in then out) very shallow, one breath every 10 contractions. For me this breathing rate keeps my "apparent" co2 level constant and I can continue longer than I have tried so far. With a little experimentation, it ought to be possible to measure progress on co2 tolerance.
If this works well, it has the advantage of requireing less time and attentiion than tables as well a less discomfort.
This technique produces a steady moderatly high co2 level. Tables provide a rising but highly variable co2 level with high peaks. Can either one work as well?? What do you physiology experts think?
Thanks
Connor