Review of the VO2 conflict section against primary sources (verified via
PubMed + search):
- Rønnestad & Hansen 2016 (PMID 23942167) confirmed: 13 cyclists, 30s vs
50%/80% Tmax at 2:1 work:rest, measured time >=90% VO2peak, 30s won. Table
row corrected to reflect the actual comparison.
- Yang 2025 optimum ~140s is a MEDIUM rep (~2.3 min), between the poles.
Section reframed from binary short-vs-long to an inverted-U with a
modality/protocol-dependent peak. 'Weighted toward running' softened to
match what the abstract actually supports.
- Removed the overstatement 'best-controlled evidence favors short 30/15
intervals'. Added two caveats: (1) cycling short-interval superiority is
largely one research group; (2) effort-matched work (total-work-matched)
reportedly nulls the advantage (Seiler group; unpublished/secondary,
flagged low-tier, not cited as fact).
- Practical menu now defaults to medium (~2-4 min, near the pooled optimum)
rather than short; short/long presented as goal-dependent options.
- citations.md: added single-group caveat on Ronnestad body of work and an
explicit NOT-VERIFIABLE entry for the effort-matched replication.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TqrhBhC3GEcKyaw8RTk8G6
Chris Farhood
85b6be4e36