Cargando…

Why Pheidippides could not believe in the ‘Central Governor Model’: Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories

An important epistemological problem has been faced by Exercise Physiologists. On one hand, one theory explains the fatigue through a ceiling effect of oxygen uptake. On the other hand, the new theory proposes that an encephalon mechanism would stop the effort before a catastrophic homeostasis failu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Pompeu, Fernando A.M.S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Chengdu Sport University 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9219333/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35782778
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2021.10.001
_version_ 1784732090026164224
author Pompeu, Fernando A.M.S.
author_facet Pompeu, Fernando A.M.S.
author_sort Pompeu, Fernando A.M.S.
collection PubMed
description An important epistemological problem has been faced by Exercise Physiologists. On one hand, one theory explains the fatigue through a ceiling effect of oxygen uptake. On the other hand, the new theory proposes that an encephalon mechanism would stop the effort before a catastrophic homeostasis failure. Many physiologists have looked for evidence to support their favourite theory even though the induction logic problem does not allow to prove whether truth is discovered; however, it is possible to prove that it does not occur. When some researchers fail to test their hypotheses, they use relativism to bring up their theories again. Noakes and his colleagues have based their theory on relativism, because it is impossible to refute by empirical observation. It also doesn't explain all phenomena that the oldest Hill's theory is able to explain. Noakes's theory isn't more accurate in its previsions. Noakes did not check whether the oxygen uptake plateau occurs in suitable tests to measure on the mouth what happens in the muscles. Finally, it doesn't propose new tests for the encephalon role during maximal effort, as that is expected in scientific work. For all of these reasons, it is possible to conclude there are no advantages in switching to the “Central Governor” theory.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9219333
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Chengdu Sport University
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92193332022-06-30 Why Pheidippides could not believe in the ‘Central Governor Model’: Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories Pompeu, Fernando A.M.S. Sports Med Health Sci Review An important epistemological problem has been faced by Exercise Physiologists. On one hand, one theory explains the fatigue through a ceiling effect of oxygen uptake. On the other hand, the new theory proposes that an encephalon mechanism would stop the effort before a catastrophic homeostasis failure. Many physiologists have looked for evidence to support their favourite theory even though the induction logic problem does not allow to prove whether truth is discovered; however, it is possible to prove that it does not occur. When some researchers fail to test their hypotheses, they use relativism to bring up their theories again. Noakes and his colleagues have based their theory on relativism, because it is impossible to refute by empirical observation. It also doesn't explain all phenomena that the oldest Hill's theory is able to explain. Noakes's theory isn't more accurate in its previsions. Noakes did not check whether the oxygen uptake plateau occurs in suitable tests to measure on the mouth what happens in the muscles. Finally, it doesn't propose new tests for the encephalon role during maximal effort, as that is expected in scientific work. For all of these reasons, it is possible to conclude there are no advantages in switching to the “Central Governor” theory. Chengdu Sport University 2021-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9219333/ /pubmed/35782778 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2021.10.001 Text en © 2021 The Author https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Pompeu, Fernando A.M.S.
Why Pheidippides could not believe in the ‘Central Governor Model’: Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories
title Why Pheidippides could not believe in the ‘Central Governor Model’: Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories
title_full Why Pheidippides could not believe in the ‘Central Governor Model’: Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories
title_fullStr Why Pheidippides could not believe in the ‘Central Governor Model’: Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories
title_full_unstemmed Why Pheidippides could not believe in the ‘Central Governor Model’: Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories
title_short Why Pheidippides could not believe in the ‘Central Governor Model’: Popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories
title_sort why pheidippides could not believe in the ‘central governor model’: popper's philosophy applied to choose between two exercise physiology theories
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9219333/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35782778
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2021.10.001
work_keys_str_mv AT pompeufernandoams whypheidippidescouldnotbelieveinthecentralgovernormodelpoppersphilosophyappliedtochoosebetweentwoexercisephysiologytheories