UKC

I was sent this link: https://www.altitudecentre.com/consultation/pod-ihe-london/

this company offers 1 hour sessions to use an Intermittent Hypoxia machine in a lab type environment.

Something I struggle with is getting enough time off work to really nail the acclimatisation.

Does anybody have experience of such a session?

Do they work?

There seems to be a lack of evidence and literature to give me any confidence or understanding of how long you would need under such conditions to get any real improvement.

In reply to montyjohn: I am minded to think that this will not work especially well.  My experience is based on personal experience, involving regular trips to 2000m to train for athletics, plus other experience from climbing trips, + other trips. I reckoned that for 2000m I needed 3 weeks of living there to get back to a 'normal' level of performance (benefits after last a lot longer than 3 weeks).

There is a trick, if you need to race at altitude, but don't have time to train there, which is to simply go there as late as possible, and limit the time there.  Thinking about this, I really think that there advertised service of short hits (IHE sessions) are not going to do much at all, except stress you.  But no real adaption is required as they're too short,,,, it's the equivalent of 10 minutes of just holding your breath as much as possible in that time.

The 45 minutes for 20 quid of running would be 'interesting' , but you'd need to do these regularly.  There's also a trick of 'sleep high train low' which people like - this is the exact opposite.. so how effective really?

From what they advertise I'd rent a system for a month, and sleep in it.

In reply to montyjohn:

You would have to do blood tests before and after to see if your body is producing more red blood cells in response. Do they do that as well?

In reply to wbo2:

I suspect you are correct and I had a similar gut feeling hence asking the question.

I would love this idea. My wide wouldn't, and then there's that pesky three year old that insist on sleeping in your bed. Might be a good way of keeping him out of our bed however.

In reply to Brass Nipples:

Not that I'm aware of, and I doubt they would offer it.

In reply to montyjohn:

I have it on good (anecdotal) authority that these do not seem to make any noticeable difference for climbing in the European alps. Although I have no idea how much time these individuals spent in the machine.

Certainly people have had success on 8000ers with this technique though. Didn't one of the Harrington's ski cho oyu using this and a very short acclimatization schedule? 

In reply to wjcdean:

Apparently they used a hypoxic chamber

https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/skills/series/altitude_and_acclimatisat...

In reply to montyjohn: I used the method outlined in the book “The Oxygen Advantage” (but not terribly seriously) and it worked extremely well for me recently - at Alpine heights.

In reply to Brass Nipples:

I'm sure they'd have a recommended partner who could do it as I've had one done for not much money, and back in the day Japanese runners staying at the hostel were having one every couple of weeks.

But take it from me, after 3 or 4 at 2000m you can go back to SL and you'll know there's a difference

Then build into sleeping at 3000m....

Probably the biggest thing I learnt is how long it took to acclimate.  You sometimes see acclimation plans for Mont Blanc over a couple of weeks and I honestly doubt how much the achieve beyond a psychological effect

In reply to wbo2:

Why? Climbing above say 3000m is really hard work and unpleasant if done immediately from sea level (breathless, headache, possibly nausea). After a few days it's fine. Acclimatisation to some degree is quick. Blood changes obviously take longer.

In reply to wbo2:

Exactly. This is one of the most misunderstood, miscommunicated areas in climbing, whose medical side already suffers from not enough clinical data and too much personal anecdote. I've given up trying to convince people, as they usually can't see past their very limited personal experience. The science indicates the true timeframes, but so many people seem to think that doesn't apply to them. 

In addition to the science, if you look behind some of the best climbs/performances of recent years by top climbers you will see they took weeks doing something to acclimatise before they started their main expedition. Otherwise, anything other than plodding up moderate snow above 6000m gives you an indication of just how unacclimatised you are.

There's no good reason around 50% of people fail to summit easy peaks like Kilimanjaro - they just don't take enough time. I've seen it on mountains all over the world. People who have summited Everest would scoff at Vinson being 'only' 4892m, but then have no answer why, after a week or less at 2000-3700m, they still took 6-8hrs to ascend just 1200m, and were so exhausted when they got there.

People climbing Everest never "get acclimatised" to 6000m or 7000m or even 5300m. They're just getting enough to temporarily survive and then managing their decline. The practical effect is that people are summiting big popular peaks in such a marginal state that they can't do anything beyond just existing, can't deal with unexpected problems, and can't help anyone else. 

As for the hypoxia tents, I think I wrote it in that other thread, but to make the most of them at home before the trip you needed to be in them rigorously most of the time, something pro athletes can justify, but something very hard for the corporate Type A folk to manage, who are the usual target for such programs.

In reply to MG:What do you think happens faster than growing new red blood cells? There are other physiological effects of living at high altitude I believe, but they take even longer (years) to develop.

I would suspect what you describe are mostly psychological effects.  I've seen people spend time at 2000m and suffer at 3K, and people go straight up and barely be affected (although that depends a little on effort level - easy to acclimate from a hotel bar)

In reply to Damo:

Are you of the opinion that just sleeping in such a tent isn't adequate for any meaningful change and you need to be in one day and night?

In reply to montyjohn:

Yes, that's my takeaway from reading how it worked on one of the successful expeditions.

In reply to montyjohn:

The Altitude Centre sells ALTI-VIT (https://www.altivit.com/).

Dr Jeremy Windsor's post on this is worth a read:

https://mountainmedicineblog.7thwave.io/cgi-bin/renderpost.py?postid=172

In reply to wbo2:

Simply breathing more happens rapidly.  Some info below.  I don't know how much alpine climbing you have done but thinking acute acclimatisation is all in people's head is very wide of the mark as anyone who's stopped at 3000m on day one but run up the same hill a few days later will tell you.

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/yellowbook/2024/environmental-hazards-risks/hi...

"...but the acute process, which occurs over the first 3–5 days following ascent, is crucial for travellers. The acute phase is associated with a steady increase in ventilation, improved oxygenation, and changes in cerebral blood flow. "

In reply to MG: So breathing faster? alias increased ventilation

I've done a bit... but I'm breathing pretty hard if I do a big hill at sea level.  I'm not really seeing what is different breathing hard at altitude, except there's less oxygen available.

In reply to wbo2:

The difference is that unacclimatised you don't breathe "enough" and feel unwell. Quite quickly your body corrects this.

In reply to montyjohn:

Loughborough University sports has a hotel with low pressure bedrooms(!) so I assume there is some benefit, at least for athletics.