Journal of Exercise Science and Fitness
We appreciate the interest that our study elicited and the comments from a reader. We commend the reader of our paper for critically evaluating the protocol and results of the study. Here, we would like to respond to the statement made in the letter. Indeed, the rest intervals were longer and time at VO2max was lower in our study than recommended by Bucheit and Larsen.1 However, because the reader is interested in the practical implications of our study, we ask that they consider the following:
Department of Kinesiology
Original Publication Date
1 PDF file
DOI of published version
UNI ScholarWorks, Rod Library, University of Northern Iowa
©2021 Tony P. Nuñez, Fabiano T. Amorim, Nicholas M. Beltz, Christine M. Mermier, Terence A. Moriarty, Roberto C. Nava, Trisha A. VanDusseldorp, and Len Kravitz
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Nuñez, Tony P.; Amorim, Fabiano T.; Beltz, Nicholas M.; Mermier, Christine M.; Moriarty, Terence A.; Nava, Roberto C.; VanDusseldorp, Trisha A.; and Kravitz, Len, "Reply to “Programming may matter most.” Response to “Metabolic effects of two high-intensity circuit training protocols: Does sequence matter?”" (2021). Faculty Publications. 211.