Navigating the Initial Challenges: Norepinephrine and Concentration

When embarking on any task, whether it’s conquering a new fitness goal or diving into a creative project, our brain undergoes a surge of norepinephrine and adrenaline. Initially, this heightened state may manifest as restlessness and stress, but it serves a vital purpose — priming us for intense focus and concentration.

Just as we wouldn’t expect our muscles to perform at their peak without a warm-up, our brain needs its own form of preparation. It’s unrealistic to assume that we can effortlessly churn out our best work from the get-go. Acknowledging the early stages of agitation and stress as an integral part of the process is the first step towards achieving success.

Deciphering the Dopamine Puzzle

Dopamine is often associated with external rewards, like celebrating the publication of a book or reaching significant personal milestones. However, its fundamental role lies in being released whenever we achieve any form of progress or believe we’re headed in the right direction. This remarkable neurotransmitter becomes our steadfast companion, helping us maintain our focus and commitment to our objectives.

When our dopamine system becomes intertwined with a specific pattern of focus, it acts as a powerful motivator. For instance, when you sit down to write and manage to produce remarkable work, even after a day of grappling with challenges, your dopamine system steps in. It suppresses the effects of norepinephrine, allowing you to sustain your concentration and stay firmly on the path to your goals.

Mastering the Art of Self-Reward

One of the most potent strategies for preserving your focus and motivation throughout your journey is the art of self-reward. By learning to reward yourself mentally for every step, no matter how small, taken in the right direction, you can create an enduring source of energy and focus for your pursuits. This internal reward system is paramount in buffering the impacts of adrenaline and stress.

By setting internal milestones within the broader scope of your objectives and recognizing your accomplishments along the way, you essentially unlock an infinite wellspring of energy and dedication for your endeavours. This internal reward mechanism empowers you to persevere through even the most demanding periods and persistently move towards achieving your aspirations.

Breaking Free from External Rewards Dependency

While external rewards such as recognition and accolades undeniably hold allure, it’s essential not to become overly reliant on them as the primary driving force behind your endeavours. Overdependence on external validation can lead to a perpetual hunger for more external affirmation.

To sustain your motivation and long-term success, shift your focus towards cultivating an internal reward system. Celebrate not only your achievements but also the effort invested. Understand that your dopamine system has the capacity to keep you invigorated and concentrated as long as you embrace the practice of self-reward.

Conclusion

Success is an intricate tapestry woven with dedication, focus, and the ability to surmount challenges. With a deep comprehension of the dopamine-driven mechanisms within our brain, we can navigate the path to success more effectively. Embrace the initial phases of agitation and stress as essential components of your journey, and hone the skill of rewarding yourself internally for your relentless efforts. In doing so, you’ll unlock an infinite reservoir of vigor and determination to propel you forward on your quest for success.

A less-known principle is the Law of the Weakest Link. It is a phenomenon that suggests the overall performance of a group or team is limited by the performance of its lowest-performing members. The concept of the Law of the Weakest Link has been studied in various contexts, from sports teams to corporate teams to academic research teams. In each case, the results have been similar: the weakest performer in a group can drag down the overall performance of the team.

One study conducted by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University found that the performance of a team is most strongly influenced by the performance of its lowest-performing member. The study involved teams of four people working on a computer-based task, and the researchers found that when one member of the team performed poorly, the overall performance of the team suffered.

The Law of the Weakest Link can have several causes. One possible explanation is that the lower-performing member of the team can create a bottleneck in the workflow, slowing down the entire team. Another possibility is that the lower-performing member can create a sense of complacency among the other team members, leading them to reduce their own effort and performance.

The Law of the Weakest Link can have serious consequences for teams and organizations. If the performance of one member is consistently below par, it can lead to frustration and demotivation among the other team members. It can also create a sense of unfairness and resentment if the lower-performing member is not held accountable for their poor performance. This problem is exacerbated when the weakest link is part of a management team, and its consequences are not only felt in the management team but also in the organization below that individual team member.

In some way, all three laws reinforce themselves. The Peter Principle often explains how that individual got to that level. The Pareto Principle explains the exponential consequences of an individual in the management team. And finally, the Law of the Weakest Link explains the degradation of the management team’s performance and the different teams working with each other.

So, what can be done to address the Law of the Weakest Link? One possible solution is to provide additional training and support to the lower-performing member to help them improve their performance. In my opinion, this should always be the first step, but it cannot go on indefinitely. Another approach is to adjust the team’s structure or responsibilities to minimize the impact of the weaker member.

It’s also important for CEOs, department heads, and team leaders to recognize the impact of the Law of the Weakest Link and take steps to address it. This can include setting clear expectations and goals for each team member, providing regular feedback and coaching, and holding team members accountable for their performance.

In conclusion, the Law of the Weakest Link is a real phenomenon that can have significant consequences for team and organizational performance. By understanding the impact of the weakest link, team leaders can take steps to address it and move their teams to a higher level of performance. It is crucial to address this issue to prevent a dysfunctional team that degrades to the level of the lowest performer.

Having been involved in 3G, 4G, 5G, IOT, Cloud Computing, VR, and Blockchain, and now dipping my toes in AI, maybe it’s time to think about passion in a more profound way. Here are some tips that I found to be useful in finding my real passion, which might be beneficial to you as well:

1. Pay attention to what engages you: Notice what activities, topics, or projects capture your attention and keep you engaged. Research has shown that when people engage in activities that they find personally meaningful and challenging, they experience a state of “flow,” characterized by deep concentration, enjoyment, and a sense of accomplishment. Pay attention to what makes you feel this way and explore further in that area, as Jordan Peterson suggests.
2. Identify your strengths: Another approach to finding your passion is to identify your strengths and build on them. Research has shown that when people use their strengths in their daily lives, they experience higher levels of well-being, engagement, and productivity. Take a strengths assessment or reflect on what you enjoy doing and are naturally good at, as Jordan Peterson advises.
3. Experiment and explore: Don’t be afraid to try new things and explore different areas, as Jordan Peterson recommends. Research has shown that people who engage in diverse experiences and interests are more likely to find their passion and experience greater well-being. Set aside time to explore different hobbies, take classes, or attend events in areas that interest you.
4. Reflect on your values: Passion is often linked to a sense of purpose and meaning in life, as Jordan Peterson emphasizes. Take time to reflect on your values and what matters most to you. Research has shown that when people align their passions with their values, they experience greater motivation and satisfaction.
5. Take responsibility for your life: Taking responsibility for one’s life is essential to finding and pursuing a meaningful passion. This involves being honest about your strengths and weaknesses, setting goals, and taking action towards them.
6. Embrace your individuality: Embracing your individuality is key to finding a fulfilling passion, as Peterson argues. Rather than trying to fit into societal expectations, embrace your unique talents and interests.
7. Be open to new experiences: Being open to new experiences and taking risks can help individuals discover their passions, as Jordan Peterson suggests. Try new things, explore different interests, and take on challenges that may be outside of your comfort zone.

Finding your real passion takes time and effort, but research shows it is worth it. It has been about 10 years since I last thought about it. By following Jeff Bezos’ and Jordan Peterson’s advice, avoiding the hot passion of the day, pursuing what is meaningful and genuine to yourself, and being open to new experiences, you too can discover what truly matters to you and build a fulfilling life around it.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is a living legend, and not just because of his impressive physique or successful film career. He is also an accomplished entrepreneur, philanthropist, and politician. But perhaps what sets him apart from others is his powerful message of motivation and inspiration.

In a famous 5-point motivation speech, Schwarzenegger shared some valuable lessons that can help us all achieve our goals and reach our full potential. Let’s take a closer look at each of these five points.

Firstly, Schwarzenegger emphasizes the importance of having a clear vision of what you want to achieve in life. As an executive and entrepreneur, I can certainly attest to the value of a clear vision that helps you stay focused, motivated, and committed to achieving your goals, no matter how challenging they may seem. So take some time to define your goals and create a clear vision of what you want to achieve.

Secondly, Schwarzenegger encourages us to think big and not limit ourselves. As someone who has achieved a certain level of success, it’s important to continue pushing yourself and setting high goals. By thinking big, we can push ourselves to do more, achieve more, and reach our full potential. So don’t be afraid to dream big and aim high!

Thirdly, there will always be people who doubt your abilities and try to bring you down. Schwarzenegger advises us to ignore the naysayers and stay focused on our goals. We all know that staying positive, believing in yourself, and focusing on your goals are essential for overcoming any obstacle that comes your way. But it is not always easy, whatever your age.

Fourthly, Schwarzenegger emphasizes the importance of hard work and dedication. He believes that success comes from putting in the time and effort to achieve our goals. As someone who has worked hard to get where I am today, I know that hard work and dedication are essential for achieving success. So, whether it’s starting early, finishing late or taking on new challenges, I am always trying to put in the effort required to achieve my goals.

Finally, Schwarzenegger encourages us to give back to our communities and help others achieve their goals. Whether it’s through mentoring, volunteering, or donating to charity, we can all make a positive impact on the lives of others.

In conclusion, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 5-point motivation speech is a powerful message that reminds us of the importance of vision, ambition, hard work, and giving back. As someone at 50 who still believes his best work is yet to come, I find his message particularly inspiring and motivating. Let’s take inspiration from the Terminator himself and keep working towards our dreams!

Setting goals is something that I never learned in school. Somehow it was never addressed. Even in the different companies that I worked for, the yearly strategy and goal-setting process was often more of a mandatory exercise instead of a real tool. This, however, does not mean that I have not experienced what setting goals and especially a specific focus on the process to get to that goal can do for your sport, your career, and even your quality of life.

It is important to understand that both setting goals and focusing on the process are important for achieving success. Setting goals provides direction and motivation. Having a clear goal in mind can help you focus your attention and effort, and give you a sense of purpose and direction. Goals can also help you measure progress and provide a sense of accomplishment when they are achieved.

However, it’s important to remember that goals are just the end result of a process. Focusing solely on the outcome can be stressful and counterproductive. Instead, it’s important to focus on the process of achieving the goal, which involves taking action and making progress toward the goal. The process is where the real work happens, and it’s what ultimately leads to success.

Here are some tips I learned for finding a balance between setting goals and focusing on the process:

1. Set specific goals that are aligned with your values and interests, but also focus on the actions you need to take to achieve them. For example, if your goal is to finish a 100km trail race, make sure you have a specific plan of action, such as increasing your weekly mileage, incorporating strength training, and practicing nutrition and hydration strategies. By focusing on the process of achieving your goal, you’ll be more likely to stay motivated and on track.
2. Break down your goals into smaller, more manageable steps that are achievable and realistic. Breaking down your goals into smaller, more manageable steps can help you stay focused on the process of achieving your goals. This can also help you avoid feeling overwhelmed or discouraged by the size or difficulty of your goals. For example, to prepare for your trail race, break it down into smaller steps such as running a certain distance on specific terrain each week, practicing your nutrition and hydration strategies during your long runs, and working on your mental toughness through meditation or visualization exercises.
3. Focus on the process of taking action, rather than just the end result. Focusing on the process of taking action can help you stay motivated and focused on your goals, rather than getting bogged down by the potential obstacles or setbacks you might face. By focusing on the process, you’ll be more likely to enjoy the journey and stay committed to your goals. For example, if your goal is to finish your 100km+ challenge, focus on the process of training and improving your running skills, rather than just the end result of crossing the finish line.
4. Celebrate your progress and small victories along the way, rather than just focusing on the end goal. Celebrating your progress and small victories along the way can help you stay motivated and encouraged as you work toward your goals. This can also help you stay focused on the process of achieving your goals, rather than just the end result. For example, celebrate each milestone along the way, such as completing your first 50km race or achieving a new personal best time on a difficult trail.
5. Be flexible and willing to adjust your goals and processes as needed based on your progress and feedback, especially when it comes to long-distance trail running. This means being open to trying new things, being willing to adjust your timeline or expectations, and being willing to learn from your mistakes and setbacks. For example, if you find that your original training plan isn’t working, be willing to adjust your approach. Perhaps you need to try a different type of trail or terrain or incorporate more strength training into your routine. By being flexible and willing to adjust, you’ll be more likely to achieve your goal of completing a 100km race and stay motivated along the way.

Remember, the path to success is rarely a straight line, so it’s important to be adaptable and willing to make changes as needed.

If you are planning out your goals in this way, tell us in the comments!

This Delta variant gives you as an individual double the chance of ending up in the hospital compared to the Alpha variant according to an article in the Lancet. This risk increases when other co-morbidities exist but the latest data in the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also show an actual increase in COVID-19-related hospitalisations for all age groups. Hospitalised adults aged 18–49 account for the largest increase. The role of co-morbidities seems to be less of a factor with the Delta variant and the fact of being vaccinated or not is now the main driver.

This makes it all very clear that in a Delta variant environment, not being vaccinated is not ideal. So COVID-19 caught up with me. It started with chills, followed by a slight fever, which evolved into a high fever and weird fever dreams where I had the feeling that I was fighting to breathe. It was as if my subconscious was warning me for what was to come. When the fever broke after more than a week, I had two good days, where I was eating somewhat decently. One disturbing factor was that I had more and more problems getting up the stairs and needed to take a break midway.

This situation deteriorated fast after that and then the struggle to get me in hospital started. The country suffers heavily from COVID at the moment and hospital beds are a scares good. Bu,t I was lucky and ended up in a public hospital outside of the capital as we were staying there at that moment. At that point, I desperately needed oxygen as even a few steps were getting tough. This although I am perfectly healthy and work out multiple times a week with weights, running and Muay Thai.

The use of oxygen is recommended from SpO2 <92% according to Covid-19 treatment guidelines by the US National Institute of Health. When I started my treatment I was as low as SpO2 88%. After a week of treatment, I was at SpO2 95% with oxygen supplementation. According to the same guidance, oxygen supplementation above 96% can have detrimental effects. So, I did dial it down to the absolute minimum but still got some relief. In a developing country, you also have certain freedom about your treatment. I switched it off completely, in alignment with the doctor, three days before leaving the hospital. All in all, I had severe symptoms for close to 3 weeks, of which I spend 12 days in the hospital.

Which medication did I get for COVI-19?

When I came in, I could barely walk some steps and walking upstairs was basically out of the question. So whatever meds they gave me, I just took it. I never even looked at it or was even interested. A lack of oxygen makes you focus on other, more important things. After some days, I did some analysis. The treatment I received for Covid-19:

• Dexamethasone (via injections, 2 x day for ten days)
• Prednisolone (first six days is my estimation)
• Favipiravir (specifically for Covid 19 Pneumonia, my estimate is I got this for 6–8 days)
• Acetylcysteine (antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and immune-modulating)

I also received anti-nausea and sleeping tablets as also pain killers but those I did not take.

Especially the first two steroid-based protocols are heavy drugs. Dexamethasone is advised against in the case of light Covid-19 treatments and is recommended only for more serious COVID-19 cases. This drug also caused some side effects with which I am still struggling. I suffer currently from insomnia. Also, I experience blurry eyesight. Both are well-known side-effects of this specific drug. Both effects are improving.

During this whole period, I have only spoken to the doctor three times over the phone. I have never seen him. The only people coming to the room were nurses in heavy protective gear, which barely spoke English. 2 times/day I had to provide temperature, oxygen level and blood pressure and info on my stool. This I had to send via a local app to the doctor. Next to that, I got every two days some blood work done and I ended up 3 times under an x-ray during my stay. I did get scared that at some point I would start to emit light, as it was not the most modern equipment. But, to compensate for that I received amazing food. Every day salads, fruit, kombucha combined with excellent meat/chicken or pork. No complaints there. I also got some ideas on how to improve the processes in the hospital by adding blockchain, 3rd party providers and other services. More about that maybe in some later posts.

When I was discharged I had however a lot of questions for which I did not get an answer.

How long do you need to be in isolation after having Covid-19?

When I got discharged, the nurses still treated me as heavily contagious, which was a bit of a surprise. I thought I was cured and ready to go. I was brought however to our rental villa with a police car with two policemen in full PE gear. It got funny when one of them had to go to the local supermarket to ask for directions. A consequence of all of this was that the whole street knew that I was home and still heavily contagious. At least according to my guest countries rules and regulations.

It appeared the discharge paper said I still needed to isolate for 14 days after my discharge. This goes against all guidance from the WHO, CDC or any modern country. The WHO has a guidance about this topic that states:

“Criteria for discharging patients from isolation (i.e., discontinuing transmission-based precautions) without requiring retesting:

• For symptomatic patients: 10 days after symptom onset, plus at least 3 additional days without symptoms (including without fever and respiratory symptoms)
• For asymptomatic cases: 10 days after a positive test for SARS-CoV-2

My last symptoms (low oxygen) were 3 days before my discharge. I would also reach 20 days after my first symptoms, which are the criteria used in some other countries. This could not be discussed. These are the local rules on standard documents, which every patient receives. so I am at the moment in isolation as I am writing this.

How to improve your SpO2 (oxygenation level) while still in hospital and after your discharge?

When you are in hospital and your brain starts working again because the oxygen level comes back to a minimum level you have a lot of questions. Remember that I could not get up the stairs without taking a break when I came in. Combine this with the fact that sports have always been extremely important for me. So I started some research while still in my hospital bed. Also, on this, I received no guidance from the medical staff. But again, language problems are a real issue as I unfortunately also do not speak the local language.

I was surprised how little COVID-19 specific recovery info is available on the internet. I start to believe that these days we only seem to write about vaccines and some controversial treatments like Ivermectin (which I did not get). General info about what you need in aftercare, and specifically for your recovery is very limited.

I was still in the 94–96% SpO2 level at that point and wanted to improve this as soon as possible. Also because I wanted to limit my time on this oxygen ventilator. Anytime you have a device/supplement taking over from your body, it can diminish your natural capacity has always been my philosophy.

One of the best sources I found is an article by John Hopkins Medicine authored by Johns Hopkins physical therapist Peiting Lien.

“Working toward recovery starts basic: with a focus on breathing,” says Peiting Lien in this article. “Deep breathing can help restore diaphragm function and increase lung capacity. The goal is to build up the ability to breathe deeply during any activity, not just while at rest,” notes Lien.

She also indicates that deep breathing exercises can also lessen feelings of anxiety and stress, which are normal for someone who experienced severe symptoms or was admitted to a hospital. Sleep quality may also improve with these types of breathing exercises which would be beneficial for my insomnia.

I am not describing the breathing protocol, as it is impossible to do a better job than the author. You can find it in the link and I recommend it greatly:

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-recovery-breathing-exercises

The program has 4 phases that you go through sequentially, and I was relieved I did not have any issues running through them. So the next thing I did was doing a set of 20 air squats and some shadowboxing in the room. I did not need extra oxygen. Now, at home, I have a kettlebell that I use for 15–20 min programs. In normal times, these programs take 10 minutes. I also have one light run behind me on an empty beach in the early morning, keeping as close to isolation as possible with nobody coming closer than 20 meters. The run did cause an issue of quite heavy fatigue, which forced me to rest for a couple of days. This brings me to the point of Long Covid, which I will discuss next.

Overall I am starting my second week since my discharge, and I am up to 97–98 % SpO2 what is encouraging. After a couple of days rest (4), combined with some long walks with the family, I picked up my running again today. It went already better.

How do I make sure my immune system recovers from COVID-19 Pneumonia and I avoid or fight Long COVID-19?

During my quest for information, I came across research about Long Covid-19. The persistence of symptoms beyond one month. At the time of this publication in the Lancet, it went up to 6–7 months and counting.

The most frequent symptoms after month 6 were fatigue, post-exertional malaise (the worsening of symptoms following even minor physical or mental exertion), and cognitive dysfunction. 85.9% of participants in the research experienced relapses, primarily triggered by exercise, physical or mental activity, and stress. 86.7% of unrecovered respondents were experiencing fatigue at the time of the survey, compared to 44.7% of recovered respondents. 45.2% required a reduced work schedule compared to pre-illness, and an additional 22.3% were not working at the time of the survey due to illness. Cognitive dysfunction or memory issues were common across all age groups (~88%).

According to this article in Nature, “more than one in 10 people who became infected with SARS-CoV-2 have gone on to get long COVID. If the UK prevalence is applicable elsewhere, more than 16 million people worldwide.” An again, I seem to be in the most vulnerable age category “long COVID is most common in middle-aged people. It is less common in younger people and older people”

What is again missing in this literature is how to avoid Long Covid-19 or how to strengthen your immune system to fight it. The Nature article highlights only that at this moment, the options for treatment are limited because the disorder is so poorly understood. Some research for treatment is ongoing, but it is all focused on medication.

“Biotechnology company PureTech Health in Boston, Massachusetts, announced last December that it was starting a clinical trial of deupirfenidone, an anti-fibrotic and anti-inflammatory agent that it has developed. Results are expected in the second half of 2021. In the United Kingdom, intensive-care specialist Charlotte Summers at the University of Cambridge and her colleagues have launched a study called HEAL-COVID, which aims to prevent long COVID from taking hold. Participants who have been hospitalized with COVID-19 will be given one of two drugs after being discharged: apixaban, an anticoagulant that might reduce the risk of dangerous blood clots; and atorvastatin, an anti-inflammatory.”

I do not want to wait for all this. I went looking for supplements that have some research indicating they are beneficial for recovery after Covid-19. I limit myself to the three supplements that get mentioned in several popular articles on the internet. However, when you dig deeper and start checking the medical literature and research papers, the situation changes:

• Vitamine C: A study in the Nutrition Journal indicates that 82% of severe ill Covid-19 patients had a Vitamin C deficiency. Vitamin C is then also a subject of interest, also due to its proven effect in avoiding sepsis and ARDS and for people who do heavy physical exercises like marathon runners. For now, there is however no proven connection between Vitamin C and avoiding or recovering from Covid 19. I take it temporarily, based on a suspected shortage and the plan to increase my physical exercise level.
• Zinc: There are well-studied beneficial effects of zinc on the immune system. Zinc is also an anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative stress agent, relevant to some severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms. Zinc deficiency is also common worldwide. Lifestyle choices and preexisting conditions alone can result in zinc deficiency. Zinc is being considered a prophylactic or adjunct therapy for COVID-19, with 12 clinical trials underway, highlighting the relevance of this trace element for global pandemics. But again, no definite outcome. I started taking it. I am also still investigating this element further.
• Vitamin D3: based on the National Institute of Health, there is no sufficient evidence to recommend either for or against the use of vitamin D for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. I do take it based on smaller studies that indicate there is a potential link between vitamin D3 and the immune system as indicated in The Lancet (PDF: https://www.thelancet.com/article/S2352-3964(18)30141-5/pdf ) Unfortunately, also for this topic overall studies are still inconclusive. I see this also as just a temporary supplement.

Conclusive evidence is lacking for all three, but there are some positive developments or alternative studies with beneficial effects. Unfortunately, nothing is directly related to the recovery of COVID-19. If any reader has more information on these or other supplements that have their base in scientific studies for assisting in the recovery of COVID-19, please reach out.

Should I go for vaccination after having Covid?

Also on this topic, I received no information from the medical staff. When researching it, there also does not seem to be a clear answer.

The CDC in the US states in their guidance that you should be vaccinated after having Covid. The reason they give is that experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19. On the same internet page they however also state that they don’t know how long protection lasts for those who are vaccinated. They also refer to studies, which have shown that vaccination provides a strong boost in protection in people who have recovered from COVID-19. There is however no reference to any of those studies. I start to understand why people in the US have lost trust in the CDC.

Doing my research, I got some more clarity from a study published in Nature. This paper states that after Covid, you are protected for 6–12 months. However, if you get one dose of one of the mRNA vaccines, your neutralization rate for the virus goes up significantly. Without vaccination, you also seem to become more susceptible to the different variants after 6 months. This is not the case once vaccinated.

“Compared with unvaccinated participants, those who had received at least 1 dose had higher plasma anti-RBD antibodies and a nearly 50-fold increase in neutralizing activity.” According to Nussenzweig the main researcher of the study, vaccination boosts the memory antibodies that develop after infection. As a summary, Nussenzweig predicted that variants will not cause serious illness in most people who have recovered from COVID-19. Nevertheless, he said, they should be vaccinated “because they become bulletproof when they do so.”

This leaves me again a bit in Limbo. At the moment, I am mentally not ready to receive the vaccine and potentially get sick again. My body needs to strengthen. But, if the mRNA vaccines become available in this country, I am strongly considering getting that shot by the end of the year. This would be within the window of 6 months, a window where I seem to be ok.

Summary

My main goal now is to build up my immune system. All focus is on healthy food, enough sleep and lots of physical activity. I will also keep taking my vitamins for some weeks and keep a close eye on the developing science. I am not sure yet if I escaped this Long Covid threat after my 1st run. Some hard sessions of Muay Thai in the coming weeks combined with kettlebell and sprint training will provide an answer for that.

I feel I am at 70–80% but this is also a consequence of being in bed for three weeks. A period where I did no more than five steps at a time. The following weeks will provide a much more realistic picture.

Related to my cognitive capability, I am not sure if you really can evaluate your capabilities. I seem to be doing ok. I started work again and am handling multiple projects in parallel. I even feel more focused than before. The hospital rest, in combination with good food and a complete shut down of work for almost 2 weeks do seem to have had a positive effect. I do hope I can maintain this. Some serious changes in my life will be made to make sure I can.

The following weeks will show if I can leave this COVID-19 behind me. I am confident I can. It was however a life-changing experience. For a person who was always super healthy and never spent a day in a hospital, this was a serious wake-up call. Family and friends became immediately more important and strangely also the need for clarity and focus in life and business. More about that later.

For more info and additional articles: http://the-lifelong-athlete.com/

By Jurgen Thoelen (Instagram)

The initial article: “Belgian-Dutch Study: Why in times of COVID-19 you should not walk/run/bike close behind each other.” created a big interest and reached more than 9.1 million people. As with any article that gathers such a massive audience, there were questions for more details.

The investigators created now a “Questions and Answers” document that answers the majority of these questions. Below you can find an unedited, original transcript of this document. The reason I publish it here is, so it can potentially also reach a larger audience and clarify any open points.

If you would rather want to check the original document then you can do that here. At that page, you can also find the Preprint of the original study if you have not yet checked it.

As always, when you have comments, be respectful.

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

“Towards aerodynamically equivalent COVID‐19 1.5m social distancing for walking and running”

Questions and Answers

Authors: Bert Blocken, (b.j.e.blocken@tue.nl), Thierry Marchal

Question 1: What was the objective of the study?

The starting point was the 1.5 m (or in some countries 2.0 m or 6 ft) social distance that is recommended to be kept between two people standing still to avoid respiratory droplets of person A reaching person B. It is common sense that when person A exhales droplets and person B moves forwards, person B can move into the droplet cloud exhaled by person A. So people movement can affect droplet exposure. The objective of this study therefore was to find out to which extent the social distance of 1.5 m is enough or not for two people walking, running, cycling in each other’s vicinity. And if not, how it should be adjusted to yield a similar (non‐)droplet exposure risk as for the case of 1.5 m with two people standing still.

Question 2: What it meant by “aerodynamically equivalent social distance” for walking, running, cycling?

The standard social distance is 1.5 m, 2 m or 6 ft (depending on the country). The aerodynamically equivalent social distance is the social distance that two persons need to maintain when walking/running/cycling to have the same level of (non‐)droplet exposure risk as in the case of 1.5 m, 2 m or 6 ft for two persons standing still and facing each other.

Question 3: What are the main findings of this study?

First, is was found that the droplets (range 40 mm — 200 mm) exhaled by a moving person are mainly entrained in the slipstream (wake) behind this person. Second, in absence of strong wind, the equivalent social distance for walking/running/cycling can remain 1.5 m (or 2 m or 6 ft) if the two persons are moving side‐by‐side or in a staggered formation. However, if person B is positioned in the slipstream (or wake) of person A, this person can be exposed to the droplets emitted by person A. Then the equivalent social distances are: 5 m for walking fast (4 km/h), 10 m for running fast (14.4 km/h), 20 m for cycling fast (30 km/h). The social distance to be kept when in the slipstream increases with increasing speed of person B.

Question 4: What are the virological, medical or epidemiological conclusions from your study?

None. This study does not draw any conclusions on the infection risk associated with particular social distances or droplet exposure. We are sharing these results with healthcare authorities and remain at their disposal for further information. It is obvious that no or reduced droplet exposure is better than larger droplet exposure. Therefore, the adjusted and equivalent social distances are to be preferred over the single value of 1.5 m.

Question 5: Why is it important to have these updated and larger social distances in walking, running and cycling?

These distances should not be larger than 1.5 m, except when person B is in the slipstream of person A. Then, the larger social distances are not only common sense but also a matter of consistency. If one now argues that this distance when moving fast (walking, running, cycling) should not be larger than 1.5 m, this logically implies that the 1.5 m when standing still and talking is also too large — which is not the case, as shown by the vast literature since 2002 on travel distance of drops. Note that organizations like CDC (Center for Disease, Control and Prevention) are asking for additional evidence and technology to give better recommendations in the future.

Question 6: What is the value of this study?

The value of this study is not to indicate that person B moving closely behind person A can inhale the droplets emitted by person A. That is common sense for most people with a minimum fluid dynamics background and/or intuition. The value of this study is to indicate where exhaled droplets go (i.e. in the slipstream) and which specific social distances should be used in walking/running/cycling to be equivalent to 1.5 m standing still.

Question 7: Was this study only done by engineers and not by medical experts?

Not really. The study was done by four engineers (2 x civil, mechanical, aeronautical) but one of these, Thierry Marchal, is also seen as a top medical expert in simulation, formally a e‐Health expert to EU authorities, leader of Avicenna Alliance and therefore spokesperson for the discussion with various authorities ( https://youtu.be/Sig5Q7rMFfY ). The medical world is moving towards in silico (computer model) to complement in vitro and in vivo data. These models have been reviewed by other experts such as Marc Horner, co‐author of the V&V 40 standard and presented to the US healthcare authorities before sharing them publicly. The medical world is now moving fast towards computer models. Therefore our study fits in these new developments.

Question 8: Should you not have involved virologists, epidemiologists and medical experts?

Not for the scope of this particular study. This study is an aerodynamics study, not a virology study. The only two facts we adopt from virology are two basic and well‐established facts: (1) Respiratory droplets are an effective way of transferring this type of viruses (well‐established in scientific literature); (2) It is better to not be exposed to other people’s saliva droplets than to be exposed to them (common sense).

Question 9: Does it make sense that mostly engineers performed this study?

The role of civil and mechanical engineers in current and previous SARS epidemics should not be underestimated. Engineers have been heavily involved in SARS since the outbreak in 2002 in Asia because the transfer of droplets in the indoor air in hospitals and houses is a key civil and mechanical engineering expertise. Thousands of papers on this topic have been published by civil and mechanical engineers in the peer reviewed literature. Note that the 1.5 m social distance has been defined in the past decades based on studies by engineers, not medical professionals. Engineering is now an important part of all biomedical and pharmaceutical research as illustrated by the fast and growing success of biomedical engineers.

Question 10: Why did you choose to not follow the standard academic procedure to first get the study peer reviewed and only announce results in the media later?

This is an exceptional situation. Even the extremely careful FDA (Food and Drug Administration) has wisely adjusted some guidance to ensure the rapid approval of any device or treatment / vaccine related to COVID‐19 (e.g. Guidance document for ventilators and accessories) without compromising patient safety. Time matters a lot here. So it is important to temporarily adjust processes to make sure new products are reviewed faster. Similarly here, once the results were properly validated, the priority was to share the results with the public to help reduce the risk of propagation of the COVID‐19; a few days later the scientific publication was shared in open access to allow all other scientists to review and challenge the approach and contribute to its future extension. The peer review publication will follow next. But we are not on the same time line when there is a pandemic storming the world. We thought that the priority was on people’s health.

If we follow the normal procedure, we would first write a research proposal. If we are lucky we receive funding to start within a year. Let us say we can produce all results in one day (never happens). Then we write the article in one day (nearly impossible) and submit for peer review. In our field, this can take months, e.g. 6. So 1.5 years from now we have our peer‐reviewed paper. Should we only then communicate to the public, we do not think this would be ethical. We made the choice to do validate our results first, then share the output publicly, before submitting the article for peer review. Not the most comfortable order for us, for multiple reasons, because of no funding, some aggressive and unjustified criticism, more debate on the format than on the study, etc. It appeared more important to us to share this precaution advice to the public.

Note that not following the normal procedure is not so exceptional, it happens frequently in scientific research. Scientists do this all the time, in the form of mass meetings, where often also press is present. These are called scientific conferences and thousands of these events are organized every year world‐ wide. There, often research is presented without publication at all or where no peer review or no decent peer review is performed for the conference publications…

Of course, we will have our study peer reviewed, because we wish to publish it in a journal, but that did not seem most urgent to us now, certainly because the study confirms common sense and adhering to the guidelines of the study cannot have harmful consequences.

Question 11: Don’t you think your advice is dangerous, especially given the study is not yet peer reviewed?

This is not a study related to a treatment. There is no risk in following our guidelines. This is not a situation that can be compared to advising people to take certain medicine that has been insufficiently tested and that can have adverse health effects. There are no adverse effects for you to walk, run or cycle in staggered arrangement instead of inline, except… increased air resistance. We believe that in this exceptional situation increased air resistance should be preferred over potential health risks.

Question 12: One could argue that you are not medical experts and that your guidelines cannot be considered as medical guidance.

The first part is not really correct. Thierry Marchal is not only an engineer but also a top medical expert in simulation, formally a eHealth expert to EU authorities, leader of Avicenna Alliance and therefore spokesperson for the discussion with various authorities (https://youtu.be/Sig5Q7rMFfY).

We do not give medical guidance. We report aerodynamic results and suggest guidance in terms of exposure to droplets. We do not draw conclusions in terms of infection risk. This study did trigger an interest from quite some virologists and epidemiologists, which can lead to future collaboration where experts of different disciplines are joining forces.

Question 13: Did you have sufficient past performance to execute this type of study with high quality?

The main investigator, Bert Blocken, has been studying droplets (of micrometer to millimeter sizes) in airflow for more than 20 years, and airflow around cyclists and runners for more than 15 years.

The other lead investigator, Thierry Marchal, has been leading the healthcare activity of a leading simulation company for 14 years and working closely with US and EU authorities for over 5 years, relying on his vast ecosystem to continuously comment on new results and challenge the hypotheses.

Question 14: Should all people that want to exercise outdoors start wearing masks?

That is not unwise if people want to move very closely behind each other. However, there are serious concerns about the shortage of masks and professional masks should primarily be reserved for the healthcare workers. Assuming that masks are not strictly needed when talking at 1.5 m distance, if people follow our aerodynamic recommendations and the updated equivalent social distances when walking/running/cycling in the slipstream, then also in those cases masks would not be strictly needed.

Question 15: Are there other simple rules that people should consider?

When there is substantial cross‐wind, the suggestion to stay out of the slipstream remains valid. This means that it is advised to not walk/run/cycle directly behind others but offset to the upwind side. When overtaking a person, be kind to this person and only when you have reached a certain distance from this person (5 m when this person is walking, 10 m for running, up to 20 m for cycling), move back on the same straight line as this person.

Question 16: How you do react to some media that have given negative feedback on this study?

It is always advisable to challenge any results, question the hypotheses and consult other experts in the field to collect different opinions. We were however surprised by some personal attacks or judgements on the format of the study rather than discussing the content itself or its conclusions. Not contacting the key researchers for further information and constructively challenging them or when seeking a second opinion on this aerodynamics modeling, asking persons that do not have proper aerodynamics expertise, often leads to embarrassing situations and useless polemics.

About the study not being complete: no scientific study is ever complete. There is an infinite number of combinations of runner body geometry, wind speed, wind direction, turbulence, droplet size, relative humidity, etc. We chose to start from the most basic choices: two identical runners, no external wind, typical droplet size from literature, etc. as this situation is not only the most common but could also be a worst case scenario. Evidently further work is needed considering different values for these parameters. We expect that various authorities will be monitoring these future studies once this wave of COVID‐19 is over to better understand these phenomena so that we would be ready for a likely future pandemic.

Question 17: Should people not decide to stop exercising outside?

No. The crisis is very large and mental and physical health are important and walking, running and cycling do contribute to both mental and physical health. Our study is intended to indicate how social distancing should be done in those situations. From the beginning, the World Health Organization WHO and the CDC have recommended to keep a distance of at least 1 m or 2 m, acknowledging that this is not always possible especially in public transportation. We are obviously not these prestigious organizations but we are providing recommendations using reliable results to minimize the risk of contamination acknowledging that they cannot always been followed.

‐‐‐ END OF DOCUMENT ‐‐‐

For more original content, please check: http://the-lifelong-athlete.com/

The sales of alcohol on online platforms are going up in these times of lockdown (1) and personally, I do enjoy a beer after my run or High Intensity Repeat Training (HIRT). I was however born in Belgium and we have without a doubt some of the best beers in the world so maybe I am biased. And maybe not everyone can relate, but for those of us who do, the effect is real: after working out on a hot day beer tastes like a drink of the gods.

I decided to do some research to check if beer is really a good alternative for more traditional sports drinks, water or that cold glass of chocolate milk. As recently there has been some discussion that drinking chocolate milk after a hard workout is a great way to help you recover.

Logically, you’d expect water to be the beverage you want most. But I do know quite a few people who long for that beer. Especially after long endurance efforts. Why is this? Well, it’s partly psychological: If you already enjoy a beer from time to time, you probably associate beer with happy occasions. And finishing a hard race, workout or run presents a fantastic opportunity to celebrate. During these stressing times that beer maybe somehow reminds you of better times.

But there’s even more to it. In fact, there’s a scientific reason why you prefer it over water. A 2016 study from the Monell Chemical Sciences Center in Philadelphia (2) found that cold and carbonated beverages quench your thirst more effectively than flat, room-temperature beverages. So when choosing between that lukewarm bottle of water and that cold pint the choice is made fast.

The reason is that these two qualities, cold and carbonated, combine to make your body aware that you’re filling it with liquids, says the study’s co-author, Paul Breslin, PhD. Your 37-degree stomach goes on a high alert when you fill it with a 5-degree beverage. And carbon dioxide — the source of beer’s bubbles — adds a biting sensation, which causes harmless irritation as it passes the tissues in your mouth and throat. “That’s a hyper-signal that you’re filling up your stomach,” says Breslin.

But could a real, alcoholic brew really be a viable workout recovery drink?

The paradox here is that beer is actually less hydrating than water. It contains carbohydrates, which displace a small amount of H2O, and alcohol, which acts as a diuretic. But the combination of ice-cold temps and effervescent bubbles make it indeed feel like the ultimate thirst-quencher. This is especially true for lagers, which are highly carbonated and designed to be served super cold.

A 2014 research paper (3) is however clear. They “conclude that alcohol ingestion suppresses the anabolic response in skeletal muscle and may therefore impair recovery and adaptation to training and/or subsequent performance”. There was some hope in a 2014 academic report (4) that notes that alcohol can inhibit muscle growth and recovery, but at levels lower than 1 gram of booze per 2 kg of body weight, no such effects are likely. A standard 5 % beer delivers about 14 grams of alcohol per 33-cl serving, so an 80-kg person can handle nearly 3.5 cans of beer before recovery suffers. But this study was later retracted so we have basically no real evidence to justify that beer. The general consensus seems to be it does impact recovery.

More importantly, when we look at binge drinking, 4 or 5 drinks or more, it is clear that this can also disrupt the body’s “ability to mount an adequate immune response to a stressful situation, such as impeding a healthy response to the coronavirus (5). So in this study, the verdict is that 1–2 drinks/day would be ok.

So the overall conclusion is not really black and white but basically comes down to this. You can dink 1–2 beers/day related to not impacting your defence for COVID-19 but when you take intensive sports activities into account it is a clear no. It does seem that those sports beverages have a role to play when working out. They contain “carbohydrates and electrolytes to help maintain blood glucose concentration, provide fuel for muscles, and decrease the risk of dehydration and hyponatremia”. (6) Maybe you can still alternate with that chocolate drink but beer simply doesn’t seem to be a good idea.

What needs further investigation is alcohol-free alternatives which do not have the diuretic or immune impacting effects and also do not impact the immune system. At least as far as I know. So it not only feels like you are quenching your thirst, but your body is indeed also hydrated in a more optimal way. I think. Need to do some more research. Skol!

Sources:

1: https://www.cspdailynews.com/beverages/demand-alcohol-strong-amid-covid-19-outbreak
2: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/authors?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0162261
3: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0088384
4: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4056249/
5: https://www.loyolamedicine.org/news/binge-drinking-immune-young-adults
6: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19225360

Original article: http://the-lifelong-athlete.com/beer-after-workout

Note: Anyone with medical problems of any nature should see a doctor before starting a diet or an exercise program. Even if you have no health problems known to you, it is advisable to consult your doctor before making major changes in your lifestyle.

What is a safe distance when running, biking and walking during COVID-19 times? It is further than the typical 1–2 meter as prescribed in different countries!

Check also the Q&A with the Investigators: https://medium.com/@jurgenthoelen/why-in-times-of-covid-19-you-should-not-walk-run-bike-close-behind-each-other-follow-up-with-q-a-ca44e12cc54d

Edit 10/04/2020: a link to the preprint of the paper ‘Towards aerodynamically equivalent COVID19 1.5 m social distancing for walking and running’ was added in sources. The content of the article is not updated with any new info in the paper. Please read the paper for more, deeper info and raise respectful questions to the researcher if you feel the need.

Edit 21/04/2020: title of the article was slightly changed to bring it more in line with the content and to avoid confusion with those people who actually do not read the article but only the title. You can not be too precise.

In a lot of countries walking, biking and jogging are welcome activities in these times of COVID-19. However, it is important to note that you need to avoid each other's slipstream when doing these activities. This comes out of the result of a study by the KU Leuven (Belgium) and TU Eindhoven (Netherlands). (1)(2)(3)(4)

The typical social distancing rule which many countries apply between 1–2 meters seems effective when you are standing still inside or even outside with low wind. But when you go for a walk, run or bike ride you better be more careful. When someone during a run breathes, sneezes or coughs, those particles stay behind in the air. The person running behind you in the so-called slip-stream goes through this cloud of droplets.

The researchers came to this conclusion by simulating the occurrence of saliva particles of persons during movement (walking and running) and this from different positions (next to each other, diagonally behind each other and directly behind each other). Normally this type of modelling is used to improve the performance level of athletes as staying in each other air-stream is very effective. But when looking at COVID-19 the recommendation is to stay out of the slipstream according to the research.

The results of the test are made visible in a number of animations and visuals. The cloud of droplets left behind by a person is clearly visible. “People who sneeze or cough spread droplets with a bigger force, but also people who just breathe will leave particles behind”. The red dots on the image represent the biggest particles. These create the highest chance of contamination but also fall down faster. “But when running through that cloud they still can land on your clothing” according to Professor Bert Blocken.

Out of the simulations, it appears that social distancing plays less of a role for 2 people in a low wind environment when running/walking next to each other. The droplets land behind the duo. When you are positioned diagonally behind each other the risk is also smaller to catch the droplets of the lead runner. The risk of contamination is the biggest when people are just behind each other, in each other’s slipstream.

On the basis of these results the scientist advises that for walking the distance of people moving in the same direction in 1 line should be at least 4–5 meter, for running and slow biking it should be 10 meters and for hard biking at least 20 meters. Also, when passing someone it is advised to already be in different lane at a considerable distance e.g. 20 meters for biking.

This is definitely information I will be taking into account and it also puts in perspective the closing of busy parks etc. Perhaps the better way is just running in the street, on your own or at least with sufficient distance. Stay safe…

Check also the Q&A with the Investigators: https://medium.com/@jurgenthoelen/why-in-times-of-covid-19-you-should-not-walk-run-bike-close-behind-each-other-follow-up-with-q-a-ca44e12cc54d

(1): https://www.demorgen.be/nieuws/belgisch-onderzoek-fietsen-joggen-of-wandelen-doe-je-best-niet-achter-elkaar-in-tijden-van-corona~b60aece6/

(2): https://www.hln.be/wetenschap-planeet/wetenschap/belgisch-onderzoek-fietsen-joggen-of-wandelen-doe-je-best-niet-achter-elkaar-in-tijden-van-corona~a60aece6/

(3): http://www.urbanphysics.net/Social%20Distancing%20v20_White_Paper.pdf

(4): http://www.urbanphysics.net/COVID19_Aero_Paper.pdf

Original article: http://the-lifelong-athlete.com/run-during-coronavirus