Some of the BFR research has been done with a standard blood pressure cuff.
Mine is wide (8") which means generally a lower pressure can be used. A lot of the stuff I skim-read yesterday related to the materials of the cuffs, the width of the cuffs, and the considerations of it (how much pressure is needed, the tissue damage that can be done from the effort, etc.) and I don’t think I would use elastic materials or ad-hoc stuff. Thinner people might do better with it than my body likely would.
I read a lot about the heart aspects but I think since I have no issues with my heart itself, or blood pressure, blood consistency, blood composition, etc. – merely the birth defect that led to the heart valve replacement a few years ago – and given it would be impossible for me to do lower-body BFR as I could never find any reasonable cuff that would fit around one of my thighs – I am limited to arms anyway, and one at a time at that, so it’ll probably work out. It is contraindicated for a variety of issues, but the studies looking at heart response don’t show any problems (though one did mention that bi- and alt- had greater heart rate response than unilateral exercises) (another showed improvements in HRV).
The blood pressure cuffs only fully occlude blood flow if you pump them to the point where they do. I will actually need to get nearly-there for 20sec a few times, to move the edema persistently present in my upper arms, and then do the pressure. If I take blood pressure at the docs and they don’t do this it’s artificially high, but a few brief periods of pressure, cleared then redone, and then it’s fine. Just has to push the stuff out of the way.
I’m pretty sure I can use the combination of subjective perception, and the actual result (whether it causes anything to start going numb, etc.) to work out a compression without full occlusion. (I have more pain from BP cuff than most people due to edema/size, so full occlusion is acutely miserable for me compared to when I was leaner.) What % that may be, who knows, because I think it’ll just take some experimentation to come up with what seems reasonable.
Oh, back to the whole “older humans” thing: yes, of course hormonal response etc. is lower, but how much lower is an important issue. The quote didn’t just say it was lower it said: “With recent studies demonstrating that traditional high-intensity resistance exercise produces a smaller response or is incapable of stimulating muscle protein synthesis in older humans” I think it depends on the person. The BFR approach seems ideal for people working against some situation that makes traditional ideal-exercise difficult or dangerous or poorly-responsive, so it just seems to me that much “less response” or worse, is definitely one of those criteria that would make it worth investigating.
I do notice that so far there hasn’t been enough time/funding to get research on a solid variety of people including post-menopausal women vs. lots of co-eds and especially men. Only an issue since the response to a lot of things differs in that group vs. the latter.
Anyway, it will be an interesting experiment. I intend to begin this week to see if it’s possible given my body sitch and my limited materials. Thanks for the reference @Don_Q Nick! I’m amazed I had not read on this before, especially since some research overlaps with the WBV stuff which I make a point to look for somewhat ongoing.
Karim I know I sorta hijacked your journal in responding to him here, but well, here was where the conversation was, I bet you don’t mind. Hope you are having fun in your new challenging job.