Combat Arm from CSC

[Condottiere]

It's my opinion that athletic performance at the Olympian level is rather individual.

It would be more of a case that whether having prosthetic blades instead of original ankles, feet, and shins, enhance the running performance, and I'm inclined to think so, by an individual who has trained extensively with them.

Steel springs provide elasticity, that potentially can give an advantage during rapid movement.

Up one technological level, making the material smart could artificially increase that, without motorizing it.

Would these race winners, and record holders, be able to achieve such feats, if non amputated?

 

[Condottiere]

I also tend to think that doping is about as far as most athletes are willing to subject their bodies, currently, to increase performance, to the point of injecting drugs into their dongs, to increase wing area.

 

[swordtart]

It's my opinion that athletic performance at the Olympian level is rather individual.

It would be more of a case that whether having prosthetic blades instead of original ankles, feet, and shins, enhance the running performance, and I'm inclined to think so, by an individual who has trained extensively with them.

Steel springs provide elasticity, that potentially can give an advantage during rapid movement.

Up one technological level, making the material smart could artificially increase that, without motorizing it.

Would these race winners, and record holders, be able to achieve such feats, if non amputated?

I look forward to reading your peer reviewed paper.

 

[Condottiere]

I also think there is an inbuilt bias to permit disadvantaged athletes to participate in competitive events.

And as I mentioned above, the more advanced material technology progresses, the more that can be leveraged to create mechanical advantages.

What the steel springs allow is utilizing stored force to push forward, but lack of lateral flexibility would incur a penalty during a turn, but I rather doubt that for forward motion.

Compression as the leg hits the ground, plus, I assume, local gravity, recreates that stored energy.

 

[rinku]

Yes. The point being, that yes, there are some exceptional amputee runners who can match exceptional non-amputee runners, and maybe beat them, but the study drew the conclusion that overall, across all abilities, the blade prosthetics don't give any significant advantage over 400m. It may be worth noting that the Olympic Men's 400m record of 43.03 seconds was set in 2016, and winning times are commonly under 44 seconds; the Paralympic Men's T43 400m record is 45.39 seconds, set in 2011. So even with the blade runners ONLY competing against each other, at the highest level they're not beating the non-amputee runners. Those stats tend to back up the study's findings.

 

[hopsnbaer]

I thought that is what I had read in the past.

 

[Condottiere]

The basic question still would be, if a human runner had both his lower legs replaced by steel springs, would be be able to cover a distance faster than if he hadn't?

The enhanced part would be validified if the answer is yes.

 

[rinku]

The answer is: it appears to be very unlikey.

Potentially you could study para athletes that were competitive runners before they lost their legs (there will be some) and see if any of them have improved their times. But there will also be plenty of other factors to consider, especially if their post-accident training has been more intense or their motivation has changed. Some will have improved just by virtue of age - a 13 year old that lost their legs in a car crash would be expected to post much better times as a 23 year old with prosthetics. On the flip side, a 33 year old sprinter who loses their legs is unlikely to ever post better times.

 

[swordtart]

The basic question still would be, if a human runner had both his lower legs replaced by steel springs, would be be able to cover a distance faster than if he hadn't?

The enhanced part would be validified if the answer is yes.

The study covers that element by taking a holistic view. Having springy legs might improve certain stages in a run, but there will be other occasions where it negatively impacts. A spring can only store energy, it cannot generate it. You gain an ability to recycle kinetic energy more efficiently, but you lose lower leg muscles that can generate it*. The dynamics are different and whilst that could lead to advantage it could equally lead to disadvantage. With less muscle overall you are going to tire faster which impacts the amount of training you can doeven if it might not impact in the short duration if an event. Any applicability of studies in dynamics for able-bodied athletes will have to be interpreted meaning your coaches need to work harder to produce the same improvement vs coaches that train non-disabled athletes which means you will need more investment to get the same level of improvement.

The study abstracted that all out by measuring overall performance outcomes of able bodied athletes vs overall performance outcomes of athletes with prosthetics. The specific question it was resolving was whether athletes with currently permitted prosthetics have an advantage over athletes without, not whether a particular athlete would perform better before or after prosthesis. It was to provide evidence for a general ruling regarding the impact of prosthetics on the sport.

It is entirely possible that if a top athlete suffered injury then their tailored prosthetic might provide some marginal advantage, but so might a better running shoe, or a specific training regimen etc. Only if athletes with permitted prosthetics consistent out performed other athletes would the sport need to revise its regulations. The study was to show if that was the case presently, not to show if it would be possible in the future.

Performance in sports has improved significantly over the years, this is not purely because humans have become intrinsically more capable. In the past for example professional football players were far less disciplined. Some famously competent players were outrageous off the field, drinking, smoking and living lifestyles that would not be tolerated by coaches today. Their equipment was also far less engineered. The stakes were also lower as there was less money in the game. Most professional players can now expect the same level of discipline, support (and reward) as the elite athletes of 20 years ago. Major sporting events in the 1920's look amateurish by todays standards but probably because they often were. Top sportsmen might have a day job in a factory.

A sportsman with a prosthetic may well not be able to live to these new exacting standards as their disability imposes broader impacts than purely during events. The situation needs to be considered holistically not solely on the basis of comparing mechanical advantage of a limb during an event.

*This is of course tangential to the combat arm/leg as they are actually powered. This conversation is more relevant to the prosthetics in CSC.

 

[Endie]

The best sprinters in the world are the right hand side of a (kinda) bell curve of everyone who has legs. The best amputee sprinters are at the right hand side of everyone who has had their lower legs amputated, which is a considerably smaller pool. So you are highly likely not to get the outliers at the far right of the curve. Added to which the amputees have, in general, had to learn to run and to develop appropriate musculature from a far later date compared to non-amputees, who get to start learning to use their legs from birth (at which point, admittedly, they are insufficiently motivated and tend to be downright awful at it).

You can see the same thing in sports like football: until very recently you could represent Scotland at rugby as a woman - despite being pretty rubbish - because there were only 20 or so teams, so you just had to be the best of 30 or 40 people in that position. As a man you were up against a thousand or so people, so the best was likely to be far, far better relative to the median*.

*Not that it would help because Gregor Townsend would still come up with a rubbish game plan and we'd lose. **
**Except against England ***
***We will also lose to England this time

 

[MonsterX]

The answer is: it appears to be very unlikey.

Potentially you could study para athletes that were competitive runners before they lost their legs (there will be some) and see if any of them have improved their times. But there will also be plenty of other factors to consider, especially if their post-accident training has been more intense or their motivation has changed. Some will have improved just by virtue of age - a 13 year old that lost their legs in a car crash would be expected to post much better times as a 23 year old with prosthetics. On the flip side, a 33 year old sprinter who loses their legs is unlikely to ever post better times.

Maybe animals studies have more potential. Take 100 bunnies, and replace the legs of 50 of them with robotic spring legs. Or any other kind of leg you want to test out. Train them for a couple of months to hop again. You will need a physical therapist with expertise in bunny recovery. This may be hard to find, but you must try. The race them against the control group of bunnies. Maybe have dogs around to motivate them, but don't let the dogs catch them since this experiment isn't about the dogs, its about the cyborg bunnies.

You could try this with people too but Ethics Boards can be so unreasonable.

 

[rinku]

There's a great Stephen Jay Gould essay* on the theme of athlete performances improving over time leading to it being hard for any of them to be individually dominant. Specifically it was in regards to the disappearance of .400 hitting in baseball, but it applies generally. Worth a read.

(*"Entropic homogeneity isn't why no one hits .400 any more.")

 

[Anstett]

There's a great Stephen Jay Gould essay* on the theme of athlete performances improving over time leading to it being hard for any of them to be individually dominant. Specifically it was in regards to the disappearance of .400 hitting in baseball, but it applies generally. Worth a read.

(*"Entropic homogeneity isn't why no one hits .400 any more.")

The original essay is quoted often. Here is a nice revisiting of that essay:

Revisiting Gould on the death of .400 hitting — ryan b. anderson

Last summer I wrote a series on Anthrodendum about beaches and baseball . I plan to do a bit more of the same this summer. Considering everything that’s going on in the world these days, this may be a retreat into escapism, and I’ll own that. Of course, baseball isn’t immune to the politics, ineq

rbaanthro.com

 

[rinku]

And always good to see Our Don mentioned.