LAUSR

We noticed recent research that has just been published in Journal of Sport and Health Science (JSHS), comparing the muscular activity patterns in 1and 2-legged cycling by Park and Caldwell. The authors reported that changes in muscle activities with 1-legged pedaling are due to a variety of changes in mechanical aspects of the pedaling motion, including altered crank torque patterns within the crank cycle, decreased pelvis stability, and the need for increased knee and ankle stiffness during the upstroke. The experiment was welldesigned and the discussion was fascinating. However, the testing protocol does not support the significance of the project, as stated in the first sentence of the abstract, “One-legged pedaling is of interest to elite cyclists and clinicians.” Their testing was conducted at 30 revolutions per min (rpm) and 30 watts (W), and both are too low for any kind of mechanical demand for cycling, either competitive sports or rehabilitation. The preferred cadences of experienced cyclists are approximately 85 95 rpm, whereas the most economic cadences are approximately 55 60 rpm. The choice of low cadence has been attributed to avoiding muscle fatigue in the participants, but previous studies have approved the possible proper cadence of 1-legged pedaling ranges from 50 rpm to 90 rpm. 6 Even for post-stroke individuals, the cadence of 40 rpm has been used. More important, there is plenty of evidence shown that muscle activities and neuromuscular coordination during cycling are significantly influenced by pedaling cadence. The lower extremity joint moment distribution would dramatically change when the pedal frequency was changed. 10 Greater pedaling cadence resulted in reduced patellofemoral compressive force with no effect on the tibiofemoral joint forces. The