{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029850746268656716, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00792910447761194, 'mean_word_length': 5.181556195965418, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Manuscript Clarification: Wooten, SV, Cherup, N, Mazzei, N, Patel, S, Mooney, K, Rafiq, A, and Signorile, JF. Yoga breathing techniques have no impact on isokinetic and isoinertial power. J Strength Cond Res 34(2): 430-439, 2020.

Request for Clarification: Recently published article in this journal, “Yoga breathing techniques have no impact on isokinetic and isoinertial power” (1) attracted our attention, and we would like to raise a few questions related to experimental design, analysis, and interpretation presented in this article and seek authors’ views on the same. Primarily, the rationale behind the hypothesis of an immediate increase in the isokinetic and isoinertial power in a muscle group, which was not actually engaged during the intervention and that too with a mere exposure session of yogic breathing, is unclear. The authors have duly acknowledged the limitations, such as novice subjects, selection of isolated muscle groups, etc., and also hinted at the positive trend of breathing effects, at least in men. Despite these, the authors have overall interpreted that yoga does not have the possibility to help in strengthening muscle groups. Given the strength of evidence in this article, do authors consider a potential effect of yoga? Furthermore, we note that for a research assessment, pranayama is advisable either before or after any type of physical activities but performing pranayama along with other activities such as isokinetic leg extension and pneumatic leg press testing might lead to precarious effects. Would this have influenced the study results in any way? Finally, authors have used a complex multiway analysis of variance for their analyses; however, their choice of LSD post-hoc test with a threshold of 0.05 will not have controlled for family-wise alpha error. Is there any possibility of spurious positive results, especially in those analyses that produced weaker effect sizes? To conclude, we seek clarification on the above points and would appreciate authors’ views on the same so that certain important aspects of this published article can be appraised in detail for the general readers.