# Study 000G Results

## Primary Answer

`Yes, supported.`

Cadence behaves like the more preservable running control variable, stride behaves like the more sacrificial expression variable, and cadence preservation alone does not fully protect internal burden.

## Key Evidence

- later specialized cadence above expected: `5/5`, `p = 0.03125`
- later specialized stride below expected: `5/5`, `p = 0.03125`
- later specialized positive HR residual burden: `5/5`, `p = 0.03125`

Nearest-speed pairing and speed-band pairing agreed with the directional result:

- nearest-speed later cadence difference: `+16.0 spm`
- nearest-speed later stride difference: `-0.1042 m`
- speed-band later cadence difference: `+15.79 spm`
- speed-band later stride difference: `-0.0976 m`

## Dissociation Between Mechanical And Physiological Protection

The strongest mechanism-level observation is that the same protected cadence pattern did not guarantee the same burden outcome.

- October 2025 outside-envelope cluster:
  - mean cadence residual: `11.38%`
  - mean stride residual: `-10.91%`
  - mean HR residual burden: `13.88 bpm`

- April 2026 boundary probe:
  - cadence residual: `10.22%`
  - stride residual: `-9.28%`
  - HR residual burden: `0.69 bpm`

That means cadence preservation appears sufficient for continued running expression, but not sufficient by itself for complete burden protection.