Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 -----Original Message-----From: jwwright [mailto:jwwright@...]Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 6:12 PM Subject: Re: [ ] How much exercise is euf? BTW, I've just been reading a Pritikin book, Diet for Runners, and I don't want to sound like I'm pushing pritikin's program, but there is some good data on runners who have had heart attacks and the (his) reason for it. Fixx was not the only one. Worth the 3$ I paid for it. I submit the one statement, pg 73: "Cholesterol cannot be cleaned out by running. Cholesterol cannot be used for fuel." That's his statement and I've yet to find a confirming source for it. Comments? Regards. I hope you're not baiting me to disagree with Pritikin. I never much though about interactions between running and cholesterol. About the only associated mechanism that comes to mind is that exercise increases HDL which is a scavenger for LDL which carries cholesterol. Running is generally healthful and I believe improves HDL/LDL ratio, but its not magic. A quick search of cholesterol metabolism on the WWW turns up a lot of words I can't pronounce but no direct association with energy pathways. I suspect out body might "eat" it eventually, but only after consuming all glycogen, adipose, protein(?) and whatever else it can grab first. I doubt jogging around the block will get us there. AFAIK the direct way to reduce cholesterol is to bind up the bile acids (made from cholesterol) in our digestive track so they will be passed instead of being recaptured for re-use. There was a popular intervention using a specially designed resin that did this (cholestrymine ?). I think it was mentioned in an early Walford book as a cheat, allowing one to eat fat while not absorbing it. There is also a popular health food store supplement "Chitosan" based on some marine exoskeleton that is reported to bind to fats. I think these have replaced with different medical interventions these days. "I don't wan't want no messy powder, give me a neat little pill." I suspect a dietary intervention combining low ingested cholesterol while high in vegetable fiber that will increase the transist speed through the intestine, will trap some of the bile present while the reduced transit time will also diminish bile recapture for re-use. The body will then need to convert existing cholesterol to generate new bile to replace what was lost. I'm not sure how or if the amount of dietary fat consumption plays into the amount of bile in circulation but since it's purpose is to aide in digestion/absorption there may be some relationship. I don't know that the presence or quantity of circulating cholesterol is "the" dominant mechanism for heart disease. Cholesterol is always present and is essential for multiple bodily processes. I seem to recall something about cholesterol being deposited in response to some insult. But I could be wrong. JR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 In a message dated 10/14/04 11:50:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, crjohnr@... writes: I suspect runners like vitamin supplement takers may gain a false sense of security and be less diligent about their entire health practice. I recall from decades ago that the story on Fixx was that he thought he could (and he did) eat fatty foods, especially in French restaurants, all the time - thinking the running would protect him from anything. After his death, IIRC the idea became prevalent for a long time that exercise wouldn't protect you from anything at all, that it could only add to "quality of life". It is taking a long time to overcome that notion. -- Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 In a message dated 10/13/04 10:18:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, crjohnr@... writes: AFAIK the direct way to reduce cholesterol is to bind up the bile acids (made from cholesterol) in our digestive track so they will be passed instead of being recaptured for re-use. There was a popular intervention using a specially designed resin that did this (cholestrymine ?). There is/was a certain Dr. Hulda who advocated a "liver cleanse". Something to do with epsom salts, followed by lots of olive oil to provoke diarrhea. I think it was mentioned in an early Walford book as a cheat, allowing one to eat fat while not absorbing it. There is also a popular health food store supplement "Chitosan" based on some marine exoskeleton that is reported to bind to fats. I think these have replaced with different medical interventions these days. "I don't wan't want no messy powder, give me a neat little pill." Not to mention the "anal leakage" which seemed to kill the popularity of fat-binders. -- Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 No, I'm not baiting. I offer what I read for discussion. Chitosan of course, binds to fat in the gut and does not remove fat from arteries. It may serve to keep some away from the arteries, perhaps. The runners had clogged arteries and as well I know it Ornish is the only claim to removing that fat/plaque, whatever. Searching the words cholesterol metabolism gets a lot of unrelated stuff. And that's why I asked. I was hoping Jeff, maybe would comment. But the thing I've noticed is that just because someone runs does not guarantee clear arteries. And maybe it doesn't even promote clear arteries. We see Atherosclerosis developing even in teens and pre-teens by some mechanism. Ref the Bogalusa Heart Study of teen autopsies. Even 6 yo can show elevated BP. And the son of a friend, a very "fit" looking 20yo football player at Ga, died in his dorm, 90% clogged. Her other 2 children have partially clogged arteries and they are not obese. So I must guess some other mechanism is at work. But to get back to this 1985 book, the only reason I posted it, is because it lists the names of 16 prominent dead runners, including Fixx: Jim Dooley, 37 e, 49, physiologist Col. Giles Hall, 50, a 20 year jogger Dr. Summers, 54, Miami Heart Institute Dr. Lauth, 46, American Heart Institute Dr. Doroff, 49, 18 mile training run Duane Armstong, 59, Ron Holmes, 37 Dr. W. Royce, Jr., 51 Peek, 58 Russ Hargreaves, 67 Dodge , 29, Bill English, 19, football player Chuck , 28, Lions Receiver Jim Fixx, 52 Jacques Bussereau, 48 - 1984 NY marathon {And my friend Coutret, who arose every morning at 6 am and ran 5 miles before going to work. Died picking up a snow shovel, at 65yo.} Pritikin quotes Dr. Ernst Jokl; "Among the postmortem findings, coronary atherosclerosis and degenerative changes of the myocardium were the most frequent....... "Even the most strenuous exercise will not cause death in subjects with normal Hearts". Dr. reported data for each sedentary man who experienced sudden death there were 7 joggers! {Ok, so I'll check for myself.} Pediatric Clinics of North AmericaVolume 51 • Number 5 • October 2004 Exercise recommendations and risk factors for sudden cardiac deathTo this end, in 1994 the 26th Bethesda Conference undertook the task of re-evaluating the risk of sports participation among athletes who have cardiovascular disease and derived a consensus on disease-specific competitive sports limitations [1] A study to determine the incidence of the problem was conducted among Minnesota high school athletes; the risk of sudden death was estimated to be 1 case/200,000 population per year [9] . The prevalence of underlying or undiagnosed cardiac disease in the general population is unclear. Risk factors for sudden cardiac death The fact that many young athletes who experienced sudden death were believed to be completely healthy incorrectly led to the belief that no precipitating cause could be found. In reality, the most common reason for sudden death is significant cardiovascular disease, either anatomic or arrhythmogenic [3] [4] [5] [10] [11] . Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a condition that occurs in approximately 2 in 1000 individuals in the general population, is the most common cause of sudden cardiac death [11] [12] . HCM consists of a diverse group of primary cardiac muscle abnormalities that result in abnormal thickening of the myocardium, generally the left ventricle [13] . ...Several genetic markers that represent various proteins in the myocardial contractile apparatus have been implicated in causing this abnormal hypertrophy. Although HCM occur in an isolated individual, in many cases there is a familial pattern of inheritance with variable expression. The mechanism for sudden death is not understood completely but is believed to be arrhythmogenic in nature. Other factors that were found to identify a population at risk for sudden death with HCM include young age at diagnosis, syncope at diagnosis, severe dyspnea, or positive family history of sudden death from HCM [14] [15] . {I pass the baton. I believe I will walk.} Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 9:18 PM Subject: RE: [ ] How much is enuf? -----Original Message-----From: jwwright [mailto:jwwright@...]Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 6:12 PM Subject: Re: [ ] How much exercise is euf? BTW, I've just been reading a Pritikin book, Diet for Runners, and I don't want to sound like I'm pushing pritikin's program, but there is some good data on runners who have had heart attacks and the (his) reason for it. Fixx was not the only one. Worth the 3$ I paid for it. I submit the one statement, pg 73: "Cholesterol cannot be cleaned out by running. Cholesterol cannot be used for fuel." That's his statement and I've yet to find a confirming source for it. Comments? Regards. I hope you're not baiting me to disagree with Pritikin. I never much though about interactions between running and cholesterol. About the only associated mechanism that comes to mind is that exercise increases HDL which is a scavenger for LDL which carries cholesterol. Running is generally healthful and I believe improves HDL/LDL ratio, but its not magic. A quick search of cholesterol metabolism on the WWW turns up a lot of words I can't pronounce but no direct association with energy pathways. I suspect out body might "eat" it eventually, but only after consuming all glycogen, adipose, protein(?) and whatever else it can grab first. I doubt jogging around the block will get us there. AFAIK the direct way to reduce cholesterol is to bind up the bile acids (made from cholesterol) in our digestive track so they will be passed instead of being recaptured for re-use. There was a popular intervention using a specially designed resin that did this (cholestrymine ?). I think it was mentioned in an early Walford book as a cheat, allowing one to eat fat while not absorbing it. There is also a popular health food store supplement "Chitosan" based on some marine exoskeleton that is reported to bind to fats. I think these have replaced with different medical interventions these days. "I don't wan't want no messy powder, give me a neat little pill." I suspect a dietary intervention combining low ingested cholesterol while high in vegetable fiber that will increase the transist speed through the intestine, will trap some of the bile present while the reduced transit time will also diminish bile recapture for re-use. The body will then need to convert existing cholesterol to generate new bile to replace what was lost. I'm not sure how or if the amount of dietary fat consumption plays into the amount of bile in circulation but since it's purpose is to aide in digestion/absorption there may be some relationship. I don't know that the presence or quantity of circulating cholesterol is "the" dominant mechanism for heart disease. Cholesterol is always present and is essential for multiple bodily processes. I seem to recall something about cholesterol being deposited in response to some insult. But I could be wrong. JR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 I suspect runners like vitamin supplement takers may gain a false sense of security and be less diligent about their entire health practice. Running is not magic but can be effectively used in combination with energy restriction to selectively burn fat. Excessive fat mass is associated with inflammation. Inflammation is suspect in numerous disease vectors. Running depending upon duration and intensity will alternately draw energy from glycogen or adipose stores. It is only a tool to be used in combination with energy balance, and diet make-up to attain a given goal. JR -----Original Message-----From: jwwright [mailto:jwwright@...]Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 10:30 AM Subject: Re: [ ] How much is enuf? No, I'm not baiting. I offer what I read for discussion. Chitosan of course, binds to fat in the gut and does not remove fat from arteries. It may serve to keep some away from the arteries, perhaps. The runners had clogged arteries and as well I know it Ornish is the only claim to removing that fat/plaque, whatever. Searching the words cholesterol metabolism gets a lot of unrelated stuff. And that's why I asked. I was hoping Jeff, maybe would comment. But the thing I've noticed is that just because someone runs does not guarantee clear arteries. And maybe it doesn't even promote clear arteries. We see Atherosclerosis developing even in teens and pre-teens by some mechanism. Ref the Bogalusa Heart Study of teen autopsies. Even 6 yo can show elevated BP. And the son of a friend, a very "fit" looking 20yo football player at Ga, died in his dorm, 90% clogged. Her other 2 children have partially clogged arteries and they are not obese. So I must guess some other mechanism is at work. But to get back to this 1985 book, the only reason I posted it, is because it lists the names of 16 prominent dead runners, including Fixx: Jim Dooley, 37 e, 49, physiologist Col. Giles Hall, 50, a 20 year jogger Dr. Summers, 54, Miami Heart Institute Dr. Lauth, 46, American Heart Institute Dr. Doroff, 49, 18 mile training run Duane Armstong, 59, Ron Holmes, 37 Dr. W. Royce, Jr., 51 Peek, 58 Russ Hargreaves, 67 Dodge , 29, Bill English, 19, football player Chuck , 28, Lions Receiver Jim Fixx, 52 Jacques Bussereau, 48 - 1984 NY marathon {And my friend Coutret, who arose every morning at 6 am and ran 5 miles before going to work. Died picking up a snow shovel, at 65yo.} Pritikin quotes Dr. Ernst Jokl; "Among the postmortem findings, coronary atherosclerosis and degenerative changes of the myocardium were the most frequent....... "Even the most strenuous exercise will not cause death in subjects with normal Hearts". Dr. reported data for each sedentary man who experienced sudden death there were 7 joggers! {Ok, so I'll check for myself.} Pediatric Clinics of North AmericaVolume 51 • Number 5 • October 2004 Exercise recommendations and risk factors for sudden cardiac deathTo this end, in 1994 the 26th Bethesda Conference undertook the task of re-evaluating the risk of sports participation among athletes who have cardiovascular disease and derived a consensus on disease-specific competitive sports limitations [1] A study to determine the incidence of the problem was conducted among Minnesota high school athletes; the risk of sudden death was estimated to be 1 case/200,000 population per year [9] . The prevalence of underlying or undiagnosed cardiac disease in the general population is unclear. Risk factors for sudden cardiac death The fact that many young athletes who experienced sudden death were believed to be completely healthy incorrectly led to the belief that no precipitating cause could be found. In reality, the most common reason for sudden death is significant cardiovascular disease, either anatomic or arrhythmogenic [3] [4] [5] [10] [11] . Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a condition that occurs in approximately 2 in 1000 individuals in the general population, is the most common cause of sudden cardiac death [11] [12] . HCM consists of a diverse group of primary cardiac muscle abnormalities that result in abnormal thickening of the myocardium, generally the left ventricle [13] . ...Several genetic markers that represent various proteins in the myocardial contractile apparatus have been implicated in causing this abnormal hypertrophy. Although HCM occur in an isolated individual, in many cases there is a familial pattern of inheritance with variable expression. The mechanism for sudden death is not understood completely but is believed to be arrhythmogenic in nature. Other factors that were found to identify a population at risk for sudden death with HCM include young age at diagnosis, syncope at diagnosis, severe dyspnea, or positive family history of sudden death from HCM [14] [15] . {I pass the baton. I believe I will walk.} Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Hi JW: Worth bearing in mind that Bill Clinton was so enamored of the Ornish diet that Ornish 'dedicated' one of his books to him. Take a look inside the front cover for the dedication. Obviously I don't know to what extent Clinton kept to the diet. But we do know that Ornish's advice was not much help to Clinton's arteries. Also worth remembering that the Seventh Day Adventist strict vegetarian diet has been shown in many studies to improve lifespan (but NOT species maximum lifespan). Yet despite that obvious advantage, Seventh Day Adventists on a strict vegetarian diet still have an incidence of ischemic heart disease of 21%. That is only about 50% better than for those on the (dreadful) 'typical north american diet'. Vegetarianism certainly does not seem to be a panacea with regard to heart disease. Nor, clearly, is exercise, given many examples of athletes who have advanced heart disease - documented by, among others, Henry , who treated some of these supremely fit people. Hence his quote: " Fitness has absolutely nothing to do with health " . Rodney. --- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> wrote: > No, I'm not baiting. I offer what I read for discussion. > Chitosan of course, binds to fat in the gut and does not remove fat from arteries. It may serve to keep some away from the arteries, perhaps. > The runners had clogged arteries and as well I know it Ornish is the only claim to removing that fat/plaque, whatever. Searching the words cholesterol metabolism gets a lot of unrelated stuff. And that's why I asked. I was hoping Jeff, maybe would comment. > > But the thing I've noticed is that just because someone runs does not guarantee clear arteries. And maybe it doesn't even promote clear arteries. We see Atherosclerosis developing even in teens and pre- teens by some mechanism. Ref the Bogalusa Heart Study of teen autopsies. Even 6 yo can show elevated BP. > > And the son of a friend, a very " fit " looking 20yo football player at Ga, died in his dorm, 90% clogged. Her other 2 children have partially clogged arteries and they are not obese. So I must guess some other mechanism is at work. > > But to get back to this 1985 book, the only reason I posted it, is because it lists the names of 16 prominent dead runners, including Fixx: > > Jim Dooley, 37 > e, 49, physiologist > Col. Giles Hall, 50, a 20 year jogger > Dr. Summers, 54, Miami Heart Institute > Dr. Lauth, 46, American Heart Institute > Dr. Doroff, 49, 18 mile training run > Duane Armstong, 59, > Ron Holmes, 37 > Dr. W. Royce, Jr., 51 > Peek, 58 > Russ Hargreaves, 67 > Dodge , 29, > Bill English, 19, football player > Chuck , 28, Lions Receiver > Jim Fixx, 52 > Jacques Bussereau, 48 - 1984 NY marathon > > {And my friend Coutret, who arose every morning at 6 am and ran 5 miles before going to work. Died picking up a snow shovel, at 65yo.} > > Pritikin quotes Dr. Ernst Jokl; " Among the postmortem findings, coronary atherosclerosis and degenerative changes of the myocardium were the most frequent....... > " Even the most strenuous exercise will not cause death in subjects with normal Hearts " . > > Dr. reported data for each sedentary man who experienced sudden death there were 7 joggers! > > {Ok, so I'll check for myself.} > > Pediatric Clinics of North America > Volume 51 . Number 5 . October 2004 > > Exercise recommendations and risk factors for sudden cardiac death > To this end, in 1994 the 26th Bethesda Conference undertook the task of re-evaluating the risk of sports participation among athletes who have cardiovascular disease and derived a consensus on disease- specific competitive sports limitations [1] > > A study to determine the incidence of the problem was conducted among Minnesota high school athletes; the risk of sudden death was estimated to be 1 case/200,000 population per year [9] . The prevalence of underlying or undiagnosed cardiac disease in the general population is unclear. > > Risk factors for sudden cardiac death > The fact that many young athletes who experienced sudden death were believed to be completely healthy incorrectly led to the belief that no precipitating cause could be found. In reality, the most common reason for sudden death is significant cardiovascular disease, either anatomic or arrhythmogenic [3] [4] [5] [10] [11] . Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a condition that occurs in approximately 2 in 1000 individuals in the general population, is the most common cause of sudden cardiac death [11] [12] . > > HCM consists of a diverse group of primary cardiac muscle abnormalities that result in abnormal thickening of the myocardium, generally the left ventricle [13] . ...Several genetic markers that represent various proteins in the myocardial contractile apparatus have been implicated in causing this abnormal hypertrophy. Although HCM occur in an isolated individual, in many cases there is a familial pattern of inheritance with variable expression. The mechanism for sudden death is not understood completely but is believed to be arrhythmogenic in nature. Other factors that were found to identify a population at risk for sudden death with HCM include young age at diagnosis, syncope at diagnosis, severe dyspnea, or positive family history of sudden death from HCM [14] [15] . > > {I pass the baton. I believe I will walk.} > > Regards. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 9:18 PM > Subject: RE: [ ] How much is enuf? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: jwwright [mailto:jwwright@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 6:12 PM > > Subject: Re: [ ] How much exercise is euf? > > > > BTW, I've just been reading a Pritikin book, Diet for Runners, and I don't want to sound like I'm pushing pritikin's program, but there is some good data on runners who have had heart attacks and the (his) reason for it. Fixx was not the only one. Worth the 3$ I paid for it. > > I submit the one statement, pg 73: " Cholesterol cannot be cleaned out by running. Cholesterol cannot be used for fuel. " That's his statement and I've yet to find a confirming source for it. Comments? > > Regards. > > I hope you're not baiting me to disagree with Pritikin. > > I never much though about interactions between running and cholesterol. About the only associated mechanism that comes to mind is that exercise increases HDL which is a scavenger for LDL which carries cholesterol. Running is generally healthful and I believe improves HDL/LDL ratio, but its not magic. > > A quick search of cholesterol metabolism on the WWW turns up a lot of words I can't pronounce but no direct association with energy pathways. I suspect out body might " eat " it eventually, but only after consuming all glycogen, adipose, protein(?) and whatever else it can grab first. I doubt jogging around the block will get us there. > > AFAIK the direct way to reduce cholesterol is to bind up the bile acids (made from cholesterol) in our digestive track so they will be passed instead of being recaptured for re-use. There was a popular intervention using a specially designed resin that did this (cholestrymine ?). I think it was mentioned in an early Walford book as a cheat, allowing one to eat fat while not absorbing it. There is also a popular health food store supplement " Chitosan " based on some marine exoskeleton that is reported to bind to fats. I think these have replaced with different medical interventions these days. " I don't wan't want no messy powder, give me a neat little pill. " > > I suspect a dietary intervention combining low ingested cholesterol while high in vegetable fiber that will increase the transist speed through the intestine, will trap some of the bile present while the reduced transit time will also diminish bile recapture for re-use. The body will then need to convert existing cholesterol to generate new bile to replace what was lost. > > I'm not sure how or if the amount of dietary fat consumption plays into the amount of bile in circulation but since it's purpose is to aide in digestion/absorption there may be some relationship. > > I don't know that the presence or quantity of circulating cholesterol is " the " dominant mechanism for heart disease. Cholesterol is always present and is essential for multiple bodily processes. I seem to recall something about cholesterol being deposited in response to some insult. But I could be wrong. > > JR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 >>>But we do know that Ornish's advice was not much help to Clinton's arteries. On January 15, 2004 Clinton publically announced he was following the S Beach Diet. During the Democratic Convention recently, he was interviewed and someone commented on how good he looked. Again, he stated that he owed it to following the S Beach diet and having a personal trainer. While he once had Ornish as an advisor, and the publicists all took great advantage of that for PR reasons, he never truly followed the recommended program. He admits publically as does all those close to him, that he had a huge affinity for fast food and junk food and embibed in them often. As is often the case, there was a huge gap between the advice given and the advice heeded. Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 The average age of death of these runners was 45.8 years! I worked with a marathoner who at age 42 had chest pain during a run and kept running some more. He stopped when he started feeling faint and his legs started buckling. The doctors said that his arteries were clogged, but he survived. Some people don't take hints from nature (like something hurts, I better stop). Surely, the " no pain no gain " and " quitters never win " mentality is partly responsible for many of these deaths. Runners are known for trying to " improve " their times and measuring their achievements against the clock. President Bush ruined both of his knees by running 3 miles in 21 minutes for several years. Bush had arthroscopic surgery on his left knee in 1997 and he injured his right knee in 2003. There is also the statistical probability that you will die doing what you do most of the time. If you drive a truck 12 hours per day you have a 50% chance of dying while driving and a 33% chance of dying in bed where you spend 8 hours. The same with runners, but since running is more stressful than sleeping, runners are more likely to die while running than when in bed. IMO, running is not compatible with longevity or healthy knees. Non-impact exercises may be better. Tony === the names of 16 prominent dead runners, including Fixx: > > Jim Dooley, 37 > e, 49, physiologist > Col. Giles Hall, 50, a 20 year jogger > Dr. Summers, 54, Miami Heart Institute > Dr. Lauth, 46, American Heart Institute > Dr. Doroff, 49, 18 mile training run > Duane Armstong, 59, > Ron Holmes, 37 > Dr. W. Royce, Jr., 51 > Peek, 58 > Russ Hargreaves, 67 > Dodge , 29, > Bill English, 19, football player > Chuck , 28, Lions Receiver > Jim Fixx, 52 > Jacques Bussereau, 48 - 1984 NY marathon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 You can overeat any diet. I recall one comedian saying "Metrical doesn't work. I eat it with every meal and I've not lost a pound." Also, the studies I've read indicated that the closer you got to vegan the better. But I don't even know a vegan. ALL the vegetarians I've met eat milk or eggs and even fish. I don't think we know the perfect diet other than limiting calories. I can gain weight eating anything. I knew some 7th day and they weren't all that strict about their diet either. As you say it may square the curve - that's all. I wonder how we define "fitness"? Surely it has to be more than I can so 150 situps, eg. Has to include blood work, angiograms, carotid IMT, etc? Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rodney Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 10:59 AM Subject: [ ] Re: How much is enuf? Hi JW:Worth bearing in mind that Bill Clinton was so enamored of the Ornish diet that Ornish 'dedicated' one of his books to him. Take a look inside the front cover for the dedication. Obviously I don't know to what extent Clinton kept to the diet. But we do know that Ornish's advice was not much help to Clinton's arteries.Also worth remembering that the Seventh Day Adventist strict vegetarian diet has been shown in many studies to improve lifespan (but NOT species maximum lifespan). Yet despite that obvious advantage, Seventh Day Adventists on a strict vegetarian diet still have an incidence of ischemic heart disease of 21%. That is only about 50% better than for those on the (dreadful) 'typical north american diet'. Vegetarianism certainly does not seem to be a panacea with regard to heart disease. Nor, clearly, is exercise, given many examples of athletes who have advanced heart disease - documented by, among others, Henry , who treated some of these supremely fit people. Hence his quote: "Fitness has absolutely nothing to do with health".Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Hi JW: I know how I define 'fit'. For me it means (for example) being able to run three miles in twenty minutes. If someone told me their blood work and angiograms showed good numbers then I would say they were healthy, not fit. And presumably had similar views since he very much divorced the idea of fitness from that of health. He presumably meant that being able to run three miles in twenty minutes does not constitute proof that you will not drop dead tomorrow from a heart attack. But language is a living thing. Perhaps the meaning will change. Or perhaps my impression of the meaning is incorrect. I certainly do not see in my dictionary any mention of running three miles, although one part of the definition I have here is: " ..in good athletic condition or health " . Rodney. --- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> wrote: > I wonder how we define " fitness " ? Surely it has to be more than I can so 150 situps, eg. Has to include blood work, angiograms, carotid IMT, etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Maybe if you do it right. But many vegans are doing it wrong and are deficient in such nutrients as B12 and iron, plus they don't get the many benefits of eating fish . Again just because one is a vegetarian or vegan, it doesn't mean they're eating healthy. on 10/14/2004 1:52 PM, jwwright at jwwright@... wrote: > Also, the studies I've read indicated that the closer you got to vegan the > better. But I don't even know a vegan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 By your definition only a small percentage of even regular runners who participate in large 5K/10K races would be considered fit. While I'm not sure I can offer a better suggestion that sounds arbitrary and only suggestive of how well one trained for that distance. JR PS: I guess I'm not fit, bummer. -----Original Message----- From: Rodney [mailto:perspect1111@...] Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 1:21 PM Subject: [ ] Re: How much is enuf? Hi JW: I know how I define 'fit'. For me it means (for example) being able to run three miles in twenty minutes. If someone told me their blood work and angiograms showed good numbers then I would say they were healthy, not fit. And presumably had similar views since he very much divorced the idea of fitness from that of health. He presumably meant that being able to run three miles in twenty minutes does not constitute proof that you will not drop dead tomorrow from a heart attack. But language is a living thing. Perhaps the meaning will change. Or perhaps my impression of the meaning is incorrect. I certainly do not see in my dictionary any mention of running three miles, although one part of the definition I have here is: " ..in good athletic condition or health " . Rodney. --- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> wrote: > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Well, , I can only handle 10 bags of concrete per day now, FWIW. Wait a minute, that's 10 bags on the cart, moved to the truck and loaded, moved from truck to front end loader, moved from FR loader to use. But that don't count for "exercise" either (tic). But it may be fit? for me. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 1:45 PM Subject: RE: [ ] Re: How much is enuf? By your definition only a small percentage of even regular runners whoparticipate in large 5K/10K races would be considered fit.While I'm not sure I can offer a better suggestion that sounds arbitrary andonly suggestive of how well one trained for that distance.JRPS: I guess I'm not fit, bummer.-----Original Message-----From: Rodney [mailto:perspect1111@...]Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 1:21 PM Subject: [ ] Re: How much is enuf? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 --- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...> wrote: > > Also worth remembering that the Seventh Day Adventist strict > vegetarian diet has been shown in many studies to improve lifespan > (but NOT species maximum lifespan). Yet despite that obvious > advantage, Seventh Day Adventists on a strict vegetarian diet still > have an incidence of ischemic heart disease of 21%. That is only > about 50% better than for those on the (dreadful) 'typical north > american diet'. Hi All, Please see: Am J Clin Nutr 1999 Sep;70(3 Suppl):516S-524S Mortality in vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative analysis of 5 prospective studies. Key TJ, Fraser GE, Thorogood M, Appleby PN, Beral V, Reeves G, Burr ML, Chang-Claude J, Frentzel-Beyme R, Kuzma JW, Mann J, McPherson K. reported that " …. all results were adjusted for age, sex, and smoking status. …. 10.6 y of follow-up. Mortality from ischemic heart disease was 24% lower in vegetarians than in nonvegetarians …. restricted to those who had followed their current diet for >5 y. ….. mortality from ischemic heart disease was 20% lower in occasional meat eaters, 34% lower in people who ate fish but not meat, 34% lower in lactoovovegetarians, and 26% lower in vegans. There were no significant differences …. all other causes combined. " in PMID: 10479225 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Looking at the PDF-available text for vegetarians, all-cause death approached 1 as more factors were considered, obtaining 0.95 odds ratio. More men than women were positively affected for stomach and lung cancer, heart disease, cerebrovascular disease and all causes. Age affected death risks significantly for heart disease and not significantly for stomach, breast and prostate cancer, cerebrovascular disease and other causes. Regular meat eaters and vegans fared worst and occasional meat eater, fish eaters and ovo- lacto-vegetarians fared best overall. Stomach cancer was better for occasionals, worst for vegans. Lung cancer was best for occasional and ovo-lacto-vegetarians and worst for vegans. Breast and prostate cancer was worst for fish, best for ovo-lacto-vegetarians and vegans. Cerebrovascular disease was best for ovo-lacto-vegetarians and vegans. Other causes was best for occasionals and fish and worst for vegans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Hi JR: Now you can relax. I only mentioned that number as an indication of the TYPE OF THING that my understanding of the word fit applies to. I.E. to endurance fitness. I would not even call a champion weight lifter 'fit' as I understand the sense in which the term, it seems to me, is normally used. I wanted to use a number that I didn't expect anyone to argue with by saying " You think that is fit? " So choose your own number. But you get my point. I think. It doesn't matter anyway, because " fitness has absolutely nothing to do with health " ; ^ ))) Rodney. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 I think there a lot of people who think they are fit and think they are doing the best for their body, their techniques are different so that can't be true, but they think that for QOL, or whatever. It always boils down to some parameter we can measure. With Bernie it's heart rate, eg, with you possibly BMI or BF, with me BP, and with it's probably pace. I don't find those comforting, but it boils down to what can I DO? I can walk 3 mph easily WITHOUT raising heart rate. At 69 I can do many physical things that I don't even think about if I should or not. I don't see myself as old or weak. I do think I am much healthier at lowered weight and lower intake. So I must be more fit than I used to be. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rodney Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 5:45 PM Subject: [ ] Re: How much is enuf? Hi JR:Now you can relax. I only mentioned that number as an indication of the TYPE OF THING that my understanding of the word fit applies to. I.E. to endurance fitness. I would not even call a champion weight lifter 'fit' as I understand the sense in which the term, it seems to me, is normally used. I wanted to use a number that I didn't expect anyone to argue with by saying "You think that is fit?" So choose your own number. But you get my point. I think.It doesn't matter anyway, because "fitness has absolutely nothing to do with health" ; ^ )))Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 Hi JW: A bit more clarification: good lipids data I would describe as one aspect of being HEALTHY; being a champion weight lifter I would classify as STRONG; running three miles in a decent time as FIT; winning the olympic archery competition as being SKILLED; winning the one hundred meters as FAST; winning the triple jump as being DEMENTED. I would personally only apply the term 'fit' to ability at endurance tasks, fwiw. I am not saying I am right. Just giving my opinion. Doing the amount of endurance activity I have been doing in recent years does not make me anywhere even remotely close to being fit, by my definition. But I do believe, based on other data, that I am healthy, which I regard as more important. Rodney. --- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> wrote: > I think there a lot of people who think they are fit and think they are doing the best for their body, their techniques are different so that can't be true, but they think that for QOL, or whatever. It always boils down to some parameter we can measure. With Bernie it's heart rate, eg, with you possibly BMI or BF, with me BP, and with it's probably pace. > > I don't find those comforting, but it boils down to what can I DO? I can walk 3 mph easily WITHOUT raising heart rate. At 69 I can do many physical things that I don't even think about if I should or not. I don't see myself as old or weak. > > I do think I am much healthier at lowered weight and lower intake. So I must be more fit than I used to be. > > Regards. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Rodney > > Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 5:45 PM > Subject: [ ] Re: How much is enuf? > > > > Hi JR: > > Now you can relax. I only mentioned that number as an indication of > the TYPE OF THING that my understanding of the word fit applies to. > I.E. to endurance fitness. I would not even call a champion weight > lifter 'fit' as I understand the sense in which the term, it seems to > me, is normally used. > > I wanted to use a number that I didn't expect anyone to argue with by > saying " You think that is fit? " So choose your own number. But you > get my point. I think. > > It doesn't matter anyway, because " fitness has absolutely nothing to > do with health " ; ^ ))) > > Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 You have it a little mixed up. No diarrhea is involved. A large amount of olive oil at once (1/4C+) will cause the liver to spasm, purging cholesterol stones (which are sort of like pearls) and other toxins through the gall bladder duct. The epsom salts, which isn't really necessary, simply relaxes the duct. The acid component, usually phosphoric acid lemon juice or apple juice or even coca cola, will help reduce the size of the stones before purging. I believe the idea came over from Europe back during the 1920's or 1930's. It goes without saying overweight people are going to have fatty livers. But the flush's impact on serum cholesterol seems doubtful. More likely to be on blood pressure. Logan > There is/was a certain Dr. Hulda who advocated a " liver cleanse " . > Something to do with epsom salts, followed by lots of olive oil to provoke > diarrhea. > > > I think it was mentioned in an early Walford book as a cheat, allowing one > to eat > > fat while not absorbing it. There is also a popular health food store > > supplement " Chitosan " based on some marine exoskeleton that is reported to bind to > > fats. I think these have replaced with different medical interventions these > > days. " I don't wan't want no messy powder, give me a neat little pill. " > > > Not to mention the " anal leakage " which seemed to kill the popularity of > fat-binders. > > -- > > Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 And that's what I was hoping we'd do in defining "fit" because I think the "fitness" types tend to dominate the exercise theme. Hard working people get a lot of exercise and also develop a lot of ills. And some of those ills can be traced to diet and can be aided by diet changes. There is one area we failed to mention (this time around) and that is weight bearing exercise to secure bone health. The incidence of Osteoporosis in the CR world bothers me. And the idea I can "accept" less of a "fit" level, less than say a marathoner, bothers me also. I accept only that I'm aging and can't run for some health reason, but I do not accept it as a necessary CR result, eg. I'm still working on running although I don't think it's necessary for health. And I'm still going to lift weights to maybe keep the bone density up - a major problem I believe in olders. I still puzzle the heart rate, because I've never been able to get mine up to the standard. Like 130 it was in the stress test. I could barely get there even at 4.4mph, 14% grade and my legs were getting tired. I was not out of breath. My legs just won't walk that fast for long. I was fairly "comfortable" at 120. So I think I operate at a lower HR. Maybe because the BP is higher. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rodney Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 7:12 PM Subject: [ ] Re: How much is enuf? Hi JW:A bit more clarification: good lipids data I would describe as one aspect of being HEALTHY; being a champion weight lifter I would classify as STRONG; running three miles in a decent time as FIT; winning the olympic archery competition as being SKILLED; winning the one hundred meters as FAST; winning the triple jump as being DEMENTED.I would personally only apply the term 'fit' to ability at endurance tasks, fwiw. I am not saying I am right. Just giving my opinion. Doing the amount of endurance activity I have been doing in recent years does not make me anywhere even remotely close to being fit, by my definition. But I do believe, based on other data, that I am healthy, which I regard as more important.Rodney.> I think there a lot of people who think they are fit and think they are doing the best for their body, their techniques are different so that can't be true, but they think that for QOL, or whatever. It always boils down to some parameter we can measure. With Bernie it's heart rate, eg, with you possibly BMI or BF, with me BP, and with it's probably pace. > > I don't find those comforting, but it boils down to what can I DO? I can walk 3 mph easily WITHOUT raising heart rate. At 69 I can do many physical things that I don't even think about if I should or not. I don't see myself as old or weak. > > I do think I am much healthier at lowered weight and lower intake. So I must be more fit than I used to be. > > Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 There is no evidence for any of this. > > There is/was a certain Dr. Hulda who advocated a " liver > cleanse " . > > Something to do with epsom salts, followed by lots of olive oil to > provoke > > diarrhea. > > > > > > I think it was mentioned in an early Walford book as a cheat, > allowing one > > to eat > > > fat while not absorbing it. There is also a popular health food > store > > > supplement " Chitosan " based on some marine exoskeleton that is > reported to bind to > > > fats. I think these have replaced with different medical > interventions these > > > days. " I don't wan't want no messy powder, give me a neat little > pill. " > > > > > > Not to mention the " anal leakage " which seemed to kill the > popularity of > > fat-binders. > > > > -- > > > > Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 Hi JW: We have previously discussed using weight vests for osteoporosis prevention. If you lose thirty pounds on CR why not habitually, when you can, wear a thirty pound weight vest? As for heart rate. I believe the amount of blood pumped depends on heart rate and HEART PUMPING CAPACITY per beat. If you have a low pulse rate it usually means you have a large heart, and that often is the result of extensive endurance exercise earlier in life. It is good to have a large heart. But I believe that endurance athletes can have problems later in life if they do not continue to use that extra heart capacity, at least to a moderate extent. Rodney. > > I think there a lot of people who think they are fit and think they > are doing the best for their body, their techniques are different so > that can't be true, but they think that for QOL, or whatever. It > always boils down to some parameter we can measure. With Bernie it's > heart rate, eg, with you possibly BMI or BF, with me BP, and with > it's probably pace. > > > > I don't find those comforting, but it boils down to what can I DO? > I can walk 3 mph easily WITHOUT raising heart rate. At 69 I can do > many physical things that I don't even think about if I should or > not. I don't see myself as old or weak. > > > > I do think I am much healthier at lowered weight and lower intake. > So I must be more fit than I used to be. > > > > Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 I have never targeted fitness as a personal goal per se. Before getting more serious about health and diet when I turned forty and discovered I was still alive, I used to joke that I jogged to support my food and beer habit. These days I run to gain a competitive edge in stamina for pick-up basketball because at 155# I certainly can't use size or power. I didn't have the standard problem of gaining weight as I aged because I was already fat as a teen. While I suspect there will be sundry definitions of overall fitness. Perhaps one should look at it from specific perspectives. Heart or cardio fitness, bone health or skeletal fitness, strength or muscular fitness, immune/inflammation fitness, flexibility, etc. Aging tends to diminish capacity in all of these areas. CR appears to be very helpful in slowing this decay but IMO we need to be proactive if we wish to remain vital and enjoy a high QOL as we age. It appears we can gain tremendously from even modest amounts of exercise. Resistance training will maintain/improve bone density and muscular strength, brisk walking will maintain/improve cardio health, proper diet and reduced fat mass is helpful in controlling inflammation levels. Stretching or Yoga is good for flexibility. Extreme exercise like all things extreme bring danger of overdoing it. Exercise is only one piece of the puzzle. We have the rest of life to get it right so we don't need to rush or over do it, but we should be moving in the right direction. Moving is the operative word. Be well. JR -----Original Message-----From: jwwright [mailto:jwwright@...]Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 8:31 AM Subject: Re: [ ] Re: How much is enuf? And that's what I was hoping we'd do in defining "fit" because I think the "fitness" types tend to dominate the exercise theme. Hard working people get a lot of exercise and also develop a lot of ills. And some of those ills can be traced to diet and can be aided by diet changes. There is one area we failed to mention (this time around) and that is weight bearing exercise to secure bone health. The incidence of Osteoporosis in the CR world bothers me. And the idea I can "accept" less of a "fit" level, less than say a marathoner, bothers me also. I accept only that I'm aging and can't run for some health reason, but I do not accept it as a necessary CR result, eg. I'm still working on running although I don't think it's necessary for health. And I'm still going to lift weights to maybe keep the bone density up - a major problem I believe in olders. I still puzzle the heart rate, because I've never been able to get mine up to the standard. Like 130 it was in the stress test. I could barely get there even at 4.4mph, 14% grade and my legs were getting tired. I was not out of breath. My legs just won't walk that fast for long. I was fairly "comfortable" at 120. So I think I operate at a lower HR. Maybe because the BP is higher. Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 In a message dated 10/15/04 9:40:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, chrisjohns2@... writes: There is no evidence for any of this. [liver stones] Evidence that it doesn't work, or that liver stones don't exist? When I stumbled across this once upon a time, I did some research, because it seemed so odd and I didn't think liver stones existed. I discovered a Thai web page http://www.md.chula.ac.th/surgery/collective/pdf/20040708.pdf which related that surgical procedures (and something presumably like sonic blasting) were indeed done for liver stones there. You have to read between the Thai, but can still get enough from the scattered English. The stones can be similar in composition to gall stones = cholsterol. "Intrahepatic lithiasis" (or "stones" instead of lithiasis) for web searches. PMID: 10795862 from Italy says that these are rare in Europe. Though Dr. is from Eurtope, which relates to what Logan posted. The question would be, in the "liver cleanse", are actual pre-existing stones being expelled, or are the stones prehaps being formed from the cleanse itself before being expelled. If the latter, then this might possibly influence serum cholesterol. Seems wacky, but there is some basis. Oh, one other ref: PMID: 15290945 on liver transplants (in an imaging pub) does specify stones as a possible complication. -- Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 In a message dated 10/15/04 9:54:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time, perspect1111@... writes: We have previously discussed using weight vests for osteoporosis prevention. If you lose thirty pounds on CR why not habitually, when you can, wear a thirty pound weight vest? Hi, Rodney. Is there evidence that continual, lesser weight is better than occasional, greater weight (as in weight lifting)? As for heart rate. I believe the amount of blood pumped depends on heart rate and HEART PUMPING CAPACITY per beat. If you have a low pulse rate it usually means you have a large heart, and that often is the result of extensive endurance exercise earlier in life. I personally find that if my resting HR gets above 70, then I can get resting rate back to 60 in fairly short order with runnning or squats. OTOH, I'm sure you know that HR taken right after awakening can tell you if you're exercising too much - say, going upwards from 60 in my case. It is good to have a large heart. But I believe that endurance athletes can have problems later in life if they do not continue to use that extra heart capacity, at least to a moderate extent. Hmmm, interesting point. I recall being surprised on seeing female bodybuilders talking (on tv) about how difficult it was to lose skeletal muscle - when the trend in competitions was less towards female hulks. Do you think that cardiac muscle would be the same or different in this regard? Also recall reading Sheehan (the running doctor) describe how, in the 70s, his enlarged heart was often viewed with alarm by cardiologists who hadn't been used to seeing anything but the usual, and equated it with the "enlarged heart" as a sign of heart disease. -- Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 In a message dated 10/15/04 9:34:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jwwright@... writes: I still puzzle the heart rate, because I've never been able to get mine up to the standard. Like 130 it was in the stress test. I could barely get there even at 4.4mph, 14% grade and my legs were getting tired. I was not out of breath. My legs just won't walk that fast for long. I was fairly "comfortable" at 120. So I think I operate at a lower HR. Maybe because the BP is higher. Jack, I'd think that pulse rate milestone would be easy to surpass, given this scheme: squats with weight. I was going to write a whole exposition about 20-rep breathing squats, butt-to-the-floor, but maybe probably that's not pertinent here. Still, to get pulse high, I don't think anything is better. If your muscles cannot overdrive your superior heart and lungs in ordinary fashion, maybe that's the way. MAY CAUSE SUDDEN DEATH, of course. But you, being so analytical, might find it cause for experimentation. -- Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.