Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

[Guest guest]

IF and only IF I have an idea WHAT that is.

Regards.

Re: [ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease> > > I would say that those who "overdo" either or both, could harmtheir health. We've heard from anorexic and severly underweightindividuals on this board and their health problems. Also our filesindicate that a BMI under 18 can lead to shorter, not longer life. And excessive exercise will not only NOT lengthen life, it couldshorten it (if you agree with the free radical theory). I myself havenoticed that exercisers/athletes often seem to be not only victims ofheart disease but cancer and other illnesses (besides Lance Armstrong,other athletes both famous and who I have personally known) .Remember Lou Gehrig and the disease named after him? All anecdotalto be sure, but as Rod says how many anecdotes do you need before youstart wondering.......> > My husband used to run a marathon a month in his youth. That wenton many 6 or 8 years or so. Now he can't walk more than a milewithout getting leg pain. I can't prove they're related, but it suremakes me wonder.> > Personally I try to do some yaga everyday (as recommended byOrnish), walk an extra mile a day, and do a bit of strength training. > > Moderation seems to be the best avenue.

[Guest guest]

IF and only IF I have an idea WHAT that is.

Regards.

Re: [ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease> > > I would say that those who "overdo" either or both, could harmtheir health. We've heard from anorexic and severly underweightindividuals on this board and their health problems. Also our filesindicate that a BMI under 18 can lead to shorter, not longer life. And excessive exercise will not only NOT lengthen life, it couldshorten it (if you agree with the free radical theory). I myself havenoticed that exercisers/athletes often seem to be not only victims ofheart disease but cancer and other illnesses (besides Lance Armstrong,other athletes both famous and who I have personally known) .Remember Lou Gehrig and the disease named after him? All anecdotalto be sure, but as Rod says how many anecdotes do you need before youstart wondering.......> > My husband used to run a marathon a month in his youth. That wenton many 6 or 8 years or so. Now he can't walk more than a milewithout getting leg pain. I can't prove they're related, but it suremakes me wonder.> > Personally I try to do some yaga everyday (as recommended byOrnish), walk an extra mile a day, and do a bit of strength training. > > Moderation seems to be the best avenue.

[Guest guest]

My review of exercise texts and articles does not give me a clue what that might be. Suggestion is 30 mins of walking per day.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

We should keep in mind that "exercise" as commonly used is a verygeneric term that means almost anything to anyone. Most that I see inthe local health club have as much clue about the way to properlyexercise as they have about proper nutrition. The vast majority do thewrong "exercises", or spend all their allotted time doing exercisesthat have limited benefit. Or do the right exercises with insufficientintensity and duration to overcome the body's natural tendency toresist adaptation to the physical stresses. Research has shown that up to a threshold, and that threshold ismoderately high, higher intensities over longer periods impart thegreatest benefit. Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too shortor too "light", or the "wrong" exercise do not provide anything in theway of desired goals, ie significant adaptation.So while these stories of hapless individuals that "exercised" butstill became sick are interesting they are also impossible to evaluateand judge. Who knows what they did, how they exercised or for how longetc. They carry no weight with me for these reasons. After all, we allknow a few CRON'ers that didn't make it too, don't we, despitehealthly lifestyle choices.I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of "exercise" and thefact of threshold effects, we need to establish an "OE" (OptimumExercise) standard of terminology and application.

[Guest guest]

My review of exercise texts and articles does not give me a clue what that might be. Suggestion is 30 mins of walking per day.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

We should keep in mind that "exercise" as commonly used is a verygeneric term that means almost anything to anyone. Most that I see inthe local health club have as much clue about the way to properlyexercise as they have about proper nutrition. The vast majority do thewrong "exercises", or spend all their allotted time doing exercisesthat have limited benefit. Or do the right exercises with insufficientintensity and duration to overcome the body's natural tendency toresist adaptation to the physical stresses. Research has shown that up to a threshold, and that threshold ismoderately high, higher intensities over longer periods impart thegreatest benefit. Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too shortor too "light", or the "wrong" exercise do not provide anything in theway of desired goals, ie significant adaptation.So while these stories of hapless individuals that "exercised" butstill became sick are interesting they are also impossible to evaluateand judge. Who knows what they did, how they exercised or for how longetc. They carry no weight with me for these reasons. After all, we allknow a few CRON'ers that didn't make it too, don't we, despitehealthly lifestyle choices.I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of "exercise" and thefact of threshold effects, we need to establish an "OE" (OptimumExercise) standard of terminology and application.

[Guest guest]

Hi Rodney!

1) The research is multitudinous and of great variety so depends on

what you want to measure, but almost anything that was measured

followed this principle: greater intensity/duration = greater

adaptation. eg, VO2, bone mass, muscle/tendon mass, muscle strength,

muscle endurance, coordination etc

2)What I mean to say is exercise below a fuzzy threshold imparts

little benefit. That is there exists a lower limit that above which

benefits are had up to a moderately high level, and that below which

little or no benefits. As one approaches the highest levels

diminishing returns set in. Also, PROPER exercise must be done correctly.

3) Tough question but off top of my head I say: 30 mins endurance

exercise (treadmill, bike) at least 3 times per week @60% VO2; 20 mins

" difficult " strength training (proper selection is vital!) once or

twice per week; stretching all major joints for about 3 reps each,

once or twice per week (shouldn't take much time).

As I said this is all very general and off the top of my head based on

research I've encountered to date, and is subject to change or to

individual goals or health or physical limitations.

All the major systems are hit .. ie cardio, bone, muscle, ligament,

joint ROM, neuromuscular (coordination)..

>

> A couple of questions:

>

> > ....... Research has shown that up to a threshold, and that

> > threshold is moderately high, higher intensities over longer

> > periods impart the greatest benefit.

>

> XXXXX In the research to which you refer what were the measures that

> were regarded as representing " benefit " ? XXXXX

>

> > Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too short or too " light " ,

> > or the " wrong " exercise do not provide anything in the way of

> > desired goals, ie significant adaptation.

>

> XXXXX So are you saying that in your opinion moderate exercise that

> is below the " moderately high " intensity you mention, imparts no

> benefit at all? XXXXX

>

> > I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of " exercise " and the

> > fact of threshold effects, we need to establish an " OE " (Optimum

> > Exercise) standard of terminology and application.

>

> XXXXX So what in your opinion represents " optimum exercise " and what

> are the most important measures by which one can judge whether one is

> getting it? Thanks. XXXXX

>

> >

[Guest guest]

Hi Rodney!

1) The research is multitudinous and of great variety so depends on

what you want to measure, but almost anything that was measured

followed this principle: greater intensity/duration = greater

adaptation. eg, VO2, bone mass, muscle/tendon mass, muscle strength,

muscle endurance, coordination etc

2)What I mean to say is exercise below a fuzzy threshold imparts

little benefit. That is there exists a lower limit that above which

benefits are had up to a moderately high level, and that below which

little or no benefits. As one approaches the highest levels

diminishing returns set in. Also, PROPER exercise must be done correctly.

3) Tough question but off top of my head I say: 30 mins endurance

exercise (treadmill, bike) at least 3 times per week @60% VO2; 20 mins

" difficult " strength training (proper selection is vital!) once or

twice per week; stretching all major joints for about 3 reps each,

once or twice per week (shouldn't take much time).

As I said this is all very general and off the top of my head based on

research I've encountered to date, and is subject to change or to

individual goals or health or physical limitations.

All the major systems are hit .. ie cardio, bone, muscle, ligament,

joint ROM, neuromuscular (coordination)..

>

> A couple of questions:

>

> > ....... Research has shown that up to a threshold, and that

> > threshold is moderately high, higher intensities over longer

> > periods impart the greatest benefit.

>

> XXXXX In the research to which you refer what were the measures that

> were regarded as representing " benefit " ? XXXXX

>

> > Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too short or too " light " ,

> > or the " wrong " exercise do not provide anything in the way of

> > desired goals, ie significant adaptation.

>

> XXXXX So are you saying that in your opinion moderate exercise that

> is below the " moderately high " intensity you mention, imparts no

> benefit at all? XXXXX

>

> > I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of " exercise " and the

> > fact of threshold effects, we need to establish an " OE " (Optimum

> > Exercise) standard of terminology and application.

>

> XXXXX So what in your opinion represents " optimum exercise " and what

> are the most important measures by which one can judge whether one is

> getting it? Thanks. XXXXX

>

> >

[Guest guest]

Athletes such as marathon runners frequently push their bodies to the

limits in training and in competition, so one might expect that this

would place them at more risk than those of us who exercise

moderately. However, even exercising much more intensely...

" ..the risk for sudden cardiac death associated with such intense

physical effort was exceedingly small (1 in 50,000) and as little as

1/100th of the annual overall risk associated with living, either with

or without heart disease. "

Risk for sudden cardiac death associated with marathon running.

Maron BJ, Poliac LC, WO.

Cardiovascular Research Division, Minneapolis Heart Institute

Foundation, Minnesota 55407, USA.

OBJECTIVES: This analysis was performed to quantitatively assess the

relative risks, associated with underlying cardiovascular disease,

incurred in the course of intense competitive sports. BACKGROUND:

Sudden cardiac death during athletic activities is a highly visible

event, and controversy persists regarding the true risks associated

with participation in sports. METHODS: The prevalence of sudden death

was assessed in two systematically tabulated groups of endurance

runners competing in the annual Marine Corps (1976 to 1994) and Twin

Cities (1982 to 1994) marathons, held over a cumulative 30-year

period. RESULTS: A total of 215,413 runners completed the races, and

four exercise-related sudden deaths occurred, each due to unsuspected

structural cardiovascular disease. Three deaths occurred during the

race (after 15 to 24 miles [24 to 38.4 km]) and the other immediately

after its completion. The ages were 19 to 58 years (average 37), and

three were men. Three of the sudden deaths were due to atherosclerotic

coronary artery disease (narrowing of two or three vessels) and one to

anomalous origin of the left main coronary artery from the right sinus

of Valsalva. None of the four runners had prior documentation of heart

disease or experienced prodromal symptoms, and two had previously

completed three marathon races each. The overall prevalence of sudden

cardiac death during the marathon was only 0.002%, strikingly lower

than for several other variables of risk for premature death

calculated for the general U.S. population. CONCLUSIONS: Although

highly trained athletes such as marathon runners may harbor underlying

and potentially lethal cardiovascular disease, the risk for sudden

cardiac death associated with such intense physical effort was

exceedingly small (1 in 50,000) and as little as 1/100th of the annual

overall risk associated with living, either with or without heart

disease. The low risk for sudden death identified in long-distance

runners from the general population suggests that routine screening

for cardiovascular disease in such athletic populations may not be

justifiable.

JW, many (if not most) heart attacks are caused by a sudden blocking

of the lumen and consequently the blood supply in an artery to a

portion of the heart by dislodged plaque. So doesn't it stand to

reason that a larger lumen is less susceptible due to its larger

internal volume?? Seems common sense to me.

> As a scientist, I can't ignore any data whether it's called

anecdotal or not. There is little scientific evidence in the health

field's articles.

> Personal experiences are hard to dismiss.

> Armstrong is cylcing because he survived and can cycle - that's all

I can conclude.

> I hafta think if exercise was good for longevity, footballers, eg,

would live forever.

>

> Without pushing anything, allow me to post a medical text.

> DeLee: DeLee and Drez's Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, 2nd ed.,

> Section D Athletes and Sudden Cardiac Death

> S. Dunnick MD, FACC

>

> Pheidippides may have been one of the first athletes to suffer a

sudden death event during an athletic endeavor. Hank Gathers, Reggie

, Flo Hyman, and Maravich may be among the better-known

athletes to have suffered such an event. Although it has been reported

with less dramatic publicity, sudden death of athletes during high

school physical education class or on the Little League baseball

diamond is equally tragic.

>

>

> I discuss both screening and more detailed diagnostic tests that are

used to try to detect the athlete who is at higher risk. I also

discuss the use of the evaluation for approximating risk groups in

terms of probabilities and possibilities rather than absolutes.

>

> Barry Maron published a schematic of the number of athletes who were

screened for heart disease. Not all athletes with heart disease have

heart disease that is capable of producing sudden cardiac death. Not

all athletes with a heart problem capable of causing sudden death

actually go on to experience sudden death. Therefore, a large total

number of athletes must be screened to determine the percentage who

have heart disease. Then, the percentage of athletes with heart

disease that can lead to sudden death is evaluated. Finally, it is the

smallest group that actually goes on to experience sudden death. These

types of statistical approaches lead to conclusions that in the minds

of the athlete, the family of the athlete, the coaching staff, and the

school administration show a variable range. On one end of the

spectrum is complete fear of competing in any setting or after any

degree of evaluation, regardless of how extensive it may be. On the

other end, minimal effort is made to screen the athlete because it is

believed that the problem is too infrequent to support the economic

commitment.{interesting -what?}

> If the combined prevalence of congenital heart conditions that could

cause sudden cardiac death is approximately 0.3% of the general

population, we must begin to look at the total number of athletes

involved.[42] If there are approximately 5000 professional athletes,

500,000 college athletes, and 5,000,000 high school athletes, the

total number of 5,505,000 is reached. At 0.3%, it appears that there

are 16,515 athletes with the potential for sudden cardiac death. Not

all athletes with the possibility of having a sudden death event,

however, actually die in this way.

>

> [72] estimated the incidence of sudden cardiac death that

occurred during jogging in Rhode Island. During the period of 1975

through 1980, the incidence rate was reported as 1 death per 15,240

joggers per year. In a New England Journal of Medicine article written

by Siscovick,[68] sudden death during " vigorous exercise " was reported

as 1 cardiac arrest per 20,000 exercises in Seattle per year.

>

> The annual incidence rates of sudden death among joggers in Dallas

[25] and marathon runners in South Africa[54] are reportedly higher: 3

to 4 per 20,000 exercisers per year.

>

> Multiple studies[68] [72] [77] have suggested that the risk of

sudden death is increased during times of greater exertion in any

given 24-hour period. In Finland, [77] a 4.5-fold increased risk was

noted in cross-country skiers; in Rhode Island,[72] a 7-fold increased

risk was recorded among joggers; and in Seattle,[68] a 6-fold

increased risk in athletes has been documented. These studies provide

good and reproducible data that indicate that there appears to be an

increased risk of sudden death during exercise.

>

> This increased risk of sudden death during exercise actually

decreases as a given individual spends increased amounts of time

exercising. Siscovick showed that men who exercise for less than 20

minutes per week had a 56-fold increase in sudden death during

exercise. As exercise time per week increased, the sudden death rate

fell, and at peak, this rate for men exercising longer than 20 minutes

per day was reduced to a 5-fold increase. {I notice this is less than

the increased risk from HRT which has been criticized.}

>

> Causes

> The causes of sudden cardiac death among athletes vary by age [46] (

Fig. 7D-1 ). Numbers, again, are not exact but estimates have been

made. In the athlete who is older than 35 years of age, coronary

artery disease remains the most frequent cause of sudden cardiac

death. Other diseases are prevalent at variable rates, however, as is

shown in the figure.

>

> Figure 7-D-1 Estimated prevalences of cardiovascular diseases

responsible for sudden death are compared in young (?35 years old) and

older (>35 years) trained athletes. Top, Causes of sudden cardiac

death in young competitive athletes (median age, 17 years), based on

systematic tracking of 158 athletes in the United States, primarily

from 1985 to 1995. In an additional 2% of the series, no evidence of

cardiovascular disease sufficient to explain death was evident at

autopsy. " Possible HCM " denotes hearts with some morphologic features

consistent with (but not diagnostic of) hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

(Adapted from Maron BJ, Shirani J, Paliac LC: Sudden death in young

competitive athletes. Clinical, demographic, and pathological

profiles. JAMA 276:199-204, 1996. Copyright 1996, American Medical

Association.) Bottom, Causes of sudden cardiac death in older trained

athletes. Data were assembled by collating findings from available

published studies. Ao, aorta; ARVD, arrhythmogenic right ventricular

dysplasia; AS, aortic stenosis; CAD, coronary artery disease; LAD,

left anterior descending; MVP, mitral valve prolapse. (From Maron BJ,

Epstein SE, WC: Causes of sudden death in competitive

athletes. J Am Coll Cardiol 7:204-214, 1986. Reprinted with permission

from the American College of Cardiology.)

>

>

>

> Among athletes, 90% of sudden deaths appear to occur during

exercise, predominantly during late afternoon and early evening hours.

>

>

> Notice the TONE of the article is that some have heart problems -

not that exercise can cure, or not cure. The idea is to detect those

at risk and limit their activites, I suppose.

>

> Our TONE should be which exercise will extend life or lower

mortality, - not vague claims that larger lumens are good, eg. Another

question: is there a benefit of exercise that out weighs the SCD risk?

>

> Regards.

[Guest guest]

Athletes such as marathon runners frequently push their bodies to the

limits in training and in competition, so one might expect that this

would place them at more risk than those of us who exercise

moderately. However, even exercising much more intensely...

" ..the risk for sudden cardiac death associated with such intense

physical effort was exceedingly small (1 in 50,000) and as little as

1/100th of the annual overall risk associated with living, either with

or without heart disease. "

Risk for sudden cardiac death associated with marathon running.

Maron BJ, Poliac LC, WO.

Cardiovascular Research Division, Minneapolis Heart Institute

Foundation, Minnesota 55407, USA.

OBJECTIVES: This analysis was performed to quantitatively assess the

relative risks, associated with underlying cardiovascular disease,

incurred in the course of intense competitive sports. BACKGROUND:

Sudden cardiac death during athletic activities is a highly visible

event, and controversy persists regarding the true risks associated

with participation in sports. METHODS: The prevalence of sudden death

was assessed in two systematically tabulated groups of endurance

runners competing in the annual Marine Corps (1976 to 1994) and Twin

Cities (1982 to 1994) marathons, held over a cumulative 30-year

period. RESULTS: A total of 215,413 runners completed the races, and

four exercise-related sudden deaths occurred, each due to unsuspected

structural cardiovascular disease. Three deaths occurred during the

race (after 15 to 24 miles [24 to 38.4 km]) and the other immediately

after its completion. The ages were 19 to 58 years (average 37), and

three were men. Three of the sudden deaths were due to atherosclerotic

coronary artery disease (narrowing of two or three vessels) and one to

anomalous origin of the left main coronary artery from the right sinus

of Valsalva. None of the four runners had prior documentation of heart

disease or experienced prodromal symptoms, and two had previously

completed three marathon races each. The overall prevalence of sudden

cardiac death during the marathon was only 0.002%, strikingly lower

than for several other variables of risk for premature death

calculated for the general U.S. population. CONCLUSIONS: Although

highly trained athletes such as marathon runners may harbor underlying

and potentially lethal cardiovascular disease, the risk for sudden

cardiac death associated with such intense physical effort was

exceedingly small (1 in 50,000) and as little as 1/100th of the annual

overall risk associated with living, either with or without heart

disease. The low risk for sudden death identified in long-distance

runners from the general population suggests that routine screening

for cardiovascular disease in such athletic populations may not be

justifiable.

JW, many (if not most) heart attacks are caused by a sudden blocking

of the lumen and consequently the blood supply in an artery to a

portion of the heart by dislodged plaque. So doesn't it stand to

reason that a larger lumen is less susceptible due to its larger

internal volume?? Seems common sense to me.

> As a scientist, I can't ignore any data whether it's called

anecdotal or not. There is little scientific evidence in the health

field's articles.

> Personal experiences are hard to dismiss.

> Armstrong is cylcing because he survived and can cycle - that's all

I can conclude.

> I hafta think if exercise was good for longevity, footballers, eg,

would live forever.

>

> Without pushing anything, allow me to post a medical text.

> DeLee: DeLee and Drez's Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, 2nd ed.,

> Section D Athletes and Sudden Cardiac Death

> S. Dunnick MD, FACC

>

> Pheidippides may have been one of the first athletes to suffer a

sudden death event during an athletic endeavor. Hank Gathers, Reggie

, Flo Hyman, and Maravich may be among the better-known

athletes to have suffered such an event. Although it has been reported

with less dramatic publicity, sudden death of athletes during high

school physical education class or on the Little League baseball

diamond is equally tragic.

>

>

> I discuss both screening and more detailed diagnostic tests that are

used to try to detect the athlete who is at higher risk. I also

discuss the use of the evaluation for approximating risk groups in

terms of probabilities and possibilities rather than absolutes.

>

> Barry Maron published a schematic of the number of athletes who were

screened for heart disease. Not all athletes with heart disease have

heart disease that is capable of producing sudden cardiac death. Not

all athletes with a heart problem capable of causing sudden death

actually go on to experience sudden death. Therefore, a large total

number of athletes must be screened to determine the percentage who

have heart disease. Then, the percentage of athletes with heart

disease that can lead to sudden death is evaluated. Finally, it is the

smallest group that actually goes on to experience sudden death. These

types of statistical approaches lead to conclusions that in the minds

of the athlete, the family of the athlete, the coaching staff, and the

school administration show a variable range. On one end of the

spectrum is complete fear of competing in any setting or after any

degree of evaluation, regardless of how extensive it may be. On the

other end, minimal effort is made to screen the athlete because it is

believed that the problem is too infrequent to support the economic

commitment.{interesting -what?}

> If the combined prevalence of congenital heart conditions that could

cause sudden cardiac death is approximately 0.3% of the general

population, we must begin to look at the total number of athletes

involved.[42] If there are approximately 5000 professional athletes,

500,000 college athletes, and 5,000,000 high school athletes, the

total number of 5,505,000 is reached. At 0.3%, it appears that there

are 16,515 athletes with the potential for sudden cardiac death. Not

all athletes with the possibility of having a sudden death event,

however, actually die in this way.

>

> [72] estimated the incidence of sudden cardiac death that

occurred during jogging in Rhode Island. During the period of 1975

through 1980, the incidence rate was reported as 1 death per 15,240

joggers per year. In a New England Journal of Medicine article written

by Siscovick,[68] sudden death during " vigorous exercise " was reported

as 1 cardiac arrest per 20,000 exercises in Seattle per year.

>

> The annual incidence rates of sudden death among joggers in Dallas

[25] and marathon runners in South Africa[54] are reportedly higher: 3

to 4 per 20,000 exercisers per year.

>

> Multiple studies[68] [72] [77] have suggested that the risk of

sudden death is increased during times of greater exertion in any

given 24-hour period. In Finland, [77] a 4.5-fold increased risk was

noted in cross-country skiers; in Rhode Island,[72] a 7-fold increased

risk was recorded among joggers; and in Seattle,[68] a 6-fold

increased risk in athletes has been documented. These studies provide

good and reproducible data that indicate that there appears to be an

increased risk of sudden death during exercise.

>

> This increased risk of sudden death during exercise actually

decreases as a given individual spends increased amounts of time

exercising. Siscovick showed that men who exercise for less than 20

minutes per week had a 56-fold increase in sudden death during

exercise. As exercise time per week increased, the sudden death rate

fell, and at peak, this rate for men exercising longer than 20 minutes

per day was reduced to a 5-fold increase. {I notice this is less than

the increased risk from HRT which has been criticized.}

>

> Causes

> The causes of sudden cardiac death among athletes vary by age [46] (

Fig. 7D-1 ). Numbers, again, are not exact but estimates have been

made. In the athlete who is older than 35 years of age, coronary

artery disease remains the most frequent cause of sudden cardiac

death. Other diseases are prevalent at variable rates, however, as is

shown in the figure.

>

> Figure 7-D-1 Estimated prevalences of cardiovascular diseases

responsible for sudden death are compared in young (?35 years old) and

older (>35 years) trained athletes. Top, Causes of sudden cardiac

death in young competitive athletes (median age, 17 years), based on

systematic tracking of 158 athletes in the United States, primarily

from 1985 to 1995. In an additional 2% of the series, no evidence of

cardiovascular disease sufficient to explain death was evident at

autopsy. " Possible HCM " denotes hearts with some morphologic features

consistent with (but not diagnostic of) hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

(Adapted from Maron BJ, Shirani J, Paliac LC: Sudden death in young

competitive athletes. Clinical, demographic, and pathological

profiles. JAMA 276:199-204, 1996. Copyright 1996, American Medical

Association.) Bottom, Causes of sudden cardiac death in older trained

athletes. Data were assembled by collating findings from available

published studies. Ao, aorta; ARVD, arrhythmogenic right ventricular

dysplasia; AS, aortic stenosis; CAD, coronary artery disease; LAD,

left anterior descending; MVP, mitral valve prolapse. (From Maron BJ,

Epstein SE, WC: Causes of sudden death in competitive

athletes. J Am Coll Cardiol 7:204-214, 1986. Reprinted with permission

from the American College of Cardiology.)

>

>

>

> Among athletes, 90% of sudden deaths appear to occur during

exercise, predominantly during late afternoon and early evening hours.

>

>

> Notice the TONE of the article is that some have heart problems -

not that exercise can cure, or not cure. The idea is to detect those

at risk and limit their activites, I suppose.

>

> Our TONE should be which exercise will extend life or lower

mortality, - not vague claims that larger lumens are good, eg. Another

question: is there a benefit of exercise that out weighs the SCD risk?

>

> Regards.

[Guest guest]

Comes to mind that smoking was not that bad for her health, for reasons unknown. My 96 yo male neighbor smoked, chewed tobacco, and drank a pint every week. He was short but he was not thin. So I take that into the maze of data. I don't exclude it.

Smoking is something I don't hafta do, like a lot of other things.

I hafta walk, because my doc said to, but I don't hafta run until someone takes all that REAL fitness acquired data on HUMANS, not the silly rats, and shows some longevity advantage. There must be tons of it that's been ignored, in high schools, colleges, NFL, and see how many of those athletes are alive today and their lifespan.

The review of centenarians in .org, did not show any particular relationships.

You can start by trying to figure out why 5 times as many are women, when 100 yrs ago, men's lifespan was greater.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Keep in mind, too, that these are all anecdotal and "one mouse"experiments. My co-worker's mother lived to 100 and she smoked herwhole life. He continues to point to this as evidence that smokingisn't bad for your health. Nothing -- including CR -- is 100% insurance that you will live a longtime. It's best to hedge your bets and do everything you can to stayhealthy.Diane

[Guest guest]

Comes to mind that smoking was not that bad for her health, for reasons unknown. My 96 yo male neighbor smoked, chewed tobacco, and drank a pint every week. He was short but he was not thin. So I take that into the maze of data. I don't exclude it.

Smoking is something I don't hafta do, like a lot of other things.

I hafta walk, because my doc said to, but I don't hafta run until someone takes all that REAL fitness acquired data on HUMANS, not the silly rats, and shows some longevity advantage. There must be tons of it that's been ignored, in high schools, colleges, NFL, and see how many of those athletes are alive today and their lifespan.

The review of centenarians in .org, did not show any particular relationships.

You can start by trying to figure out why 5 times as many are women, when 100 yrs ago, men's lifespan was greater.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Keep in mind, too, that these are all anecdotal and "one mouse"experiments. My co-worker's mother lived to 100 and she smoked herwhole life. He continues to point to this as evidence that smokingisn't bad for your health. Nothing -- including CR -- is 100% insurance that you will live a longtime. It's best to hedge your bets and do everything you can to stayhealthy.Diane

[Guest guest]

I think the " what " and " how much " depends on where you are now. If you

are of advancing age and previously unaccustom to exercise then I

would not risk it. I have been exercising for a very long time from an

early age so I've been involved in this for quite some time so see my

risk for moderate exercise as negligible. In short, I know what I am

doing with my body and how it is reacting, I've made all the mistakes

at an early age. I would NOT begin to experiment at an advanced age

(Don't try this at home!

> My review of exercise texts and articles does not give me a clue

what that might be. Suggestion is 30 mins of walking per day.

>

> Regards.

> [ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

>

>

> We should keep in mind that " exercise " as commonly used is a very

> generic term that means almost anything to anyone. Most that I see in

> the local health club have as much clue about the way to properly

> exercise as they have about proper nutrition. The vast majority do the

> wrong " exercises " , or spend all their allotted time doing exercises

> that have limited benefit. Or do the right exercises with insufficient

> intensity and duration to overcome the body's natural tendency to

> resist adaptation to the physical stresses.

>

> Research has shown that up to a threshold, and that threshold is

> moderately high, higher intensities over longer periods impart the

> greatest benefit. Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too short

> or too " light " , or the " wrong " exercise do not provide anything in the

> way of desired goals, ie significant adaptation.

>

> So while these stories of hapless individuals that " exercised " but

> still became sick are interesting they are also impossible to evaluate

> and judge. Who knows what they did, how they exercised or for how long

> etc. They carry no weight with me for these reasons. After all, we all

> know a few CRON'ers that didn't make it too, don't we, despite

> healthly lifestyle choices.

>

> I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of " exercise " and the

> fact of threshold effects, we need to establish an " OE " (Optimum

> Exercise) standard of terminology and application.

>

>

[Guest guest]

I think the " what " and " how much " depends on where you are now. If you

are of advancing age and previously unaccustom to exercise then I

would not risk it. I have been exercising for a very long time from an

early age so I've been involved in this for quite some time so see my

risk for moderate exercise as negligible. In short, I know what I am

doing with my body and how it is reacting, I've made all the mistakes

at an early age. I would NOT begin to experiment at an advanced age

(Don't try this at home!

> My review of exercise texts and articles does not give me a clue

what that might be. Suggestion is 30 mins of walking per day.

>

> Regards.

> [ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

>

>

> We should keep in mind that " exercise " as commonly used is a very

> generic term that means almost anything to anyone. Most that I see in

> the local health club have as much clue about the way to properly

> exercise as they have about proper nutrition. The vast majority do the

> wrong " exercises " , or spend all their allotted time doing exercises

> that have limited benefit. Or do the right exercises with insufficient

> intensity and duration to overcome the body's natural tendency to

> resist adaptation to the physical stresses.

>

> Research has shown that up to a threshold, and that threshold is

> moderately high, higher intensities over longer periods impart the

> greatest benefit. Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too short

> or too " light " , or the " wrong " exercise do not provide anything in the

> way of desired goals, ie significant adaptation.

>

> So while these stories of hapless individuals that " exercised " but

> still became sick are interesting they are also impossible to evaluate

> and judge. Who knows what they did, how they exercised or for how long

> etc. They carry no weight with me for these reasons. After all, we all

> know a few CRON'ers that didn't make it too, don't we, despite

> healthly lifestyle choices.

>

> I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of " exercise " and the

> fact of threshold effects, we need to establish an " OE " (Optimum

> Exercise) standard of terminology and application.

>

>

[Guest guest]

> I hafta think if exercise was good for longevity, footballers, eg,

would live forever.

I really have to disagree with this observation. Most footballers are

obese. They eat to gain weight, not to optimize their nutrition. They

do the opposite of CRON.

They don't really do " exercise " in the aerobic fitness sense. Yes, I

realize they get a lot of exercise, but it's really the wrong kind -

intense and episodic. Bad for the heart. Plus all the physical

contact is damaging to the body.

My guess would be that football players would live less long than the

average.

[Guest guest]

> I hafta think if exercise was good for longevity, footballers, eg,

would live forever.

I really have to disagree with this observation. Most footballers are

obese. They eat to gain weight, not to optimize their nutrition. They

do the opposite of CRON.

They don't really do " exercise " in the aerobic fitness sense. Yes, I

realize they get a lot of exercise, but it's really the wrong kind -

intense and episodic. Bad for the heart. Plus all the physical

contact is damaging to the body.

My guess would be that football players would live less long than the

average.

[Guest guest]

Yes, and my father enjoyed his pipe and lucky strikes until he succumbed to throat cancer in his late 40's .

These anecdotes don't prove anything.

JR

-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ]On Behalf Of jwwrightSent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 1:29 PM Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Comes to mind that smoking was not that bad for her health, for reasons unknown. My 96 yo male neighbor smoked, chewed tobacco, and drank a pint every week. He was short but he was not thin. So I take that into the maze of data. I don't exclude it.

Smoking is something I don't hafta do, like a lot of other things.

I hafta walk, because my doc said to, but I don't hafta run until someone takes all that REAL fitness acquired data on HUMANS, not the silly rats, and shows some longevity advantage. There must be tons of it that's been ignored, in high schools, colleges, NFL, and see how many of those athletes are alive today and their lifespan.

The review of centenarians in .org, did not show any particular relationships.

You can start by trying to figure out why 5 times as many are women, when 100 yrs ago, men's lifespan was greater.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Keep in mind, too, that these are all anecdotal and "one mouse"experiments. My co-worker's mother lived to 100 and she smoked herwhole life. He continues to point to this as evidence that smokingisn't bad for your health. Nothing -- including CR -- is 100% insurance that you will live a longtime. It's best to hedge your bets and do everything you can to stayhealthy.Diane

[Guest guest]

Yes, and my father enjoyed his pipe and lucky strikes until he succumbed to throat cancer in his late 40's .

These anecdotes don't prove anything.

JR

-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ]On Behalf Of jwwrightSent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 1:29 PM Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Comes to mind that smoking was not that bad for her health, for reasons unknown. My 96 yo male neighbor smoked, chewed tobacco, and drank a pint every week. He was short but he was not thin. So I take that into the maze of data. I don't exclude it.

Smoking is something I don't hafta do, like a lot of other things.

I hafta walk, because my doc said to, but I don't hafta run until someone takes all that REAL fitness acquired data on HUMANS, not the silly rats, and shows some longevity advantage. There must be tons of it that's been ignored, in high schools, colleges, NFL, and see how many of those athletes are alive today and their lifespan.

The review of centenarians in .org, did not show any particular relationships.

You can start by trying to figure out why 5 times as many are women, when 100 yrs ago, men's lifespan was greater.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Keep in mind, too, that these are all anecdotal and "one mouse"experiments. My co-worker's mother lived to 100 and she smoked herwhole life. He continues to point to this as evidence that smokingisn't bad for your health. Nothing -- including CR -- is 100% insurance that you will live a longtime. It's best to hedge your bets and do everything you can to stayhealthy.Diane

[Guest guest]

Hi :

1) So the criteria are all measures, of one kind or another, of

athletic ability. No one doubts that there is a phenomenon called

training effect whereby if you use a muscle the muscle becomes more

effective for the purpose for which it was trained. Certainly we can

likely agree that if we are going to live to be 100 or more we need

to be physically capable, so that we can remain independant as long

as possible - fitter if you like. But how is this relevant to

health? Especially, if it is relevant at all, how is it relevant to

the health of people already pursuing a CRON diet?

2) I posted here a month or so ago a study by Gibala at

McMaster University which showed that just 32 thirty-second sprints

in six training seconds spread over two weeks doubled (yes, doubled)

the endurance capacity of the subjects. This doesn't seem like a

huge effort and it does seem to have had a large effect. So I am not

convinced about the validity of your 'threshold' point.

3) I wonder how effective your program would be in comparison with

Gibala's results? But all that is established by this is that

physical effort makes a person fitter. It doesn't convince me that

it makes them healthier, especially in light of the New England

Centenarian study which has found that 'exercise' is NOT one of the

distinguishing characteristcs of the centenarians they have studied.

But we all agree, probably, that some minimum level of exercise is

absolutely essential. Precisely where the 'enough threshold' is

located, and how much HEALTH benefit can be derived from going beyond

it, is far from clear to me. So far as I know it has not yet been

determined.

Rodney.

> >

> > A couple of questions:

> >

> > > ....... Research has shown that up to a threshold, and

that

> > > threshold is moderately high, higher intensities over

longer

> > > periods impart the greatest benefit.

> >

> > XXXXX In the research to which you refer what were the measures

that

> > were regarded as representing " benefit " ? XXXXX

> >

> > > Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too short or

too " light " ,

> > > or the " wrong " exercise do not provide anything in the way

of

> > > desired goals, ie significant adaptation.

> >

> > XXXXX So are you saying that in your opinion moderate exercise

that

> > is below the " moderately high " intensity you mention, imparts no

> > benefit at all? XXXXX

> >

> > > I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of " exercise " and

the

> > > fact of threshold effects, we need to establish an " OE " (Optimum

> > > Exercise) standard of terminology and application.

> >

> > XXXXX So what in your opinion represents " optimum exercise " and

what

> > are the most important measures by which one can judge whether

one is

> > getting it? Thanks. XXXXX

> >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Hi :

1) So the criteria are all measures, of one kind or another, of

athletic ability. No one doubts that there is a phenomenon called

training effect whereby if you use a muscle the muscle becomes more

effective for the purpose for which it was trained. Certainly we can

likely agree that if we are going to live to be 100 or more we need

to be physically capable, so that we can remain independant as long

as possible - fitter if you like. But how is this relevant to

health? Especially, if it is relevant at all, how is it relevant to

the health of people already pursuing a CRON diet?

2) I posted here a month or so ago a study by Gibala at

McMaster University which showed that just 32 thirty-second sprints

in six training seconds spread over two weeks doubled (yes, doubled)

the endurance capacity of the subjects. This doesn't seem like a

huge effort and it does seem to have had a large effect. So I am not

convinced about the validity of your 'threshold' point.

3) I wonder how effective your program would be in comparison with

Gibala's results? But all that is established by this is that

physical effort makes a person fitter. It doesn't convince me that

it makes them healthier, especially in light of the New England

Centenarian study which has found that 'exercise' is NOT one of the

distinguishing characteristcs of the centenarians they have studied.

But we all agree, probably, that some minimum level of exercise is

absolutely essential. Precisely where the 'enough threshold' is

located, and how much HEALTH benefit can be derived from going beyond

it, is far from clear to me. So far as I know it has not yet been

determined.

Rodney.

> >

> > A couple of questions:

> >

> > > ....... Research has shown that up to a threshold, and

that

> > > threshold is moderately high, higher intensities over

longer

> > > periods impart the greatest benefit.

> >

> > XXXXX In the research to which you refer what were the measures

that

> > were regarded as representing " benefit " ? XXXXX

> >

> > > Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too short or

too " light " ,

> > > or the " wrong " exercise do not provide anything in the way

of

> > > desired goals, ie significant adaptation.

> >

> > XXXXX So are you saying that in your opinion moderate exercise

that

> > is below the " moderately high " intensity you mention, imparts no

> > benefit at all? XXXXX

> >

> > > I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of " exercise " and

the

> > > fact of threshold effects, we need to establish an " OE " (Optimum

> > > Exercise) standard of terminology and application.

> >

> > XXXXX So what in your opinion represents " optimum exercise " and

what

> > are the most important measures by which one can judge whether

one is

> > getting it? Thanks. XXXXX

> >

> > >

[Guest guest]

That article is the risk, whereas the text was relative risk. Like 5 times for a person who runs regularly. Surely, the risk is low, but in Rhode Island, eg, it was shown the relative risk was 7x greater for a marathoner than a couch potato. Pritikin said it was due to diet. (Diet For Runners, pg 80).

What I experience is that walking outdoors is better than a treadmill (same speed).

Walking on a treadmill is better than no exercise at all for general health - controlling weight, motility, blood pressure. I get to eat a little more.

But I wouldn't be doing either had I not lost 60# dieting. So I hafta favor weightloss over exercise.

And I can do those things because I DON'T have CVD (or so the angiogram says).

BTW, I'm not so sure losing 60# was a good idea other than feeling a LOT better.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Athletes such as marathon runners frequently push their bodies to thelimits in training and in competition, so one might expect that thiswould place them at more risk than those of us who exercisemoderately. However, even exercising much more intensely..."..the risk for sudden cardiac death associated with such intensephysical effort was exceedingly small (1 in 50,000) and as little as1/100th of the annual overall risk associated with living, either withor without heart disease." Risk for sudden cardiac death associated with marathon running.Maron BJ, Poliac LC, WO.Cardiovascular Research Division, Minneapolis Heart InstituteFoundation, Minnesota 55407, USA.OBJECTIVES: This analysis was performed to quantitatively assess therelative risks, associated with underlying cardiovascular disease,incurred in the course of intense competitive sports. BACKGROUND:Sudden cardiac death during athletic activities is a highly visibleevent, and controversy persists regarding the true risks associatedwith participation in sports. METHODS: The prevalence of sudden deathwas assessed in two systematically tabulated groups of endurancerunners competing in the annual Marine Corps (1976 to 1994) and TwinCities (1982 to 1994) marathons, held over a cumulative 30-yearperiod. RESULTS: A total of 215,413 runners completed the races, andfour exercise-related sudden deaths occurred, each due to unsuspectedstructural cardiovascular disease. Three deaths occurred during therace (after 15 to 24 miles [24 to 38.4 km]) and the other immediatelyafter its completion. The ages were 19 to 58 years (average 37), andthree were men. Three of the sudden deaths were due to atheroscleroticcoronary artery disease (narrowing of two or three vessels) and one toanomalous origin of the left main coronary artery from the right sinusof Valsalva. None of the four runners had prior documentation of heartdisease or experienced prodromal symptoms, and two had previouslycompleted three marathon races each. The overall prevalence of suddencardiac death during the marathon was only 0.002%, strikingly lowerthan for several other variables of risk for premature deathcalculated for the general U.S. population. CONCLUSIONS: Althoughhighly trained athletes such as marathon runners may harbor underlyingand potentially lethal cardiovascular disease, the risk for suddencardiac death associated with such intense physical effort wasexceedingly small (1 in 50,000) and as little as 1/100th of the annualoverall risk associated with living, either with or without heartdisease. The low risk for sudden death identified in long-distancerunners from the general population suggests that routine screeningfor cardiovascular disease in such athletic populations may not bejustifiable.JW, many (if not most) heart attacks are caused by a sudden blockingof the lumen and consequently the blood supply in an artery to aportion of the heart by dislodged plaque. So doesn't it stand toreason that a larger lumen is less susceptible due to its largerinternal volume?? Seems common sense to me.> As a scientist, I can't ignore any data whether it's calledanecdotal or not. There is little scientific evidence in the healthfield's articles. > Personal experiences are hard to dismiss. > Armstrong is cylcing because he survived and can cycle - that's allI can conclude. > I hafta think if exercise was good for longevity, footballers, eg,would live forever. > > Without pushing anything, allow me to post a medical text.> DeLee: DeLee and Drez's Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, 2nd ed., > Section D Athletes and Sudden Cardiac Death> S. Dunnick MD, FACC > > Pheidippides may have been one of the first athletes to suffer asudden death event during an athletic endeavor. Hank Gathers, Reggie, Flo Hyman, and Maravich may be among the better-knownathletes to have suffered such an event. Although it has been reportedwith less dramatic publicity, sudden death of athletes during highschool physical education class or on the Little League baseballdiamond is equally tragic.>

[Guest guest]

That article is the risk, whereas the text was relative risk. Like 5 times for a person who runs regularly. Surely, the risk is low, but in Rhode Island, eg, it was shown the relative risk was 7x greater for a marathoner than a couch potato. Pritikin said it was due to diet. (Diet For Runners, pg 80).

What I experience is that walking outdoors is better than a treadmill (same speed).

Walking on a treadmill is better than no exercise at all for general health - controlling weight, motility, blood pressure. I get to eat a little more.

But I wouldn't be doing either had I not lost 60# dieting. So I hafta favor weightloss over exercise.

And I can do those things because I DON'T have CVD (or so the angiogram says).

BTW, I'm not so sure losing 60# was a good idea other than feeling a LOT better.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Athletes such as marathon runners frequently push their bodies to thelimits in training and in competition, so one might expect that thiswould place them at more risk than those of us who exercisemoderately. However, even exercising much more intensely..."..the risk for sudden cardiac death associated with such intensephysical effort was exceedingly small (1 in 50,000) and as little as1/100th of the annual overall risk associated with living, either withor without heart disease." Risk for sudden cardiac death associated with marathon running.Maron BJ, Poliac LC, WO.Cardiovascular Research Division, Minneapolis Heart InstituteFoundation, Minnesota 55407, USA.OBJECTIVES: This analysis was performed to quantitatively assess therelative risks, associated with underlying cardiovascular disease,incurred in the course of intense competitive sports. BACKGROUND:Sudden cardiac death during athletic activities is a highly visibleevent, and controversy persists regarding the true risks associatedwith participation in sports. METHODS: The prevalence of sudden deathwas assessed in two systematically tabulated groups of endurancerunners competing in the annual Marine Corps (1976 to 1994) and TwinCities (1982 to 1994) marathons, held over a cumulative 30-yearperiod. RESULTS: A total of 215,413 runners completed the races, andfour exercise-related sudden deaths occurred, each due to unsuspectedstructural cardiovascular disease. Three deaths occurred during therace (after 15 to 24 miles [24 to 38.4 km]) and the other immediatelyafter its completion. The ages were 19 to 58 years (average 37), andthree were men. Three of the sudden deaths were due to atheroscleroticcoronary artery disease (narrowing of two or three vessels) and one toanomalous origin of the left main coronary artery from the right sinusof Valsalva. None of the four runners had prior documentation of heartdisease or experienced prodromal symptoms, and two had previouslycompleted three marathon races each. The overall prevalence of suddencardiac death during the marathon was only 0.002%, strikingly lowerthan for several other variables of risk for premature deathcalculated for the general U.S. population. CONCLUSIONS: Althoughhighly trained athletes such as marathon runners may harbor underlyingand potentially lethal cardiovascular disease, the risk for suddencardiac death associated with such intense physical effort wasexceedingly small (1 in 50,000) and as little as 1/100th of the annualoverall risk associated with living, either with or without heartdisease. The low risk for sudden death identified in long-distancerunners from the general population suggests that routine screeningfor cardiovascular disease in such athletic populations may not bejustifiable.JW, many (if not most) heart attacks are caused by a sudden blockingof the lumen and consequently the blood supply in an artery to aportion of the heart by dislodged plaque. So doesn't it stand toreason that a larger lumen is less susceptible due to its largerinternal volume?? Seems common sense to me.> As a scientist, I can't ignore any data whether it's calledanecdotal or not. There is little scientific evidence in the healthfield's articles. > Personal experiences are hard to dismiss. > Armstrong is cylcing because he survived and can cycle - that's allI can conclude. > I hafta think if exercise was good for longevity, footballers, eg,would live forever. > > Without pushing anything, allow me to post a medical text.> DeLee: DeLee and Drez's Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, 2nd ed., > Section D Athletes and Sudden Cardiac Death> S. Dunnick MD, FACC > > Pheidippides may have been one of the first athletes to suffer asudden death event during an athletic endeavor. Hank Gathers, Reggie, Flo Hyman, and Maravich may be among the better-knownathletes to have suffered such an event. Although it has been reportedwith less dramatic publicity, sudden death of athletes during highschool physical education class or on the Little League baseballdiamond is equally tragic.>

[Guest guest]

Hi folks:

Just by way of clarification that number in 2) " 32 " was a grand total

of 32 sprints over two weeks. NOT 32 per session.

Rodney.

> > >

> > > A couple of questions:

> > >

> > > > ....... Research has shown that up to a threshold, and

> that

> > > > threshold is moderately high, higher intensities over

> longer

> > > > periods impart the greatest benefit.

> > >

> > > XXXXX In the research to which you refer what were the

measures

> that

> > > were regarded as representing " benefit " ? XXXXX

> > >

> > > > Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too short or

> too " light " ,

> > > > or the " wrong " exercise do not provide anything in the way

> of

> > > > desired goals, ie significant adaptation.

> > >

> > > XXXXX So are you saying that in your opinion moderate exercise

> that

> > > is below the " moderately high " intensity you mention, imparts

no

> > > benefit at all? XXXXX

> > >

> > > > I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of " exercise "

and

> the

> > > > fact of threshold effects, we need to establish an " OE "

(Optimum

> > > > Exercise) standard of terminology and application.

> > >

> > > XXXXX So what in your opinion represents " optimum exercise "

and

> what

> > > are the most important measures by which one can judge whether

> one is

> > > getting it? Thanks. XXXXX

> > >

> > > >

[Guest guest]

Hi folks:

Just by way of clarification that number in 2) " 32 " was a grand total

of 32 sprints over two weeks. NOT 32 per session.

Rodney.

> > >

> > > A couple of questions:

> > >

> > > > ....... Research has shown that up to a threshold, and

> that

> > > > threshold is moderately high, higher intensities over

> longer

> > > > periods impart the greatest benefit.

> > >

> > > XXXXX In the research to which you refer what were the

measures

> that

> > > were regarded as representing " benefit " ? XXXXX

> > >

> > > > Also demonstrated is that exercise levels too short or

> too " light " ,

> > > > or the " wrong " exercise do not provide anything in the way

> of

> > > > desired goals, ie significant adaptation.

> > >

> > > XXXXX So are you saying that in your opinion moderate exercise

> that

> > > is below the " moderately high " intensity you mention, imparts

no

> > > benefit at all? XXXXX

> > >

> > > > I've said this before, the ambiguous meaning of " exercise "

and

> the

> > > > fact of threshold effects, we need to establish an " OE "

(Optimum

> > > > Exercise) standard of terminology and application.

> > >

> > > XXXXX So what in your opinion represents " optimum exercise "

and

> what

> > > are the most important measures by which one can judge whether

> one is

> > > getting it? Thanks. XXXXX

> > >

> > > >

[Guest guest]

Remember they don't hafta stay obese after football, but pick any sport - basketball, tennis, swimming, you name it. You'll not find an article that says: "play tennis - you'll live longer". Of course, almost any sport incurs problems. Like a friend fell off his bike and broke his back. Another ran into a parked cart at 30mph.

A coworker, marathoner winner at age 55, came in one day from lunch and told me he had woke up on the ground, while running his daily 5 miles. He had no explanation and his doc had no comment either. Those things go mainly unreported to the data set. Maybe the shock of hitting the ground started his heart?

And the fact that I KNOW about that IS significant because it must happen a lot for me to hear about it. So how many pre SCD's occur and are ignored? I only know THREE marathoners (live ones).

But we were talking exercise, and you agree that weight is more important, and I agree with that.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

> I hafta think if exercise was good for longevity, footballers, eg,would live forever. I really have to disagree with this observation. Most footballers areobese. They eat to gain weight, not to optimize their nutrition. Theydo the opposite of CRON. They don't really do "exercise" in the aerobic fitness sense. Yes, Irealize they get a lot of exercise, but it's really the wrong kind - intense and episodic. Bad for the heart. Plus all the physicalcontact is damaging to the body.My guess would be that football players would live less long than theaverage.

[Guest guest]

Remember they don't hafta stay obese after football, but pick any sport - basketball, tennis, swimming, you name it. You'll not find an article that says: "play tennis - you'll live longer". Of course, almost any sport incurs problems. Like a friend fell off his bike and broke his back. Another ran into a parked cart at 30mph.

A coworker, marathoner winner at age 55, came in one day from lunch and told me he had woke up on the ground, while running his daily 5 miles. He had no explanation and his doc had no comment either. Those things go mainly unreported to the data set. Maybe the shock of hitting the ground started his heart?

And the fact that I KNOW about that IS significant because it must happen a lot for me to hear about it. So how many pre SCD's occur and are ignored? I only know THREE marathoners (live ones).

But we were talking exercise, and you agree that weight is more important, and I agree with that.

Regards.

[ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

> I hafta think if exercise was good for longevity, footballers, eg,would live forever. I really have to disagree with this observation. Most footballers areobese. They eat to gain weight, not to optimize their nutrition. Theydo the opposite of CRON. They don't really do "exercise" in the aerobic fitness sense. Yes, Irealize they get a lot of exercise, but it's really the wrong kind - intense and episodic. Bad for the heart. Plus all the physicalcontact is damaging to the body.My guess would be that football players would live less long than theaverage.

[Guest guest]

It may prove we know how to shorten lifespan, taken as a whole.

RE: [ ] Re: Exercise and Heart Disease

Yes, and my father enjoyed his pipe and lucky strikes until he succumbed to throat cancer in his late 40's .

These anecdotes don't prove anything.

JR