Guest guest Posted December 21, 2005 Report Share Posted December 21, 2005 Hi Al: I would take issue with item number 3 on the basis that I do not believe the measure they use as representing 'fitness' really does represent fitness. They seem to believe that O2max is a good measure of fitness. I suggest they had taken a look at some of the results that can come from using standard methods of measuring O2max and then see if they agree with the conclusions, they might have decided to change the measure they used. Go to http://www.preventdisease.com/healthtools/tools.html Click 'Rockport Walk Test' Enter the following data: Gender: male; age 40; weight 140 pounds; heart rate 165; time taken to walk the mile, 11 minutes 0 seconds. Then click 'calculate'. You will get an O2max of 51.2. Next enter: Gender: male; age 65; weight 160 pounds; heart rate 135; time 10 minutes 30 seconds. Click 'calculate'. You will get an O2max of 46.3. Now tell me who do you think is fitter? The person who is 25 years older; weighs twenty pounds more, yet moves that extra weight thirty seconds faster, and ends with a pulse rate 30 points lower? You decide for yourself. But the lighter, slower person, whose pulse rate was thirty points higher at the end of the exercise has a higher O2max. Anyone think he is 'fitter'? Input appreciated. Rodney. --- In , Al Pater <old542000@y...> wrote: > > Hi All, ....................................... > 3. Prevalence and Cardiovascular Disease Correlates of Low Cardiorespiratory Fitness > in Adolescents and Adults > Mercedes R. Carnethon; Martha Gulati; Philip Greenland > JAMA. 2005;294:2981-2988. > > ABSTRACT > > Context Population surveys indicate that physical activity levels are low in the > United States. One consequence of inactivity, low cardiorespiratory fitness, is an > established risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality, > but the prevalence of cardiorespiratory fitness has not been quantified in > representative US population samples. > > Objectives To describe the prevalence of low fitness in the US population aged 12 > through 49 years and to relate low fitness to CVD risk factors in this population. > > Design, Setting, and Participants Inception cohort study using data from the > cross-sectional nationally representative National Health and Nutrition Examination > Survey 1999-2002. Participants were adolescents (aged 12-19 years; n = 3110) and > adults (aged 20-49 years; n = 2205) free from previously diagnosed CVD who underwent > submaximal graded exercise treadmill testing to achieve at least 75% to 90% of their > age-predicted maximum heart rate. Maximal oxygen consumption (O2max) was estimated > by measuring the heart rate response to reference levels of submaximal work. > > Main Outcome Measures Low fitness defined using percentile cut points of estimated > O2max from existing external referent populations; anthropometric and other CVD risk > factors measured according to standard methods. > > Results Low fitness was identified in 33.6% of adolescents (approximately 7.5 > million US adolescents) and 13.9% of adults (approximately 8.5 million US adults); > the prevalence was similar in adolescent females (34.4%) and males (32.9%) (P = .40) > but was higher in adult females (16.2%) than in males (11.8%) (P = .03). > Non-Hispanic blacks and Mexican Americans were less fit than non- Hispanic whites. In > all age-sex groups, body mass index and waist circumference were inversely > associated with fitness; age- and race-adjusted odds ratios of overweight or obesity > (body mass index 25) ranged from 2.1 to 3.7 (P<.01 for all), comparing persons with > low fitness with those with moderate or high fitness. Total cholesterol levels and > systolic blood pressure were higher and levels of high-density lipoprotein > cholesterol were lower among participants with low vs high fitness. > > Conclusion Low fitness in adolescents and adults is common in the US population and > is associated with an increased prevalence of CVD risk factors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2005 Report Share Posted December 21, 2005 Hi Al: I would take issue with item number 3 on the basis that I do not believe the measure they use as representing 'fitness' really does represent fitness. They seem to believe that O2max is a good measure of fitness. I suggest they had taken a look at some of the results that can come from using standard methods of measuring O2max and then see if they agree with the conclusions, they might have decided to change the measure they used. Go to http://www.preventdisease.com/healthtools/tools.html Click 'Rockport Walk Test' Enter the following data: Gender: male; age 40; weight 140 pounds; heart rate 165; time taken to walk the mile, 11 minutes 0 seconds. Then click 'calculate'. You will get an O2max of 51.2. Next enter: Gender: male; age 65; weight 160 pounds; heart rate 135; time 10 minutes 30 seconds. Click 'calculate'. You will get an O2max of 46.3. Now tell me who do you think is fitter? The person who is 25 years older; weighs twenty pounds more, yet moves that extra weight thirty seconds faster, and ends with a pulse rate 30 points lower? You decide for yourself. But the lighter, slower person, whose pulse rate was thirty points higher at the end of the exercise has a higher O2max. Anyone think he is 'fitter'? Input appreciated. Rodney. --- In , Al Pater <old542000@y...> wrote: > > Hi All, ....................................... > 3. Prevalence and Cardiovascular Disease Correlates of Low Cardiorespiratory Fitness > in Adolescents and Adults > Mercedes R. Carnethon; Martha Gulati; Philip Greenland > JAMA. 2005;294:2981-2988. > > ABSTRACT > > Context Population surveys indicate that physical activity levels are low in the > United States. One consequence of inactivity, low cardiorespiratory fitness, is an > established risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality, > but the prevalence of cardiorespiratory fitness has not been quantified in > representative US population samples. > > Objectives To describe the prevalence of low fitness in the US population aged 12 > through 49 years and to relate low fitness to CVD risk factors in this population. > > Design, Setting, and Participants Inception cohort study using data from the > cross-sectional nationally representative National Health and Nutrition Examination > Survey 1999-2002. Participants were adolescents (aged 12-19 years; n = 3110) and > adults (aged 20-49 years; n = 2205) free from previously diagnosed CVD who underwent > submaximal graded exercise treadmill testing to achieve at least 75% to 90% of their > age-predicted maximum heart rate. Maximal oxygen consumption (O2max) was estimated > by measuring the heart rate response to reference levels of submaximal work. > > Main Outcome Measures Low fitness defined using percentile cut points of estimated > O2max from existing external referent populations; anthropometric and other CVD risk > factors measured according to standard methods. > > Results Low fitness was identified in 33.6% of adolescents (approximately 7.5 > million US adolescents) and 13.9% of adults (approximately 8.5 million US adults); > the prevalence was similar in adolescent females (34.4%) and males (32.9%) (P = .40) > but was higher in adult females (16.2%) than in males (11.8%) (P = .03). > Non-Hispanic blacks and Mexican Americans were less fit than non- Hispanic whites. In > all age-sex groups, body mass index and waist circumference were inversely > associated with fitness; age- and race-adjusted odds ratios of overweight or obesity > (body mass index 25) ranged from 2.1 to 3.7 (P<.01 for all), comparing persons with > low fitness with those with moderate or high fitness. Total cholesterol levels and > systolic blood pressure were higher and levels of high-density lipoprotein > cholesterol were lower among participants with low vs high fitness. > > Conclusion Low fitness in adolescents and adults is common in the US population and > is associated with an increased prevalence of CVD risk factors. 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.