Re: Running and Health

[Guest guest]

Hi folks:

From the same author, Fries JF, (oooops):

" ............... Male and female runners had more fractures than nonrunners ................... ."

PMID: 1572779

Rodney.

>> > Hi folks:> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm>> > But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?> > And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are> unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to> die sooner.> > If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.> > Rodney.>

[Guest guest]

Hey Rodney

I will try and find the study but remember reading it earlier. I think

the main point of the article, was that those who were vigorously active

for around 200 minutes a week had less risk than those who were active

under 20 minutes. While it was done on runners, I think the main point

was the amount and not so much the type. But, as you showed, there is a

down side to running.

Jeff

Rodney wrote:

>

> Hi folks:

>

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm

> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm>

>

> But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?

>

> And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are

> unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to

> die sooner.

>

> If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.

>

> Rodney.

>

>

[Guest guest]

The report, page 1638, Aug 2008 Archives of Internal Medicine. Studies like this are difficult to control in all aspects, but the 2 groups were very similar for age, race, education and BMI. You should have access to the original at the nearest med school library.

OupaOn Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:02 AM, Rodney <perspect1111@...> wrote:

Hi folks:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm

But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?

And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to die sooner.

If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.

Rodney.

[Guest guest]

Might be:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12418943?ordinalpos=1 & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

CONCLUSION: Running and other aerobic exercise in elderly persons protect against disability and early mortality, and are associated with prolongation of a disability-free life. PMID: 12418943

{Healthy people have less risk?

Always when I read these I wonder if it's a rec for ALL people? Does it apply to a 70 yo 350#, or does it only apply to those few "lucky" ones who started that program 20 years ago?

Of course, anyone considering running, in general, should probably ask their doctor.

Also, in that rec to run, shouldn't there also be a rec when to STOP? Like chest pains, out of breath, other symptoms to tell you when Sudden Cardiac Death is about to happen?

1: Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2006 Dec;13(6):859-75.

Sudden cardiac death in athletes: the Lausanne Recommendations.

Bille K, Figueiras D, Schamasch P, Kappenberger L, Brenner JI, Meijboom FJ, Meijboom EJ.

Division of Pediatric Cardiology, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.

OBJECTIVES: This study reports on sudden cardiac death (SCD) in sport in the literature and aims at achieving a generally acceptable preparticipation screening protocol (PPSP) endorsed by the consensus meeting of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). BACKGROUND: The sudden death of athletes under 35 years engaged in competitive sports is a well-known occurrence; the incidence is higher in athletes (approximately 2/100,000 per year) than in non-athletes (2.5 : 1), and the cause is cardiovascular in over 90%.

PMID: 17143117

Regards

[ ] Running and Health

Hi folks:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm

But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?

And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to die sooner.

If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.

Rodney.

[Guest guest]

Hi Oupa:

I am not particularly interested in how well the groups were matched.

I do not doubt that people who are overweight or obese will benefit, at least somewhat, from a moderate amount of exercise.

But for people at the issue is whether those who are calorically restricted also benefit. There are experiments in rodents which have been posted here, one of them quite recently, which suggest a material amount of exercise may be *counter-productive* for those on CR, at least in the case of rodents.

[As always, with the qualification that there is a threshold level of exercise that is vital - bed-ridden little old ladies (or middle-aged men, for that matter) do not usually survive for long. But, according to cardiologist Dr. Henry , one does not need to go out of one's way to 'take exercise' to reach that threshold.]

Nevertheless, as with most things in this field, the jury is still out and likely will remain so for quite some time.

Rodney.

> > > Hi folks:> >> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm> >> > But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?> >> > And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are> > unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to die> > sooner.> >> > If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.> >> > Rodney.> >> > > >>

[Guest guest]

OK. They have now posted this at PubMed, so here is the abstract of this one:

Reduced disability and mortality among aging runners: a 21-year longitudinal study.

Chakravarty EF, Hubert HB, Lingala VB, Fries JF.

Division of Immunology and Rheumatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 1000 Welch Rd, Ste 203, Palo Alto, CA 94304. echakravarty@....

BACKGROUND: Exercise has been shown to improve many health outcomes and well-being of people of all ages. Long-term studies in older adults are needed to confirm disability and survival benefits of exercise. METHODS: Annual self-administered questionnaires were sent to 538 members of a nationwide running club and 423 healthy controls from northern California who were 50 years and older beginning in 1984. Data included running and exercise frequency, body mass index, and disability assessed by the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI; scored from 0 [no difficulty] to 3 [unable to perform]) through 2005. A total of 284 runners and 156 controls completed the 21-year follow-up. Causes of death through 2003 were ascertained using the National Death Index. Multivariate regression techniques compared groups on disability and mortality. RESULTS: At baseline, runners were younger, leaner, and less likely to smoke compared with controls. The mean (SD) HAQ-DI score was higher for controls than for runners at all time points and increased with age in both groups, but to a lesser degree in runners (0.17 [0.34]) than in controls (0.36 [0.55]) (P < .001). Multivariate analyses showed that runners had a significantly lower risk of an HAQ-DI score of 0.5 (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.84). At 19 years, 15% of runners had died compared with 34% of controls. After adjustment for covariates, runners demonstrated a survival benefit (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.82). Disability and survival curves continued to diverge between groups after the 21-year follow-up as participants approached their ninth decade of life. CONCLUSION: Vigorous exercise (running) at middle and older ages is associated with reduced disability in later life and a notable survival advantage.

PMID: 18695077

Rodney.

>> > Hi folks:> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm>> > But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?> > And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are> unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to> die sooner.> > If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.> > Rodney.>

[Guest guest]

Thanks for that. When I met my husband (we were in our 40’s) he was an avid runner, running a marathon a month!! Now in his 60’s I always wonder if that was bad for his joints, knees or whatever else, as he ages and no longer runs. (He does get leg cramps sometimes and I have a tendency to blame it on the excessive running in his youth). One doctor friend has mentioned that runners have all kinds of alternate vessels and capillaries in and out of the heart and tend to have less heart disease in older age (but I could never confirm this.)

Anyway makes me feel he might last awhile.

From: Rodney <perspect1111@...>

Reply-< >

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:58:44 -0000

< >

Subject: [ ] Re: Running and Health

OK. They have now posted this at PubMed, so here is the abstract of this one:

Reduced disability and mortality among aging runners: a 21-year longitudinal study.

Chakravarty EF <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & amp;Cmd=Search & amp;Term=%22Chakravarty%20EF%22%5BAuthor%5D & amp;itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlus> , Hubert HB <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & amp;Cmd=Search & amp;Term=%22Hubert%20HB%22%5BAuthor%5D & amp;itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlus> , Lingala VB <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & amp;Cmd=Search & amp;Term=%22Lingala%20VB%22%5BAuthor%5D & amp;itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlus> , Fries JF <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=!pubmed & amp;Cmd=Search & amp;Term=%22Fries%20JF%22%5BAuthor%5D & amp;itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlus> .

Division of Immunology and Rheumatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 1000 Welch Rd, Ste 203, Palo Alto, CA 94304. echakravarty@....

BACKGROUND: Exercise has been shown to improve many health outcomes and well-being of people of all ages. Long-term studies in older adults are needed to confirm disability and survival benefits of exercise. METHODS: Annual self-administered questionnaires were sent to 538 members of a nationwide running club and 423 healthy controls from northern California who were 50 years and older beginning in 1984. Data included running and exercise frequency, body mass index, and disability assessed by the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI; scored from 0 [no difficulty] to 3 [unable to perform]) through 2005. A total of 284 runners and 156 controls completed the 21-year follow-up. Causes of death through 2003 were ascertained using the National Death Index. Multivariate regression techniques compared groups on disability and mortality. RESULTS: At baseline, runners were younger, leaner, and less likely to smoke compared wit! h controls. The mean (SD) HAQ-DI score was higher for controls than for runners at all time points and increased with age in both groups, but to a lesser degree in runners (0.17 [0.34]) than in controls (0.36 [0.55]) (P < .001). Multivariate analyses showed that runners had a significantly lower risk of an HAQ-DI score of 0.5 (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.84). At 19 years, 15% of runners had died compared with 34% of controls. After adjustment for covariates, runners demonstrated a survival benefit (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.82). Disability and survival curves continued to diverge between groups after the 21-year follow-up as participants approached their ninth decade of life. CONCLUSION: Vigorous exercise (running) at middle and older ages is associated with reduced disability in later life and a notable survival advantage.

PMID: 18695077

Rodney.

>

>

> Hi folks:

>

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm

> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm>

>

> But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?

>

> And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are

> unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to

> die sooner.

>

> If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.

>

> Rodney.

>

[Guest guest]

I suppose this is a good place to jump-in, being new to the list and

to CR.

I am a yogini (10hrs yoga a week; instructor and student), and a

runner (4-6hrs a week with my dogs while wearing a weighted pack

[15lbs]). I do the latter because, first, I enjoy it, and second,

because I enjoy hiking in the woods with my dogs.

My diet is Ayurvedic (vata body type, ovo-lacto vegetarian for 35+

years), but in the last year I have been looking at CR. I came

across a wiki on the subject, bought the book (recommend for this

list), and have been researching varies websites and the like. Part

of my interest in this area stems from my seeming inability to loose

weight, which, at 49 years old, is, I am told, " normal " (current

weight: 130lbs).

I have been tracking my food/activity/weight on fitday.com for over a

year now. My caloric intake ranges from 1200-1300 per day.

According to all the CR information I have been finding, this should

be 1000 calories per day.

The article on running is very interesting because it is an activity

I engage in (more a jogging / speed walking / cross-country combo

than actual running). Plus, the idea of exercise combined with CR

and ON is of key importance to me since this is part of my lifestyle.

From the article, " CONCLUSION: Vigorous exercise (running) at middle

and older ages is associated with reduced disability in later life

and a notable survival advantage. "

So .. other than this post being a polite introduction, I am

specifically interested in how athletics and CRON can, if possible,

co-exist.

Om Peace!

Valarie Devi

http://hamsa-yogashala.com/

[Guest guest]

Welcome.

With a height of 5'6 " and a weight of 130 lb your Body Mass Index is

21.0 which is very good. You do not need to lose weight. With your

active lifestyle you probably don't have much fat to shed.

You are burning around 600 Calories per day doing yoga and running. If

your weight has been steady, you should probably not reduce your

calories if you want to maintain your energy level. Remember that the

" longevity " aspects of CR still remain to be demonstrated in humans.

It is an experiment, and we are the Guinea pigs.

Tony

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/index.html

>

> I suppose this is a good place to jump-in, being new to the list and

> to CR.

>

> I am a yogini (10hrs yoga a week; instructor and student), and a

> runner (4-6hrs a week with my dogs while wearing a weighted pack

> [15lbs]). I do the latter because, first, I enjoy it, and second,

> because I enjoy hiking in the woods with my dogs.

>

> My diet is Ayurvedic (vata body type, ovo-lacto vegetarian for 35+

> years), but in the last year I have been looking at CR. I came

> across a wiki on the subject, bought the book (recommend for this

> list), and have been researching varies websites and the like. Part

> of my interest in this area stems from my seeming inability to loose

> weight, which, at 49 years old, is, I am told, " normal " (current

> weight: 130lbs).

>

> I have been tracking my food/activity/weight on fitday.com for over a

> year now. My caloric intake ranges from 1200-1300 per day.

> According to all the CR information I have been finding, this should

> be 1000 calories per day.

>

> The article on running is very interesting because it is an activity

> I engage in (more a jogging / speed walking / cross-country combo

> than actual running). Plus, the idea of exercise combined with CR

> and ON is of key importance to me since this is part of my lifestyle.

>

> From the article, " CONCLUSION: Vigorous exercise (running) at middle

> and older ages is associated with reduced disability in later life

> and a notable survival advantage. "

>

> So .. other than this post being a polite introduction, I am

> specifically interested in how athletics and CRON can, if possible,

> co-exist.

>

> Om Peace!

> Valarie Devi

> http://hamsa-yogashala.com/

>

[Guest guest]

Tony wrote [[Welcome.]]

** Thank you Tony.

[[With a height of 5'6 " and a weight of 130 lb your Body Mass Index is

21.0 which is very good. You do not need to lose weight. With your

active lifestyle you probably don't have much fat to shed.]]

** Mostly around my belly, which is 33 " at the navel.

[[You are burning around 600 Calories per day doing yoga and

running.]]

** This is my rough estimate as well; though, because my personal

yoga practice is active to strenuous (versus gentle stretching), I

sometimes wonder if that calculation should be different. Eitherway,

I doubt the number would be that significant .. no doubt more an ego-

thingie than a necessary ratio.

[[if your weight has been steady, you should probably not reduce your

calories if you want to maintain your energy level. Remember that the

" longevity " aspects of CR still remain to be demonstrated in humans.

It is an experiment, and we are the Guinea pigs.]]

** Yea .. I realize the Guinea pig thing .. which, to me, is part of

what makes CRON interesting, as well as lists like this one.

[[http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/index.html]]

** Ah .. are you the '' from this site? If so .. this is a

page I found early on in my research and kept returning to because of

the high quality of straight-forward and easily laid-out

information. Good job!

Om Peace!

Valarie Devi

http://hamsa-yogashala.com/

[Guest guest]

Valarie Devi,

Thanks for the comment about my web site. I have an interest in

trying to quantify CR to avoid some of the problems that the extreme

practitioners suffer, such as osteoporosis.

I have put your numbers in the Calorie Restriction Calculator:

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/health/cron1.html

Using your height of 5'6 " , weight 130 lb, age 49, very active level of

activity, and 1300 Calories per day gives your Percentage of Calorie

Restriction as 40%. At 1200 Calories it is around 45%CR.

Setting the level of activity to moderately active, the percentages

are 33% and 39%, respectively.

I think that with your level of activity you are already practicing

around 40% CR. Don't become obsessed about your waist size or body

shape; that opens the door toward anorexia. Your emphasis should be to

assure that you have optimum nutrition by getting the RDA of all

vitamins and minerals. CRON-o-Meter is a good tool for this purpose.

Tony

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/health/optimum-nutrition.html

>

> Tony wrote [[Welcome.]]

> ** Thank you Tony.

>

> [[With a height of 5'6 " and a weight of 130 lb your Body Mass Index is

> 21.0 which is very good. You do not need to lose weight. With your

> active lifestyle you probably don't have much fat to shed.]]

> ** Mostly around my belly, which is 33 " at the navel.

>

> [[You are burning around 600 Calories per day doing yoga and

> running.]]

> ** This is my rough estimate as well; though, because my personal

> yoga practice is active to strenuous (versus gentle stretching), I

> sometimes wonder if that calculation should be different. Eitherway,

> I doubt the number would be that significant .. no doubt more an ego-

> thingie than a necessary ratio.

>

>

>

> [[if your weight has been steady, you should probably not reduce your

> calories if you want to maintain your energy level. Remember that the

> " longevity " aspects of CR still remain to be demonstrated in humans.

> It is an experiment, and we are the Guinea pigs.]]

> ** Yea .. I realize the Guinea pig thing .. which, to me, is part of

> what makes CRON interesting, as well as lists like this one.

>

> [[http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/index.html]]

> ** Ah .. are you the '' from this site? If so .. this is a

> page I found early on in my research and kept returning to because of

> the high quality of straight-forward and easily laid-out

> information. Good job!

>

> Om Peace!

> Valarie Devi

> http://hamsa-yogashala.com/

>

[Guest guest]

Hi JW:

Good question.

One explanation which would be consistent with what we think we know is this. Perhaps when the study was done it found that exercise did not reverse arterial plaque, but slowed down its rate of accumulation. This would have been less than had been hoped, so the results may simply have not been submitted for publication. This might be especially true if the organization doing the study had a heavy interest of some kind in proving exercise has benefits?

My impression is that exercise in overweight subjects postpones cardiovascular events, but does not prevent them. So subjects have fewer events (which show up as apparent benefits) at earlier ages. And some manage to die of something else before their arteries finally cause trouble. But without the exercise they might have succumbed to CVD first.

Evidence on this one way or another would be helpful. But this logic would explain why exercise seems to be helpful to people with higher BMIs who (for the most part) have accumulating plaque, but not to those on CR who (for the most part) don't have plaque - presumed from the CRON studies' BP, lipids and carotid IMT data.

Just a thought about the kind of logic that might explain the data we have.

Rodney.

> >> > > Hi folks:> > >> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm> > >> > > But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?> > >> > > And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are> > > unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to die> > > sooner.> > >> > > If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.> > >> > > Rodney.>

[Guest guest]

I got the book by , " The Exercise Myth " and I read it.

IMO, it is clear, concise and truthful.

It begs the question, why do we not have a simliar text about exercise?

What I need to see is a text that shows that exercise, running, eg,

reduces/reverses the buildup in coronaries the way Ornish showed that a low

fat diet can reverse heart disease. Pictures on pg 21, 22 and 23 of his

book.

Pg 22, " 77 per cent blockage had reversed to 59 percent and blood flow had

increased by 270 percent. (see Fig 1.3) "

Ornish wrote his book in 1990. Surely there must be a similar evaluation of

running by now.

And if as detailed as Ornish's book, it would have a well defined exercise

program that one can apply, Probably in conjunction with the right diet.

Regards

[ ] Re: Running and Health

Hi Oupa:

I am not particularly interested in how well the groups were matched.

I do not doubt that people who are overweight or obese will benefit, at

least somewhat, from a moderate amount of exercise.

But for people at the issue is whether those who are

calorically restricted also benefit. There are experiments in rodents which

have been posted here, one of them quite recently, which suggest a material

amount of exercise may be *counter-productive* for those on CR, at least in

the case of rodents.

[As always, with the qualification that there is a threshold level of

exercise that is vital - bed-ridden little old ladies (or middle-aged men,

for that matter) do not usually survive for long. But, according to

cardiologist Dr. Henry , one does not need to go out of one's way to

'take exercise' to reach that threshold.]

Nevertheless, as with most things in this field, the jury is still out and

likely will remain so for quite some time.

Rodney.

>

> > Hi folks:

> >

> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7554293.stm

> >

> > But did they study benefits for varying levels of caloric intake?

> >

> > And did they control for the fact that people who are already sick are

> > unlikely to be able to run? ......... and, of course, are likely to die

> > sooner.

> >

> > If anyone finds the abstract it would be interesting to see it.

> >

> > Rodney.

[Guest guest]

My opinion about exercise is that it helps to build muscles, and the

extra strength can keep you from falling and getting hurt, or it can

make you more independent at a later age. Exercise may not

necessarily result in better cardiovascular health, but the increased

muscle mass, better coordination, and the endorphins produced during

exercise can lead to better mood and the perception of better health.

Also, vigorous exercise requires the lungs to work harder. This helps

to clear the lungs and increases blood flow to the brain.

After reading the statistics when I was younger, I figured that I

would live one hour more for every hour that I exercised, so I thought

that exercise was just a waste of time. However, as I have gotten

older, I find that my lungs and my brain benefit from a 30-minute

exercise session that makes me breathe hard. I can *feel* the

difference. I have a better quality of life in whatever extra hours I

live.

I have collected a few references that show that:

1) People who exercise regularly have a lower death rate than

sedentary people, regardless of their weight.

2) Exercise improves insulin sensitivity for healthy persons and those

with non-insulin dependent diabetes

3) Weight-bearing exercises strengthen bones and may help decrease the

risk of osteoporotic fractures.

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/exercise.html

Tony

> >

> > I got the book by , " The Exercise Myth " and I read it.

> > IMO, it is clear, concise and truthful.

> > It begs the question, why do we not have a simliar text about

> exercise?

> >

> > What I need to see is a text that shows that exercise, running, eg,

> > reduces/reverses the buildup in coronaries the way Ornish showed that

> a low

> > fat diet can reverse heart disease. Pictures on pg 21, 22 and 23 of

> his

> > book.

> > Pg 22, " 77 per cent blockage had reversed to 59 percent and blood flow

> had

> > increased by 270 percent. (see Fig 1.3) "

> >

> > Ornish wrote his book in 1990. Surely there must be a similar

> evaluation of

> > running by now.

> > And if as detailed as Ornish's book, it would have a well defined

> exercise

> > program that one can apply, Probably in conjunction with the right

> diet.

> >

> > Regards

> >

[Guest guest]

I’ve recently increased my daily walk from 20 minutes to about 35-40 minutes. Just a few minutes more of walking daily has lowered my BP, and measurably improved my stamina (and perhaps has done more than that but those are the obvious improvements).

I agree with Tony.

From: citpeks <citpeks@...>

Reply-< >

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:57:22 -0000

< >

Subject: [ ] Re: Running and Health

My opinion about exercise is that it helps to build muscles, and the

extra strength can keep you from falling and getting hurt, or it can

make you more independent at a later age. Exercise may not

necessarily result in better cardiovascular health, but the increased

muscle mass, better coordination, and the endorphins produced during

exercise can lead to better mood and the perception of better health.

Also, vigorous exercise requires the lungs to work harder. This helps

to clear the lungs and increases blood flow to the brain.

After reading the statistics when I was younger, I figured that I

would live one hour more for every hour that I exercised, so I thought

that exercise was just a waste of time. However, as I have gotten

older, I find that my lungs and my brain benefit from a 30-minute

exercise session that makes me breathe hard. I can *feel* the

difference. I have a better quality of life in whatever extra hours I

live.

I have collected a few references that show that:

1) People who exercise regularly have a lower death rate than

sedentary people, regardless of their weight.

2) Exercise improves insulin sensitivity for healthy persons and those

with non-insulin dependent diabetes

3) Weight-bearing exercises strengthen bones and may help decrease the

risk of osteoporotic fractures.

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/exercise.html

Tony

> >

> > I got the book by , " The Exercise Myth " and I read it.

> > IMO, it is clear, concise and truthful.

> > It begs the question, why do we not have a simliar text about

> exercise?

> >

> > What I need to see is a text that shows that exercise, running, eg,

> > reduces/reverses the buildup in coronaries the way Ornish showed that

> a low

> > fat diet can reverse heart disease. Pictures on pg 21, 22 and 23 of

> his

> > book.

> > Pg 22, " 77 per cent blockage had reversed to 59 percent and blood flow

> had

> > increased by 270 percent. (see Fig 1.3) "

> >

> > Ornish wrote his book in 1990. Surely there must be a similar

> evaluation of

> > running by now.

> > And if as detailed as Ornish's book, it would have a well defined

> exercise

> > program that one can apply, Probably in conjunction with the right

> diet.

> >

> > Regards

> >

[Guest guest]

I have no problem with walking. no doubt it lowered my BP.

I got my wife back to walking 1.3 to 2 miles, although she has no problem with BP (109/67).

Life seems to go in phases, something prompts you to change, and if you succeed, even a little, you're inspired to do more.

Until I started CR, I was too sore to move.

Regards

[ ] Re: Running and Health My opinion about exercise is that it helps to build muscles, and theextra strength can keep you from falling and getting hurt, or it canmake you more independent at a later age. Exercise may notnecessarily result in better cardiovascular health, but the increasedmuscle mass, better coordination, and the endorphins produced duringexercise can lead to better mood and the perception of better health.Also, vigorous exercise requires the lungs to work harder. This helpsto clear the lungs and increases blood flow to the brain.After reading the statistics when I was younger, I figured that Iwould live one hour more for every hour that I exercised, so I thoughtthat exercise was just a waste of time. However, as I have gottenolder, I find that my lungs and my brain benefit from a 30-minuteexercise session that makes me breathe hard. I can *feel* thedifference. I have a better quality of life in whatever extra hours Ilive.I have collected a few references that show that:1) People who exercise regularly have a lower death rate thansedentary people, regardless of their weight.2) Exercise improves insulin sensitivity for healthy persons and thosewith non-insulin dependent diabetes3) Weight-bearing exercises strengthen bones and may help decrease therisk of osteoporotic fractures.http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/exercise.htmlTony--- In <mailto: %40> , "Rodney" <perspect1111@...> wrote:>> > Hi JW:> > Good question.> > One explanation which would be consistent with what we think we know is> this. Perhaps when the study was done it found that exercise did not> reverse arterial plaque, but slowed down its rate of accumulation. This> would have been less than had been hoped, so the results may simply have> not been submitted for publication. This might be especially true if> the organization doing the study had a heavy interest of some kind in> proving exercise has benefits?> > My impression is that exercise in overweight subjects postpones> cardiovascular events, but does not prevent them. So subjects have> fewer events (which show up as apparent benefits) at earlier ages. And> some manage to die of something else before their arteries finally cause> trouble. But without the exercise they might have succumbed to CVD> first.> > Evidence on this one way or another would be helpful. But this logic> would explain why exercise seems to be helpful to people with higher> BMIs who (for the most part) have accumulating plaque, but not to those> on CR who (for the most part) don't have plaque - presumed from the CRON> studies' BP, lipids and carotid IMT data.> > Just a thought about the kind of logic that might explain the data we> have.> > Rodney.> > > >> > I got the book by , "The Exercise Myth" and I read it.> > IMO, it is clear, concise and truthful.> > It begs the question, why do we not have a simliar text about> exercise?> >> > What I need to see is a text that shows that exercise, running, eg,> > reduces/reverses the buildup in coronaries the way Ornish showed that> a low> > fat diet can reverse heart disease. Pictures on pg 21, 22 and 23 of> his> > book.> > Pg 22, "77 per cent blockage had reversed to 59 percent and blood flow> had> > increased by 270 percent. (see Fig 1.3) "> >> > Ornish wrote his book in 1990. Surely there must be a similar> evaluation of> > running by now.> > And if as detailed as Ornish's book, it would have a well defined> exercise> > program that one can apply, Probably in conjunction with the right> diet.> >> > Regards> >