bobthib

That does it. I'm quitting.




Tomorrow.

Banded Krait

I seriously doubt that any of us in the 50+ forum is cycling long enough, and at such a high intensity, as to be suffering the physical damage described in this study.

Having said that, I intend to keep training with the intent to complete a century ride this fall.
I note that during my recent first metric century, I played it conservative and formally stopped three times (two bathroom breaks and a food stop) and informally several more when I got lost. And I was not riding anywhere near "race" pace, just nice and steady and enjoying the ride.

I do wonder if those participating in randonneuring are putting themselves at risk, although from what I understand, randonneuring events are not races.

Yen

I often wonder if I'm doing any damage when my HR reaches near-max during a steep climb, and we have a few climbs like that on our regular mid-week rides. It recovers very quickly, 30+ beats in 20-30 seconds, but the rate is disconcerting. Saturday rides are long endurance rides and if the day turns hot and I'm hurrying to catch up with the group, my heart rate rises fast. And then there's the spin class...

Racer Ex 

Anything worth doing is worth overdoing- Racer Ex

Doug64

When I was young (a lot younger), I ran competitively. During an eight year period I ran 22-marathons, 4- 50 km races, and 1- 50 miler. We would train hard peaking at about 70 miles a week, 2 or three times a year. I would start getting stress injuries if I exceeded the 70 mile threshold so I'd supplement with swimming, weight work and cycling. We would run at least one 20+ mile run weekly. One training run that I'd do about once a month, when daylight permitted, was to run the 25 miles home from work in the evening, and ride my bike back to work the next day. I continued to run recreationally for fitness, and ran my age annually until an accident stopped me at 49 years old. Luckily, it got me back full time on my bike. My point is that it does happen, but it takes a lot of work to do damage. Two other distance runners in the club and I have had heart rhythm problems. That is more than just a coincidence. I've seen other studies that have come to the same conclusion. It is discouraging to think that doing something we thought was good for us would come back to haunt us later in life.

Ironically, I started out bike racing, and found out I was a better runner than a biker. The results would probably been about the same, mediocre athlete with heart rhythm problems

Dudelsack 

What does T. Roosevelt have to do with any of this? He was a politician. Politicians will say anything that sounds good.

Tell me that he had a degree in exercise physiology or cardiac electrophysiology and then I'll think whatever he said might be even vaguely relevant to the ongoing discussion.

Hermes

How many think salt is bad for you? And how long has this idea been around and supported by government? Well, think again. Here is an article from the NYT that puts a different light on salt. Which one is right? You make the call!

Salt, we misjudged you. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/op...pagewanted=all

"WHY have we been told that salt is so deadly? Well, the advice has always sounded reasonable. It has what nutritionists like to call “biological plausibility.” Eat more salt and your body retains water to maintain a stable concentration of sodium in your blood. This is why eating salty food tends to make us thirsty: we drink more; we retain water. The result can be a temporary increase in blood pressure, which will persist until our kidneys eliminate both salt and water."

contango 

I dunno, breathe pure air for long enough and you'll still die.

Blanchje

When it comes to living life I find TR to be much more of an ispiration than a hand wringing cardiac electrophysiologist so I'd say it's relevant. Then again, my goal in life is to live it not survive it.

big john

The message is quite clear.

Coincidentally, this morning I read a line by Mike Ferrintino in "Bike"; "Riding until I turned myself inside-out was the only way I could get tired enough to not be a self destructive ass hole."

Phil_gretz

Amen to that! Teddy Roosevelt had bigger testacles than most prominent men of his generation.

JTGraphics

Everyones got to go some time, and when you never know so if you like riding ride!
Everyones different nothing or no one can guarantee your health.
Some of the healthiest people or at least we thought die from heart attacks early and some who seemed to live the life smoking and drinking live to be ripe old ages.
Thats life live it to the fullest we are only here once!

PatW

All that I could find on the study were their conclusions and a bit on the methodology. It seems as if they took competitive professional aerobic atheletes as their test group. They did not seem to mention any control group. Also given the activities of elite atheletes, some things or a combination of things could have produced the effect. For example, elite aerobic atheletes tend to be really skinny. Maybe being skinny and exercising at the highest exertion levels for extended periods of time can cause the body to catabolise heart muscle. That is just a guess by the way. But in saying this, I would think that the study's results have to be considered tentative.

The problem I find with the study is that they do not give a mechanism. They do not have any real notion of how much aerobic exercise and at what intensity is dangerous. They did seem to suggest that low intensity aerobic activity is fine.

Even in their study group, they had only a relatively small percentage of problems (20% I think). I would think that recreational atheletes and even low level competitive atheletes would be pretty safe. I do centuries several times a year (less than I would like).

Another thing is the study was essentially a correlation. Inferring causality from a correlation can sometimes be right but it can just as often be wrong. I knew a distinguished professor who said that every medical study ever performed proved what it set out to prove. Obviously, this scientist had a less than exalted opinion of medical researchers.

So what to take from it? It makes sense to not ride as hard as one can for long rides and not to do extended hard rides day after day. I would think that if you ride most of the time at moderate intensity and only ride hard for short intervals, you are probably going to be OK.

CommuteCommando

+ this pretty much sums it up. My doc is totally o.k with my ~100 mi/week. Articles come out like this where a factoid, that may or may not be good science, is taken way out of context, and then sensationalized.

Also 67% of all statistics quoted on the internet are 95% B.S.

gregf83 

It's available here for free: https://cardionutrition.files.wordpre...-bad-thing.pdf

As one would expect, the actual article isn't nearly as sensational or conclusive as the headlines.

Dudelsack 

Cool! Thanks. I'm glad I didn't spend $31 for it.

@PatW - exactly. As I said, people are going to be hashing this out for years.

@everyone else - yeah, yeah, I read Theodore Rex, too. He was a great man and a brilliant leader. I just don't want him as my cardiologist

chasm54

The abstract of the report states that lifelong vigorous exercisers tend to have low mortality rates and high functional capacity. So what this amounts to is a statement that for most people, vigorous exercise is beneficial. But for some people, prolonged exercise at high (but unspecified) intensity may cause problems.

Anyone surprised?

Looigi

Another article about more of a good thing not necessarily being more better.

https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/0...EXCITE&ei=5043

NOS88

Yen, I appreciate the heads up.

This section of the article is the one about which I'm thinking.

"But for some individuals, over months and years of repetitive injury, this process can lead to the development of patchy scarring of certain areas of the heart, and abnormal heart rhythms.
In one study, approximately 12 per cent of apparently healthy marathon runners showed evidence for patchy myocardial scarring..."

Unless they can tell us what makes the 12 percent more likely to have the scarring, I think I’ll gamble on being part of the 88% that it doesn’t impact on in the same manner. Like many things, I am, however, open to a revision in my thinking.

Blanchje

There are a lot of bad ways to die. Dropping dead of a heart attack while excercising isn't one of them.

BobV13

[h=2]Article: Excess exercise hurts the heart[/h]
BS... Use it or loose it

CommuteCommando

+1 I've seen family and friends fade away, hooked up to machines and suffering other such indignities. Every time some one says I should really try the 2 Lb Monster Chili Cheese Bacon Burger, because "you gotta live a little", I shake my head.

Dudelsack 

That was another good article.

We could learn something from the horse trainers down the road. A racehorse can be trained to ignore the "central governor" and, when the "bleed" they are really going into high output cardiac failure. That's why routine Lasix use is so controversial in that industry.

These horses need to be read Teddy Roosevelt quotes. They probably wouldn't need Lasix

I wonder if sometimes we're not putting ourselves into right heart failure with transient pulmonary hypertension. Maybe someone else will chime in.

Barrettscv 

I'm glad to hear that moderate exercise has as much benefit as more extreme exercise.

Some months I'm unable to ride as often, or as long or as hard as I would like. It's important to remember that in less than an hour a person can get substantial health benefits.

This motivates me to go out for a 15 mile ride without any guilt over the lack of challenge.

Gain without extreme pain.

Mobile 155

In the last two months we have received a new message from the news media with their take on what the medical profession is thinking. It breaks down to, exercise less and eat more chocolate. As Jay Leno said the other night, "Think how easy this makes new years resolutions. I'll sit on the sofa more and eat more chocolate."
What happens when we see these raw studies is jump to conclusions that fit some of our preconceived ideas. But it also paints too many with a far too big brush.