I love your logic

I went to high school with a kid that died at 17 in a car accident. I'm 37 and my heart is still beating. Not trying to be pedantic here, I've heard that same thing, the problem is general rules tend to get caught up on the specifics. The devil is always in the details.

Probably more to the point, exercise raises your heart rate temporarily, but it makes your heart stronger and that means it doesn't have to beat as often to do the same job. That's why people lower their resting heart rate through regular exercise. Somebody else did the math in this thread, you might elevate your HR by 70 beats for an hour, and lower it by 10 for the other 23 hours in the day; in the end you come out ahead. And even if the thing about having a set (or max?) number of beats is flat out wrong, you still benefit from having a strong heart.

I guess this thread and the other article (not that I've read it because ignorance is a blessing) means everything in this book is BS, eh?

The one article I read mentioned athletes using caffeine-based supplements in addition to the more usual coffee and things, but they didn't specify an exact amount. Since I'm not a coffee drinker, I think it's safe to say that I'm below whatever usage they were at.

.....on a comfort bike.

It all depends on the intensity. If you are doing 400 miles a week in Zone 5, you are a prime candidate for Afib.

If you are doing 400 miles a week with about 5-10% of time in Zone 4-5, and rest in Zone 3, you are probably fine.

As I age, I have shifted my exercise mostly to Zone 3 with occasional forays into Zone 4 & 5.

I went on the group ride tonight. There were only eight of us with one guy being 52 and the rest kids in their 20's and 30's. I'm 68. There was rain to the north so we rode east then south 53 miles. The 52 guy and I fell off the back a few times but they let us catch up. We went over Chesterfield Hill which is 1.75 miles and 9 percent. As I write I am toast. My average speed was 18.8 which considering Chesterfield Hill and a few other steep hills is cooking. They dropped us in the last five miles so the kids probably averaged 21-22. At no time on that ride did I ever feel like my heart was going to explode in my chest nor did I feel like anything was wrong at all. I didn't have the horsepower I had twenty years ago but aside from that everything seems fine under the hood. I need to think about this. My plan is to wait until I turn 70 and race again. I'm still thinking because I take the warnings seriously.

It is a complex topic, and no one study or article is going to give you a simple answer that is appropriate for everyone. This fact is there is absolutely no one-size-fits-all course to follow to maximize your health and longevity. If you want simple, have a look at what is known with certainty about what decreases health and lifespan. High fat, sugary diet combined with a sedentary lifestyle that includes tobacco use (to any degree and in any form) and excessive alcohol intake are a universal recipe for chronic debilitating disease and early death. Engage in those sorts of things to any degree, any at all and the effects are always demonstrably negative. Putting aside the diet and substance abuse for the sake of simplicity, what can be said with equal certitude about exercise? First, even a little bit enhances overall quality and quantity of life. Secondly, if overdone, like anything else, it can lead to problems. These are well established facts and that are not at odds at all with these new studies being bandied about the internet these days. (God knows, the internet is the source of all wisdom, truth, and knowledge ) I submit to you that if you're pushing your training to truly dangerous levels, somewhere deep down inside, you'll know it. Now I know roadies aren't, as a rule, good candidates for the cover of "Mental Health Monthly", but c'mon folks, if you're honest with yourself and your body, I doubt you can go wrong.

You want a simple rule that covers all the bases. How about "Moderation in all things"? No it ain't sexy and it isn't gonna go viral on the web and it sounds way too much like your father, and his father, and his father before that. Hmm, maybe there's a reason for that. Ya think!?

In closing let me pass along something my cardiologist told me that sums it up nicely for me at least. Exercise is indeed the fountain of youth, but its waters must be taken internally, so while regular sips are very good, bathing in it doesn't help.

You mean like 56 year olds, still trying to get a National Championship jersey?

There are more of us than you might think.

That's BS. Ignoring environmental factors (getting hit by a car) there are a million other factors. How you eat, how you exercise, genetics, etc.

Even if it's true, those who exercise have lower resting heart rates so if spending time in the red means my resting heart rate is in the 40's (it is), so be it. I'll spend 20-30 mins a week in the red, 6-10 hours moderate, and the rest of the time I'm humming along effortlessly.

This article is somewhat clinical but it seems to support other data that suggest more study is needed.
Some of the changes in the hearts of endurance athletes have been well documented but there seems to be no consensus among cardiologists regarding quality of life and longevity. I guess we just need to stay tuned.

I just got diagnosed with this (exercise induced a-fib) so i have been reading a lot about this. My symptoms had been present for a couple years, but only after averaging 244 bpm on a prolonged climb (and at my brother's insistence) did have it checked out. I guess I was lucky because during the first stress test my heart hit 270 bpm (they actually wanted to admit me right then), which led to a a series of tests that confirmed it.

My doctor placed me on prescription and shut down the cycling--not good! The takeaway seems to be that we need to be mindful about rest and honest about the risks of excessive, prolonged exertion in the pursuit of something we love.

In any event, i'm looking for the Lennard Zinn upside to this: maybe i'll be a better rounded person. I also expect that I'll save a ton of money since I have no clear need for "go fast" gear any more.

Holy **** 244 and 270?? I don't think I've even seen myself go above 175 and I'm 29

I know this is probably way too glib, but a quick search of only the first page of this study revealed no less than 20 occurrences of the word "excessive". Like I said, this may be a cheap shot, but what I take away from this is, don't be "excessive".

See my experience is the absolute flip side of what fried-bake describes. Prior to my conversion to healthier habits, I was a poster boy for all that's evil in the typical American lifestyle. Getting into cycling, along with smoking cessation and marked dietary changes did wonders to mitigate the risk factors I'd indulged in for 40+ years, but of course, nothing cures cardiovascular disease once you've got it. Which is why I quite literally dropped stone cold dead one morning after an easy short ride to the local Peet's to meet up with my riding group. Long story short, I was successfully resuscitated, and underwent an equally successful double bypass graft. Afterward, I had occasion to ask my cardiac surgeon what role, if any, my 100+ mile/week (about 33% of which was done at a tempo or higher intensity level) played any role is what happened to me. His response? "Damned straight it had something to do with it. Had you not been that well conditioned, you would have had a less than 3% chance of surviving the event you sustained. As it is, despite that, your myocardium suffered very minimal damage." He went on to tell me to rehab gradually at my own rate, but to continue towards the same level of conditioning I enjoyed prior to my SCA. It's taken 2 years to get most of the way back, and this is probably as good as it's going to get. That said, I'm still more fit that the vast majority of folks 5 years younger. When I last saw my cardiologist 8 months ago, and his parting shot was to tell me he didn't need to see me again unless I felt I needed it. And to keep riding.

The point is this. Whether or not a given level of training is going to cause cardiovascular pathology depends intrinsic factors that are not at all well understood. I mean, what's the difference between some one who smokes 2 pack a day from his late teens on and lives a happy life into his 80's and someone else who presents with end stage pulmonary carcinoma with only a 15 pack-year history? No one really knows. These studies only document the occurrence of CV is people who exercise to "excessive" levels. This does not establishes causation. It only point to the need for further study to determine what, if any, relation the two have to each other. Remember that. Also keep in mind that what's excessive for one person is just fine for someone else. Like I said before, be honest with yourself and your body, and make moderation your byword. Do that, and I think you'll be fine. Whatever... It works for me. As always, YMMV

No kidding, if I saw anything above 200 I'd be off the bike trying to lay down or take an ice bath or something. 270? Jesus.

You sure have the experience to know what you are talking about.

A serious question...when you dropped stone cold dead prior to resuscitation, did you have anything that would qualify as a near death event i.e. did you feel your spirit leaving your body or see a transcendent light source?

Thanks

I don't think anyone's debating that exercise is good for your heart. And 100 miles a week of recreational riding with some intervals thrown in isn't the "excessive exercise" that's at issue.

I think there is a real question of whether 200 miles a week, 6 days a week, doing intervals at 100% effort, and multiple days of racing still makes health sense in your 50's particularly if it's on top of a lifetime of doing that.

I think it's very likely that 100 miles or so a week of moderate recreational club rides, balanced with some other recreational activities thrown in gives you all the health benefit you can get, and that pushing to the very limit of what your capable of, which many Masters racers, and triathletes do, adds no health benefit, and likely increases your risk of sudden cardiac death, and problems like a fib.

So I think if you continue to race into your 50's, you should be honest with yourself, and realize the rationale for doing so is not better health.

And as one off anecdote, I have a 59 year old friend, lifetime bike racer, maybe 5% body fat, who just underwent ablation for A Fib.

Sample of one, but consistent with Zinn's and others experience.

I usually do 4 days a week moderate effort, which I'm not worried about, but I have started doing 2 days a week of absolute 100% effort intervals. 3 mins on, 3 mins off, repeat 6x or 1.5 mins on, 3 mins off, repeat 8x, or 10 mins on, 5 mins off, repeat 3x... that kind of thing, but my other riding is lower intensity and I'm getting a ton of sleep/recovery time.

In 8 weeks my blood pressure has gone from 120/75 to 106/52 (the lower number is where I was in my early 20's) and my resting heart rate has gone from 60 to 48 (several tests before and after). That's the part that worries me, as the article said that decreased resting heart rate could be a sign of enlarged heart. I went in and got an EKG and they said I was perfect, but I don't know that an EKG checks for everything. I'm 29 years old, 30 in a couple weeks.

I don't think you need to worry about doing 2 sets of anerobic intervals a week at age 30. If that were a problem, most of my friends would have long since been dead.

The fact that your resting heart rate is lower means you're getting fitter.

There's good data that the bigger the spread between your max HR and your resting HR, and the faster the rate at which your HR recovers from a max effort, the greater your life expectancy.

My point, and I think Zinn's point, is that you can get a good cardiovascular fitness from moderate exercise, and taking it to the level necessary to compete doesn't advance your overall health once you hit your 50's.

If you're doing 400 miles a week in zone 5 you've calibrated your zones wrong and and aren't a candidate for anything beyond perpetual mediocrity because you're working hard enough for your body to favor your lactate system instead of training your aerobic base but not hard enough to improve it.

Yeah I was reading something about 1 minute recovery times and you have a higher chance of heart issues if you recover fewer than 12 beats in 60 seconds after stopping exercise.

I was hitting within a couple beats of the highest I've ever seen yesterday and 60 seconds later I had dropped 35 beats while still soft pedaling. If I wasn't pushing as high and stopped moving completely I'd drop 45-50 beats in 60 seconds. 12 seems awfully low.

I barely exercise.

I am a cyclist, not an aspiring athlete. I am old and retired and fortunate enough to be able to enjoy my chosen sport. Maybe sometimes... I let my passion and love of cycling border on the side of excess. It's not a big deal. Like most old people I have a doctor who I have confidence in. He is well aware of my cycling habits and seems knowledgeable of cycling's risk factors. My health is monitored.

I don't call my cycling habit exercise. I call cycling fun.

I do exercise. I do calisthenics and some weight training as well as a little jogging. I don't really enjoy exercising but the CDC and other experts say I need that. So my participation is minimal at best. I have to force myself keep up an exercise routine.

I read the article and my take-away was that older cyclists/athletes should moderate their exercise, not stop it or cut back substantially. The examples it cited were older cyclists who were racing and training at very high stress levels. That is, riding at high intensity with greatly elevated heart rates and perhaps inadequate rest and recovery.

As someone else has already mentioned, the key is moderation and common sense. I am 61 and ride about 800 miles/month, about half of that from commuting, and my heart and general health are excellent. However, I have scaled the intensity of my riding as I've gotten older, and seldom participate in fast group rides any more. In addition to commuting, I regularly ride with several other guys in their 60s and we ride at a moderate pace. We stop for breaks more frequently than in the past and ease the intensity of rides in hot and humid weather. I've been doing a lot more bike touring in recent years, including some loaded tours, but not trying to set any speed records.

The article in Velo News is more of a caution for "Type A" personalities and competitive types who have a hard time moderating their exercise (or other activities).

Yeah, 270 bpm sounds off the chart. I haven't used a heart rate monitor in a while. However, I noticed that when I did use it in the past my max heart rate seemed to vary with the temperature. So my rule of thumb used to be max hr = 100 + temp (F). Has anyone else noticed that or did I not really find my true max?

Actually it's not BS. And you are correct about the rest of it. That's a big reason that those who exercise live longer. It's probably not quite that simple, and counting heartbeats may be a symptom, not a cause, but for sure a lower resting HR is a good thing. Low resting HR can also accompany the over-stressed heart syndrome, but it's certainly not diagnostic.

My personal experience: I've been training hard for 20 years, starting when I was 50. I was at my peak about 10 years ago, riding ego-busting group rides every Sunday, intervals midweek, the usual, and did experience "stutter." My doc fitted my with a Halter device, but it didn't show anything. I backed it off a bit and that went away. At 70, my HR doesn't drop as fast as it used to, but it's still decent. My resting HR is ~44, standing resting HR ~54, LT ~143. Don't know max, but it must be ~158. I'll see over 150 once in a while. Don't do many intervals anymore, but I still participate in fast group rides, just not as fast as they used to be - we've all gotten older. In endurance events I don't try to come anywhere near LT any more, though I can still take it into zone 5 on centuries and shorter. Eventually it'll be a cartoon: racing down the hallway with our walkers.