View Full Version : Excessive exercise hurts your heart
HenryA
06-04-2012, 08:35 PM
Here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2154267/Excess-exercise-hurts-heart-cause-dangerous-long-term-harm-say-scientists.html
Louis
06-04-2012, 08:46 PM
Every week my Tanita fat-o-meter scale tells me that I don't exercise excessively...
bobswire
06-04-2012, 08:52 PM
Trying to lift heavy things can give you a heart attack too.
Another in depth story from the Daily Mail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2103814/Porsche-driver-gets-sticky-situation-runs-car-right-patch-wet-cement.html
http://i46.tinypic.com/2hebotk.jpg
54ny77
06-04-2012, 08:54 PM
Hey wasn't that your photo from last year?
Trying to lift heavy things can give you a heart attack too.
Another in depth story from the Daily Mail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2103814/Porsche-driver-gets-sticky-situation-runs-car-right-patch-wet-cement.html
http://i46.tinypic.com/2hebotk.jpg
Viper
06-04-2012, 08:55 PM
The Church told me about too much of another thing leads to blindness. I kid. You can't argue with data, though I can't put a lot of stock into just one article, I would agree; the heart is merely a muscle and it can only do so much. Pro cyclists and runners etc are addicts, the article touches on this. I know a few people who I'd like to steal all of their bikes and sneakers, hand them a book or a cup of tea, and tell em' to grow up.
I hate the medical term coined in the 80's, do things in moderation. Who strives to be moderate, middle of the road, but an addiction to chronic, intense exercise...something's got to give.
pavel
06-04-2012, 08:57 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
Viper
06-04-2012, 09:00 PM
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/when-exercise-is-too-much-of-a-good-thing/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21330616
HenryA
06-04-2012, 11:07 PM
I guess I was thinking I could use this to show my wife about the dangers of too much lawn mowing.
Whadya think?
Fixed
06-05-2012, 12:01 AM
Reading that just hurt my heart
Cheers :):
biker72
06-05-2012, 06:08 AM
every week my tanita fat-o-meter scale tells me that i don't exercise excessively...
+1
I guess I was thinking I could use this to show my wife about the dangers of too much lawn mowing.
Whadya think?
Sounds like a plan. :banana:
A not so good plan, but still a plan. :p
laupsi
06-05-2012, 08:00 AM
one thing a doc friend of mine told me, he is a life long bike racer too and a very successful one at that, many older pro riders, when it's time, die of heart attacks. simple reason, their hearts were trained to such an extent when they were young that it atrophies at a faster rate than people w/normal sized hearts and the heart muscle is one that will become brittle w/age thus exasperating the problem.
any cardiologists on the forum care to chime in?
redir
06-05-2012, 11:10 AM
Well ya gotta die of something. Sit on the couch, work in the sun, eat eggs for breakfast, work as a high stress stock broker, it's all bad for you. Air must be bad for you because anything that breaths it will eventually die.
Living is BAD for ya folks. That's the truth.
Bob Loblaw
06-05-2012, 09:10 PM
The more you live, the more likely you are to die.
BL
esldude
06-06-2012, 07:27 PM
http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2812%2900473-9/fulltext
You can read the actual article here rather just the newspaper account. Includes a video summary by one of the authors.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_125879.html
Here is similar info from a different source with similar conclusions.
laupsi
06-06-2012, 08:03 PM
told my wife about this, she is an MD. she looked at me deadpan and said, "no kidding, this is common knowledge"
tannhauser
06-06-2012, 09:20 PM
one thing a doc friend of mine told me, he is a life long bike racer too and a very successful one at that, many older pro riders, when it's time, die of heart attacks. simple reason, their hearts were trained to such an extent when they were young that it atrophies at a faster rate than people w/normal sized hearts and the heart muscle is one that will become brittle w/age thus exasperating the problem.
any cardiologists on the forum care to chime in?
they done wore it out, in other words.
redir
06-07-2012, 07:34 AM
http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2812%2900473-9/fulltext
You can read the actual article here rather just the newspaper account. Includes a video summary by one of the authors.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_125879.html
Here is similar info from a different source with similar conclusions.
This is the part a lot of people won't understand:
Notwithstanding, the hypothesis that long-term excessive endurance exercise may induce adverse CV remodeling warrants further investigation to identify at-risk individuals and formulate physical fitness regimens for conferring optimal CV health and longevity.
Ironically if they said that it was just 'a theory' most people would shun it as a joke.
Bob Loblaw
06-07-2012, 09:51 PM
I have been trying to figure out why this doesn't bother me and I think I have it. I don't ride for health reasons. Doesn't even enter my mind unless I am sick at the doctor's office and I have to explain to the PA that 72 bpm is about 15 above normal for me.
In fact there are a few health prices I am already paying. Calluses on my feet that split and bleed periodically. The tendency to get woozy if I stand up too fast. A bad back. Athlete's palm. Permanently deformed toes from narrow cycling shoes long ago. Not to mention the permant damage to skin and joints from umpteen thousand crashes over the past two or three decades. So do I care my heart may pop like a balloon? Nope. It is all worth it.
BL
beeatnik
06-08-2012, 06:18 AM
The tendency to get woozy if I stand up too fast.
BL
Used to happen to me a lot. What's the cause? Low blood sugar?
I have been trying to figure out why this doesn't bother me and I think I have it. I don't ride for health reasons.
Health was never my primary motivation,but I always considered it a real benefit anyway. And I always felt OK back when I was riding a lot (5-6,000 miles per year, not huge, but perhaps enough to be relevant?). But then when I eased back, I actually started feeling better and healthier. And started understanding that the amount I was riding and the kind of diet I subscribed to in order to fuel all of that riding might not be all that healthy. I ride a lot less these days, a LOT less, and I don't enjoy it as much (too many chickens and eggs there to even try to unpack), but I feel plenty healthy. Better than when I was hardcore. Studies like this don't surprise me at all.
-Ray
Fixed
06-08-2012, 06:37 AM
Rest in peace or rest in peace
Cheers :)
Viper
06-08-2012, 06:46 AM
Fixed, it's rest in peace or rest in pieces. :)
Hey, I know excessive exercise hurts the arse. Mine was sore from last weekend.
:beer:
PS: Excessive Rockford Files, Miami Vice and Magnum PI is a good-thing.
67-59
06-08-2012, 06:50 AM
This is the part a lot of people won't understand:
Notwithstanding, the hypothesis that long-term excessive endurance exercise may induce adverse CV remodeling warrants further investigation to identify at-risk individuals and formulate physical fitness regimens for conferring optimal CV health and longevity.
Ironically if they said that it was just 'a theory' most people would shun it as a joke.
And here's the "health" reason to keep riding, directly from the abstract. After talking about the possible negative effects, and the fact that it may only occur in certain "at-risk" individuals, they say:
However, this concept is still hypothetical and there is some inconsistency in the reported findings. Furthermore, lifelong vigorous exercisers generally have low mortality rates and excellent functional capacity.
In other words, while there may be cardiac downsides that apply to some people, there are also clear upsides that apply to most everybody who partakes in exercise. To summarize: The good is far more likely than the bad.
Life is a game of chance, and even after this article, it seems like you're making your odds better, not worse, by riding a lot. Frankly, I'm still far more concerned about getting hit by a car than I am about this.
Bob Loblaw
06-08-2012, 08:09 AM
If your heart has a low BPM rate and a high stroke volume, it takes a moment for your body to bring your blood pressure up to defeat the added effects of gravity when you stand up. Sometimes, especially when I have been sitting for a while like at the movies or work, I stand up and sit right back down.
BL
Used to happen to me a lot. What's the cause? Low blood sugar?
And here's the "health" reason to keep riding, directly from the abstract.
....................
Life is a game of chance, and even after this article, it seems like you're making your odds better, not worse, by riding a lot.
There's a big difference between "keep riding" and "riding a lot". I don't think anyone would argue that exercise isn't a good thing and that riding isn't a fine form of exercise. The post and the article are about exercising "excessively" which I think is a reasonable point. I think cutting back from 6000 miles a year to being a couch potato would be a big mistake. I don't think cutting back from 6000 miles per year to 1500 or 2000, mixed in with lots of walking and general activity is a bad thing though, and it may actually be good for you.
BTW, there was also a bit of publicity of a recent study about the hazards of SITTING too much. Even if you exercise a lot, if you spend too much time per day on your ass, it increases all kinds of health risks. So I guess the upshot is to stay active but not TOO active. As with all things, moderation...
I recently spent a month in New York City, doing a ton of photography. I basically walked myself silly every day (except for one or two days of really terrible weather). I didn't do a BIT of more intensive exercise, but I walked for several hours every day. I gotta say, I've never felt better in my adult life. I've been back home for more than a month now and I tend to generally be on or off here, not sort of going but not intensely pretty much all the time. I think city's can be very healthy places to live if the air is OK.
-Ray
LesMiner
06-08-2012, 08:38 AM
It was 1984 when Jim Fixx died from a heart condition. At the time many medical people were challenging the benefits of exercise. See the article from 1984
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/07/24/science/the-doctor-s-world-james-fixx-the-enigma-of-heart-disease.html?pagewanted=all
Fixed
06-08-2012, 08:47 AM
It was 1984 when Jim Fixx died from a heart condition. At the time many medical people were challenging the benefits of exercise. See the article from 1984
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/07/24/science/the-doctor-s-world-james-fixx-the-enigma-of-heart-disease.html?pagewanted=all
I do I had all of his books
I believe when the story came out he was unaware that he had a hereditary heart problem If I remember right being fit helped him live as long as he did
Cheers :)
gasman
06-08-2012, 09:04 AM
I do I had all of his books
I believe when the story came out he was unaware that he had a hereditary heart problem If I remember right being fit helped him live as long as he did
Cheers :)
Jim Fixx's father died in his 50's from a heart attack. Mr. Fixx knew his family history and was trying to avoid the same fate. Didn't work in part because he was ingoring symptoms that were mild but present- mainly some slight chest discomfort and easier fatigue.
I think the article and the previous studies with mice are valid for only those that put in huge volumes of exercise with high intensity-like pro cyclists. Like Fixed said you do need time to rest and the serious Masters athletes I know always completely rest one day a week.
These studies don't really apply to 99.9% of us on this board. We don't have the time to work that hard nor the desire to beat ourselves up that much.
laupsi
06-08-2012, 09:22 AM
unless you race and race a lot, let's face it most of us on this forum do not fit into this category, you will never have to worry about the type of heart problems discussed in the article.
riding a lot, 6,000 miles/year at a HR below or at threshold will not do any damage to your heart providing you are healthy to begin with.
it's the extreme riding/racing at HR's well above threshold and for extended periods, this is where the damage is being done. if you ride/train/race at this HR level you will know it, if have to think about it, you're not.
illuminaught
06-08-2012, 09:28 AM
Any extreme can increase your chances of proving mortality.
Live the life you love.
54ny77
06-08-2012, 10:05 AM
I know a guy who continually talks about Fixx as justification for chain smoking, sedentary life and cheesesteak eating. It's really absurd. I just ignore him when he starts yapping on about it.
If you're gonna go, you're gonna go. What you do prior to that and how you enjoy it is up to you.
I had an Uncle who was fit as a fiddle, ran all the time on treadmill, played basketball, etc. Could run circles around some guys 1/2 - 2/3 his age. He died from a heart attack. Body was very fit, but his heart plumbing was not.
5 miles on a treadmill followed by donuts and coffee and a smoke isn't exactly the diet & exercise plan of champions...but then again, I've known a few guys who are 80-90 yrs. old that defy the odds with their lifestyle and diet yet, they're 80-90+ without too many physical hiccups.
Go figure.
It was 1984 when Jim Fixx died from a heart condition. At the time many medical people were challenging the benefits of exercise. See the article from 1984
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/07/24/science/the-doctor-s-world-james-fixx-the-enigma-of-heart-disease.html?pagewanted=all
it's the extreme riding/racing at HR's well above threshold and for extended periods, this is where the damage is being done. if you ride/train/race at this HR level you will know it, if have to think about it, you're not.
Actually, for extended periods it would be below threshold.
But, athletes worth their salt will train at intervals above threshold.
Rueda Tropical
06-08-2012, 10:54 AM
everything in moderation. Drinking to much water can kill you. To much of vitamins that are vital to good health can kill you. Starving can kill you but to much food can kill you as well.
A glass of red wine a day = good. A bottle a day = not so good.
Extreme excess in anything is likely to be dangerous to your health.
laupsi
06-08-2012, 12:43 PM
Actually, for extended periods it would be below threshold.
But, athletes worth their salt will train at intervals above threshold.
but added up the time spent above threshold is significant for all racers
67-59
06-08-2012, 12:58 PM
There's a big difference between "keep riding" and "riding a lot". I don't think anyone would argue that exercise isn't a good thing and that riding isn't a fine form of exercise. The post and the article are about exercising "excessively" which I think is a reasonable point. I think cutting back from 6000 miles a year to being a couch potato would be a big mistake. I don't think cutting back from 6000 miles per year to 1500 or 2000, mixed in with lots of walking and general activity is a bad thing though, and it may actually be good for you.
BTW, there was also a bit of publicity of a recent study about the hazards of SITTING too much. Even if you exercise a lot, if you spend too much time per day on your ass, it increases all kinds of health risks. So I guess the upshot is to stay active but not TOO active. As with all things, moderation...
I recently spent a month in New York City, doing a ton of photography. I basically walked myself silly every day (except for one or two days of really terrible weather). I didn't do a BIT of more intensive exercise, but I walked for several hours every day. I gotta say, I've never felt better in my adult life. I've been back home for more than a month now and I tend to generally be on or off here, not sort of going but not intensely pretty much all the time. I think city's can be very healthy places to live if the air is OK.
-Ray
This article says nothing about 6,000 miles riding a year being "excessive endurance exercise." Where they talk about cycling, they talk about "very long distance bicycle races", and the one graph that shows transient decrease in ejection fraction was after 8 hours of alpine cycling. You can easily hit 6,000 miles -- or 10,000 miles -- per year without ever pushing it as hard as you would in a "very long distance" race, or riding 8 hours at a time in the Alps.
I don't disagree that lesser mileage may also be good, and that mixing it up with walking helps too...just don't get confused about this necessarily applying to non-racers who ride <10,000 miles per year.
laupsi
06-08-2012, 01:05 PM
i don't disagree that lesser mileage may also be good, and that mixing it up with walking helps too...just don't get confused about this necessarily applying to non-racers who ride <10,000 miles per year.
+1
esldude
06-08-2012, 01:22 PM
Guys, this and some other articles all come to the conclusion the absolute intensity isn't the issue. It is the total amount of time or work done at a relatively high intensity. There are older such studies showing negative effects even at lower intensities if the total amount of calories used up in activity gets too high.
This particular study suggests 1 hour per day at higher intensity (which non-racing riding would fall into) or 2 hours per day at lower intensities like walking. Some older looks into this issue pegged the dividing line somewhere around 90 minutes with the proviso you don't do 90 minutes every day. And they aren't claiming they can say 60 is fine but 61 is too much. Nor that 60 is the right amount for each and every person. But looking at large numbers of folks over time somewhere in and around that number looks to be prudent.
The authors try and make it very clear over and over and over that this is not a reason to not exercise and shouldn't be looked at that way. That exercise is highly beneficial for everyone. Just that 30-60 minutes per day gets you the overwhelming majority of the health benefits, that more than that could increase you chances of heart problems (not that it definitely will just increases the chances).
The reaction to this news sure looks like the reaction of addicts who don't want to hear it in large measure.
Further, one is always taking some risks. The risks from long excessive exercise are likely less than no exercise. And if one enjoys something they can surely decide it is worth the risk. Almost everyone does things with some risk because they like it and are willing to accept the risk. This is no different. Just a warning as to what could happen, that if you fall in this category maybe be aware of it. And they hope to develop testing for such in the future.
Bob Loblaw
06-08-2012, 01:31 PM
I was just at the store, saw not one but three dudes shuffling around the store with oxygen carts. One was in his 80's at least, but the others were more seventy-ish. I plan to still be racing when I am that age.
I will take the threat of a sudden heart attack over a nose hose any day.
BL
Bob Loblaw
06-08-2012, 01:33 PM
Hey! I resemble that remark!
The reaction to this news sure looks like the reaction of addicts who don't want to hear it in large measure.
This article says nothing about 6,000 miles riding a year being "excessive endurance exercise." Where they talk about cycling, they talk about "very long distance bicycle races", and the one graph that shows transient decrease in ejection fraction was after 8 hours of alpine cycling. You can easily hit 6,000 miles -- or 10,000 miles -- per year without ever pushing it as hard as you would in a "very long distance" race, or riding 8 hours at a time in the Alps.
I don't disagree that lesser mileage may also be good, and that mixing it up with walking helps too...just don't get confused about this necessarily applying to non-racers who ride <10,000 miles per year.
Maybe not - I'm not claiming 6000 miles is a lot, particularly compared to a lot of folks out there. But I've never been fast, so 6000 miles is a lot of hours, and I live in a hilly area, so a good bit of it was at somewhat high intensity. And I'd do a lot of rides that were 3-4 hours in duration and a few each year that were more like 5-7, with plenty of high intensity riding on those long days. And that level of activity sometimes left me depleted in ways that my more typical 20-30 mile rides with only moderate climbing these days doesn't. That level of depletion was very very good for one thing in particular - being in shape to do more of the same. But it didn't make me feel healthier or any more able to be active in a variety of ways, which I enjoy. It just made me a pretty damn fit cyclist. Now I'm a far less fit cyclist but every bit as fit otherwise.
Not claiming that it was harming my health, but I don't think it was doing it any real good either. Just a matter of whether you love it enough to put that much energy into it. I did then - I don't now.
-Ray
Fixed
06-08-2012, 03:36 PM
We all have to die of something
Here is to life cheers :beer:
If Jim had rode my old fixed gear it would be
Fixx's fixed from fixed
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.