1234

Yet another article on the dangers of running (too much). (Read 1027 times)

    Click

     

    I dont know if people are just spouting nonsense or taking very extremist views from very limited data.

     

    ___________________________________________________________________________________

     

    Fitness fanatics should do “just one or a few” marathons or full-distance triathlons, say the cardiologists, because over-exerting the heart for years can lead to long-term damage. There is now convincing evidence that repeatedly asking the heart to pump “massive” volumes of blood, for hours at a time, can lead to an array of problems, they say. These include overstretching of the organ’s chambers, thickening of its walls and changes to electrical signalling. These could trigger potentially dangerous heart rhythm problems.

     

    “In addition, long-term excessive exercise may accelerate aging in the heart, as evidenced by increased coronary artery calcification, diastolic ventricular dysfunction, and large-artery wall stiffening,” they write in the journal Heart. Dr James O’Keefe and Carl Lavie, from St Luke’s Mid America Heart Institute in Kansas City, and the Pennington Biomedical Research Centre in Baton Rouge, US, say the heart is only designed for “short bursts” of intense activity.

     

    They cite the example of Micah True, the hero of the book Born to Run about ultra-endurance running. He died in March, aged 58, on a 12-mile training run in New Mexico. He routinely ran a marathon a day, sometimes more. They believe that decades of such exertion led him to develop Phidippides cardiomyopathy. Named after the original runner, who died delivering news of the Greeks’ victory at Marathon, it is “the constellation of cardiac pathology that has been in observed in the hearts of some veteran extreme endurance athletes”. They concluded that most people should limit vigorous exercise to 30 to 50 minutes a day. “If one really wants to do a marathon or full-distance triathlon etc, it may be best to do just one or a few and then proceed to safer and healthier exercise patterns,” they advise.

     

    No amount light to moderate exercise is harmful, they note. “A routine of moderate physical activity will add life to your years, as well as years to your life. "In contrast, running too fast, too far, and for too many years may speed one’s progress towards the finish line of life.” Ellen Mason, senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, said: “Whether you’re taking part in an endurance event, watching your weight or staying healthy after a heart attack, it’s important to build up your activity levels gradually, especially if you’ve not exercised in a while.”

    I dont sweat. I ooze liquid awesome.

    Flinders


    Three Martini Lunch

      O'Keefe and Lavie were the source for the WSJ article a couple of weeks ago that made the same argument.

       

      My personal opinion is that it is extremist views from a limited data set: Though there might be something there on the extreme end, like the Micah True example, that running 100+ mpw for years, if not decades, on end might not be all that good for you.  Taking things to the extreme in most contexts often isn't the best for one's health.  But that is the crux of the matter, isn't it: where do you draw the line beyond which something is extreme?  O'Keefe, I think in the WSJ article argues that the "extreme" line is around 30-40mpw, which might be an extremist position based on the very limited data that is out there.

      M: 3:31:56

      HM: 1:37:33

        I thought that it was kind of funny that at the bottom of the article I had a link to http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9739262/Middle-aged-men-warned-to-avoid-violent-exertion-after-man-dies-following-Gangnam-Style-dance.html on my computer. 

        Running Goals ...

         

        "But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep."  Robert Frost


        A Saucy Wench

          O'Keefe and Lavie were the source for the WSJ article a couple of weeks ago that made the same argument.

           

          My personal opinion is that it is extremist views from a limited data set: Though there might be something there on the extreme end, like the Micah True example, that running 100+ mpw for years, if not decades, on end might not be all that good for you.  Taking things to the extreme in most contexts often isn't the best for one's health.  But that is the crux of the matter, isn't it: where do you draw the line beyond which something is extreme?  O'Keefe, I think in the WSJ article argues that the "extreme" line is around 30-40mpw, which might be an extremist position based on the very limited data that is out there.

           

          The rebuttal to the WSJ article published somewhere that I am not going to go looking for, was that when you looked at the data that OKeefe and Lavie were using they had normalized for so much that all of the health benefits of running were "eliminated".  i.e. if runners weighed 20% less and had a 10% lower mortality rate then the mortality rate was credited to weighing less, not running.  Same with cholesterol, bloodpressure, etc.

          I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets

           

          "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7

          Jon the Freshman


            First and foremost I really think the doctors' research time put into this article could have been better utilized in solving the other side of this equation which is to include obesity, childhood diabetes and heart disease. That being said, lets poke some holes. The fact that they site Micah True is completely ridiculous. The autopsy report on his body said he died from congestive heart failure due to an abnormality that lies dormant until it presents itself. In other words any single person could have the same condition without knowing they do whether they partake in prolonged exercise or not. Then their second argument relies on the idea that he was training for a marathon. How about we get our facts right. He lives in the canyons. That's how everyone who lives there gets around. Finally Pheidippides did not in fact die. The real story involves him running from Athens to Sparta and back. And guess what that was aprox. 300 miles in 2 days time. History tells us that he also did not die from this. But, allowing for some wiggle room for the sake of argument, you could equally agree that he died from dehydration and overall exhaustion from running 300 miles. People need to stop thinking about how bad a lot of something healthy could be for a person and start thinking about the real capabilities of the human body. 


            Feeling the growl again

              The rebuttal to the WSJ article published somewhere that I am not going to go looking for, was that when you looked at the data that OKeefe and Lavie were using they had normalized for so much that all of the health benefits of running were "eliminated".  i.e. if runners weighed 20% less and had a 10% lower mortality rate then the mortality rate was credited to weighing less, not running.  Same with cholesterol, bloodpressure, etc.

               

              Yes, once they corrected for all the known beneficial effects of running, they found no benefit to large amounts of running.

               

              Duh.

               

              Someone with a set agenda, so they waterboard the data until if confesses what they want to hear.

               

              Yawn.  I'm running 20 miles tomorrow.

              "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

               


              Shakedown Street

                We are all going to die at some point, either from running, hookers/blow, or being a couch potato.

                 

                Your choice.

                Started-5/12, RWOL refugee,5k-24:23 (1/12/13),10K-55:37(9/15/12),HM-1:52:59(3/24/13)


                Feeling the growl again

                  We are all going to die at some point, either from running, hookers/blow, or being a couch potato.

                   

                  Your choice.

                   

                  We have to choose just one?

                  "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                   


                  Wandering Wally

                    When will someone release a study on the dangers of couch surfing?

                    Run!  Just Run!

                     

                    Trail Runner Nation Podcast

                    Jeff F


                    Free Beer

                      When will someone release a study on the dangers of couch surfing?

                       

                      +1

                       

                      A couple years back when there was a death at the Chicago marathon my mother told me that was a sign to stop running marathons. I responded to her that I was certain more people died in their recliners that day in Chicago.

                        I just cant wrap my head around this statement "In contrast, running too fast, too far, and for too many years may speed one’s progress towards the finish line of life.”

                         

                        If anything since i started running (and i have run very little so far), my resting heart rate has dropped significantly. This is generally in line with "the fitter you are, the less work your heart needs to do to sustain your bodily functions" .. from increased stroke volume, stronger cardiac muscles in pumping etc etc ...

                         

                        So - is that to say then, that the only way to know you have truly overworked yourself running is when you drop dead with your shoes on?

                        I dont sweat. I ooze liquid awesome.


                        Feeling the growl again

                           

                           

                          If anything since i started running (and i have run very little so far), my resting heart rate has dropped significantly. This is generally in line with "the fitter you are, the less work your heart needs to do to sustain your bodily functions" .. from increased stroke volume, stronger cardiac muscles in pumping etc etc ...

                           

                           

                          Context is important.

                           

                          Many of the cardiac changes seen in runners are pathological in non-runners (low HR, left ventricular enlargement, etc).  In more than a few of the "studies" I have seen posted by some of these cardiologists, they seem incapable of placing such changes in the proper context, and erroneously analyze the changes only in the isolated context and comparing to pathological conditions in non-runners.

                           

                          This is why when a runner goes in for a physical and has a resting HR in the 50s, they get to walk away with a 24-hr halter monitor.

                           

                          This is why when I walked into an ER with a corneal abrasion and they took my resting HR at 29, the tech looked like he was going to faint (turned out to be a smart guy, his first statement was "please tell me you run marathons or I have to get a doctor RIGHT NOW").

                           

                          The fact that a certain physiological change is pathological in one context, does NOT mean that it is pathological in another.

                          "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                           


                          Labrat

                             

                            Someone with a set agenda, so they waterboard the data until if confesses what they want to hear.

                             

                             

                            I'm so stealing that line for future use.

                            5K  23:21*  (Vdot 41.53)   10/13/12

                            10K  51:48 (Vdot 38.39)  7/15/12

                            HM 1:46:23 (Vdot 41.95) 11/9/13

                            FM 4:28:33 (Vdot 33.01) 11/12/11

                            *Gun time, all others are chip time

                            meaghansketch


                              The rebuttal to the WSJ article published somewhere that I am not going to go looking for, was that when you looked at the data that OKeefe and Lavie were using they had normalized for so much that all of the health benefits of running were "eliminated".  i.e. if runners weighed 20% less and had a 10% lower mortality rate then the mortality rate was credited to weighing less, not running.  Same with cholesterol, bloodpressure, etc.

                               

                              Here's the rebuttal if anyone wants to read it; interesting stuff.  

                              Up next: Front Runners New York LGBT Pride 5-mile  06/28 |  NYRR Team Championships: Women (5M) 08/02

                              Goal race: NYCRUNS Haunted Island 10K 10/25


                              Imminent Catastrophe

                                You people are going to ruin your knees too.

                                "Able to function despite imminent catastrophe"

                                 "To obtain the air that angels breathe you must come to Tahoe"--Mark Twain

                                "The most common question from potential entrants is 'I do not know if I can do this' to which I usually answer, 'that's the whole point'.--Paul Charteris, Tarawera Ultramarathon RD.

                                 

                                √ Tahoe Rim Trail 100M 20/21 July 2013

                                Boston Marathon 21 April 2014

                                Tahoe Rim Trail 100M 19/20 July 2014

                                1234