Masters Running

12345

Thu Jan 8 Runs and etc (Read 543 times)

    I know you weren't whining Evan. Just having some fun. We've got a dinner spot picked out. Keep the Beer cold for me! Bill

    "Some are the strong, silent type. You can't put your finger on exactly what it is they bring to the table until you run without them and then you realize that their steadiness fills a hole that leaks energy in their absence." - Kristin Armstrong


    King of PhotoShop

      Interesting discussion yesterday. I guess I fall into the low VO2 max category. Lousy heart and lungs? I dunno. I just know that it would take a HUGE amount of training, years and dedication for me to ever run a BQ marathon, if at all possible. I put in over 1800 miles last year and didn't see a whole lot of improvement, maybe 10 seconds faster per mile at 10K race speed. Which comes to my next question. Can anyone achieve a BQ goal if they train smart, stick with it, and never get sidelined for long by a serious injury? Or do you think some people would just never be able to reach that level?
      If there was ever a dedicated and strong runner I have seen here who could easily BQ, it is you. I don't know how you train or anything about your program, but I do know you run a lot and run gutsy. What do you think is in the way of a BQ? Spareribs


      King of PhotoShop

        Spareribs fish oil!? Yech! Tongue Well if it works . . . good luck getting the LDL down. I have a question about cholesterol that you may have some idea about. My DW's LDL is very high. But her (HDL+LDL)/HDL ratio is literally off the charts good (i.e. low). So the doctor told her that she need not worry about her LDL number. With her ratio being so low he quipped that her blood was like plaque cleaning Drano and she would never die of a clogged artery. My question is what is your understanding about LDL versus the (HDL+LDL)/HDL ratio? WebMd, not admitedly the world's best place for serious medical advice, has very conflicting commentary on this issue. In one article the author says you want a low total and a low ratio. Great, but what if the total is due almost entirely to the HDL number? Whether that is good, bad or indifferent is not so clear from the article.
        You and jdmom asked a question that is in my opinion the most important one right now, or at least it seems to me. My primary care provider kept telling me, "your HDL is so high, and although you LDL is also high, your risk ratio is terrific, and no worries," so I didn't care much for it. Fast forward to recent issues and the message from the cardiologist is much different: "I wish I had seen you years earlier, as I would have had you on a statin. No matter your HDL and risk ratio, high LDL will catch up with you as you age." Men or women in your 50's, no matter your risk ratio, if the LDL is high, I doubt the HDL is "drano". Maybe it would be a good idea to have a cardiologist offer an opinion. I am not bitter over this, but if I had to do it all over again, I wish I had had these discussions with a cardiologist rather than my regular physician. It seems to me, looking back, that no one goes to a cardilogist without a referral, or until something is wrong. I'll send anyone here a check for $5 if you print this email and have your PCP read it and respond to it, if you are over 50 and have high LDL. That's how seriously I take this issue. Thanks twocat for letting me share that singular opinion, even though there are no studies to back it. Spareribs
          Ok, so am I to assume you told Tramps my name was Erika N. Kephalin? Otherwise, I'm lost. It makes me very very happy to hear that Erika is in Florida right now. If anyone deserves it...she does.
          http://www.runningahead.com/groups/MastRun/Forum/905013875de64a658a619ee41e72b237 Big grin

          Lou, (aka Mr. predawnrunner), MD, USA | Lou's Brews | lking@pobox.com

          12345