Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do not dispute the OP's subject line and attached research but I think intuitively we recognize some of us have genetic advantages for certain activities which are a limiting factor to others if attempting to reach a similar level without those advantages.
As Stan4 mentioned, most people who have responded haven't understood the actual conclusion of the study. The conclusion is that intense cardiovascular exercise can cause structural changes in the heart that, over time, may increase one's risk of heart events. That is not the same as someone dying on the spot, and one doesn't imply the other.
This is not an entirely new concept. There have been a couple controversial studies done that indicated that running above a 7:30 pace for over an hour could cause these sorts of structural changes. The authors of that study, one of whom was a runner himself, concluded that things like marathons are probably not healthy. This caused a stir, of course, because there are many runners, and it seems inconceivable that doing something like that could be unhealthy. Further, most runners, and certainly people who can run that far and fast, do live longer than the average person. However, runners benefit from multiple factors that improve their longevity independently from their cardiovascular health, such as a lower BMI.
And as he also pointed out, most people vastly overestimate how hard they are actually working out and for how long. A 7:30 pace for an hour is darn fast. Most even pretty decent runners will never see that. Many good runners will never be able to run a mile that fast even.
And as he also pointed out, most people vastly overestimate how hard they are actually working out and for how long. A 7:30 pace for an hour is darn fast. Most even pretty decent runners will never see that. Many good runners will never be able to run a mile that fast even.
ANY good distance runner will be able to do so. In high school I ran a 4:41 mile my senior year at the Colorado State T&F Meet. We were at an elevation of over 6,000 feet. A 4:41 got me 11th place. I'm 34 now and have had two knee surgeries and a series of severe ankle injuries. I don't run nearly as much as I used to. Still I can pull a 3 mile run in under 20 minutes, and if you told me to go 1 mile as fast as I can I'm confident I'd be under 6.
ANY good distance runner will be able to do so. In high school I ran a 4:41 mile my senior year at the Colorado State T&F Meet. We were at an elevation of over 6,000 feet. A 4:41 got me 11th place. I'm 34 now and have had two knee surgeries and a series of severe ankle injuries. I don't run nearly as much as I used to. Still I can pull a 3 mile run in under 20 minutes, and if you told me to go 1 mile as fast as I can I'm confident I'd be under 6.
The speed given by the authors of the research I mentioned was 7:30/mile for an hour. The above poster is right: most runners can't do that.
My thought is based on gut feeling, so take it just as food for thought. My gut tells me that the highest risk does not result from strenuous exercise, but from doing strenuous exercise too soon after beginning an exercise program. Working up gradually is good. Very gradual progress is especially good.
If you're just starting out with a mix of walking and a little easy jogging, it's probably overly ambitious to aim for running a marathon a year from now. Again, this is just gut feeling, but my gut tells me that running that marathon is probably okay, as long as you work up to that level of fitness over a number of years.
I think most of it has to do with extensively training the glycolytic energy system for prolonged periods of time. It eventually starts to damage your mitochondria and can result in long term, perhaps even permanent damage.
In some sports, utilizing the glycolytic energy system is part of the game, but a lot of trainers are starting to use a combination of training the alactic and aerobic energy systems and leaving the glycolytic system alone.
Drinking too much water can kill you...dum dum duhmmmmmm.
That is true! I remember this lady was on the radio, competing in a contest of who could drink the most water. She wanted to win a game console for her son, I think. She started feeling nauseated when she was on air - when she returned home, she died. I think it was so much water she drank that something happened to her brain.
My thought is based on gut feeling, so take it just as food for thought. My gut tells me that the highest risk does not result from strenuous exercise, but from doing strenuous exercise too soon after beginning an exercise program. Working up gradually is good. Very gradual progress is especially good.
If you're just starting out with a mix of walking and a little easy jogging, it's probably overly ambitious to aim for running a marathon a year from now. Again, this is just gut feeling, but my gut tells me that running that marathon is probably okay, as long as you work up to that level of fitness over a number of years.
There is actually truth to that. If I remember correctly, the authors of the study I mentioned above did say that the the temporary structural changes that occur in the heart after these sorts of really intense, really long exercise sessions are greater in people who aren't as well-trained. Their concern, of course, is that these temporary changes can become permanent, and it makes sense that greater changes would be worse than lesser changes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.