Sister Buder would tell you to HTFU. OK, she wouldn't use that phrase, but you get the point. I've worked out with her and she inspires me.

There must be something going around on social media about this because this is the third time this week I’ve seen/heard it brought up.

And I’ve never heard it before this past Monday.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

I did just a little bit of research so far and I found two articles. The first one said that doctors recommend a healthy mix of cardio and weights as you get older. The other said that cardio is the worst thing you can do and if you want to know what really works, click here.

So......read into that what you want, but I'm pretty sure "here" was going to involve my credit card number.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

N=2 anecdotes:

A friend of mine, long-time bike racer, died at the age of 61. He needed a heart transplant and decided to pull the plug (long story). I knew him for 30 years and would say that he was overtrained 90% of the time.
Another friend died at the age of 72 from complications during heart surgery. He was a lifelong athlete, but got really serious about endurance athletics in his 60s (RAAM, etc.).





Don't overdo it.

Okay, so I found this article so far:

https://www.wellandgood.com/...ter-results/slide/2/



It isn't saying cardio is bad. It is saying TOO MUCH cardio is bad. What defines too much cardio is going to vary, but at least in this one article it said 4 hours hard a week is too much. 2.5 hours hard was better.

I'm guessing this is geared toward the people who do lots of spin and high intensity aerobics classes. I don't think I've ever done four hours of hard aerobic work a week in my life. In college, or in season practices had us doing ~8 hours a week of cardio, but only ~3 hours of that was hard.


Anyway, I'm probably currently hitting 4 hours a week of cardio, very little of it very hard, plus a bunch of weights and plyo exercises plus rock climbing. Gets me to about 7 hours a week.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Here's a good study:

http://www.onlinejacc.org/content/65/5/411


This study suggests that "slow", "short", and <3x per week is optimal, but cites an upper limit on healthy running from an older study:



"A weekly energy expenditure of 3,500 kcal is approximately equivalent to that required for running 35 miles, which is in the range of the upper limits for incremental health benefits from strenuous exercise identified by several recent large epidemiological reports. These studies found that a weekly cumulative dose of approximately 30 miles of running or 46 miles of walking is approximately the safe upper limit for optimizing long-term CV health and life expectancy."

---

---

"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."

I think the bigger issue is that as one gets older the gains become harder to come by, and so the temptation to see long sessions in a different light (uncomfortable bore feasts with little point) increases.

I’m now 53 and am less engaged with endurance activity than I have been in years. I find weights far more appealing now.

But none of that is based on science; it’s all just personal preferences over time.

I believe the jury is still out on this. Most of the concern over exercise,and heart issues, started a few years back when a few articles came out saying "some exercise is good but too much is bad for the heart".

One of the studies did have them exercising but they had an average age in the 60s, and the participants already had heart disease. That's not a good starting point. A better designed study would be a prospective one where you started at a much younger age, made sure all participants were of similar good health (i.e., cardiac disease ruled out), and then kept measurements of their actual exercise and how much intensity was involved. That study has not been performed, that I am aware of.

This leads me to the second problem with these studies. One of these big studies involved a questionnaire and then follow up for a decade (I think.......I'm on my phone so it's not so easy for me to go look this up again right now). The age range for this group was broad (I believe 20s to 60s) and the participants were the ones who judged the intensity of their exercise, not the researchers. The participants were asked about their exercise intensity and the researchers determined who developed a heart rhythm disturbance among the participants. Questionnaires are notoriously fickle with a lot more limited reliability. Also, as I believe an editorial about this study pointed out, what is considered to be intense exercise to a 20 year old is a lot different than to a 40 year old or 50 year old.........so again, self assessment and not true physical measurements by the researchers.

This may not have helped answer your question but I hoped to add a little perspective as to where the "exercise can be bad for those over 40" came from. Until better research becomes available, the jury is still out.

For me personally, I was paranoid and went to see a cardiologist. I told the heart doc "listen, I'm being VERY paranoid but I've seen too many men, who look very physically fit like me, drop dead at races". I've had to perform CPR in the middle of a race. He smiled, said he appreciated my honesty as to why I was there, and then proceeded to do testing. I had an EKG that day, wore a 24 hour holtor monitor to look for any aberrant rhythms, and had an echocardiogram done to check my heart. No, it's not fool proof but it did give me SOME piece of mind knowing I did not have an unrecognized heart rhythm disturbance and my heart did not show abnormal valve function, abnormal cardiomegaly, or other structural abnormalities.

I think in general over the last few years there's been an emphasis from some corners on weight lifting and adding muscle/strength as the ultimate desirable goal and along with that a denigration of endurance training. So not surprising some people are pushing the health benefits of weight lifting and the potential dangers of endurance training to sell that perspective.

The only thing I've seen is some suggestion a history of high volume/intensity endurance training may lead to increased risk of arrhythmia.

Then again, seems like weight lifting doesn't do all that much if anything to protect against heart disease.

So just be sensible. Like in most things, it's a false notion that more is always better (it certainly compromises immune function and increases risk of musckuloskeletal injury).

I think it's important to recognize that the health benefits of endurance training have little to do with the "gains". It's mostly about just getting out there to stimulate the physiological changes to occur to deal with the stress of the exercise. That's why the marathon runner is probably not going to be all that much healthier than the person walking around their neighborhood for 30 minutes 5 times a week. Yes they might be a little healthier but not nearly as much healthier as most would think from all the extra work they are doing.

My N+1. Mid 60's. Runner for 3 decades. Marathoner. Ironman. Got 2 marathons in the next 5 months and the goal is to BQ, again. I am less obsessive about miles per week now than I was a few years ago, but that is due to living/playing on a lake now. I drink more beer too. Lake Life.

Healthwise, never spent a night in the hospital since birth. RHR in the mid 30's. I can maintain a HR in the 160's+ for 3.5 to 4 hours. No heart problems at all. I take no meds of any kind. The doctor at my last exam suggested I take a baby aspirin daily, but I take them sporadically, at best.

No one in my family has ever exercised regularly. My father died of COPD at age 60. His father died of COPD at age 55. They were both smokers. I never saw either do any exercise and neither could have ever run 400m in their adulthood.

I attribute my good health and stamina to the decades of running. It may be a negative for some or even most people, but I have enjoyed it and have benefitted from it. Do a study that says running is good or bad for you. Write all the articles to support one premise or the other. I'm still going to run. It is my happy place and that is why I do it.

With the numbers they have I wonder how just 1 or 2 more or fewer deaths would have changed the whole conclusion of the study, which seems to largely rely on 2 of the 40 (or 36) "strenuous" joggers dying? They make the case for the "strenuous" exercise causing heart damage over time, and since I think they said they had cause of death data it seems really important to tell the reader if those 2 deaths were from malignant arrhythmias or other CVD causes or they got hit by a bus or something similar!

Trying to add value to the thread...

1.) There's definitely increased heart risk for pointy end of the curve endurance athletes.
2.) Classic American exercise folklore says you need to kill yourself with cardio (a la every contestant on the Biggest Loser). So there are many people that approach cardio like lunatics.
3.) Overtraining w/ cardio seems much easier than overtraining w/o cardio.
4.) Overtraining leads to poor hormonal values that mitigate good response to exercise stress.
5.) There is a correlation between muscle mass and general health (up to a point).
6.) It is harder, as you get older, to maintain muscle mass.
7.) Because of #5 and #6 it's often recommended to focus more on weight training as we get older (especially for men).


I don't think cardio is automatically bad for older people, but there are contexts where cardio is bad, and there are contexts where it isn't helpful to the person's stated goals. So an ongoing question is still: how do you know when you've crossed the line into dangerous or counterproductive cardio?

I think the advice you get varies from one cardiologist to another. I have a family history of coronary disease and if I don't take statins my cholesterol blows up. I do a treadmill test about once every 5-10 years as I will get occasional chest pain (which is probably digestive in nature, but get checked out to make sure). The last cardiologist said he would recommend everyone avoid doing marathons. But others would encourage it if it keeps you active.

The most important part of spin is to make sure you place your bike in the right area.

It seems pretty much incontrovertible that sensible cardio is good for most everyone at any age. The question really seems to be when does it become overkill? In the grand scheme of things there are probably very, very few old folks doing 35+ miles a week of running or even lower levels where you might be doing more harm than good. It's the million of older folks out there doing nothing that we need to worry about :)

Oh man, too much! 10 minutes of my life I'll never get back. But it was hilarious.

+1

But Barry: N=1. I'm about to be 41, runner for the last 30 years. I'm not dead yet.

My dad is 78 and his doctor has him on a cardio and weight routine. He is told a good mix of both is best but means nothing without a healthy diet (most here understand about the diet but most outside of here don't).

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

My doctor, who I respect very much, strenuously disagrees. Cardio exercise in your 40's has been shown to have great benefits later in life.

When I am regularly exercising I never struggle to stay lean. If I take time off it creeps up, sometimes more than creeps. I've long had the goal to do an IM after 50. Well, I've got the over 50 pat down, now I just need to find the time to train. Kind of funny, as I typed this a promo email just came in from Marathon Travels. Must be a sign.

My feeling about people who say things like this is that they are looking for excuses to not exercise or trying to put you down for doing it(I've got a brother who does this, he's an asshole).

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

he is obsessed in the best possible way

I'm 47, but, I am right there with you. I never did a lot of weight training when doing IMs and, as a result, I was quite skinny but not well defined. I am very much enjoying hitting the weights and seeing the definition the comes with frequent weight training.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I've always enjoyed lifting. I laugh when people talk about how horrible it is to sling iron in a gym. Being able to lift large rocks amuses me.

When people ask what the best exercise is I always say the one you will keep doing.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.