My Dad had 2 heart attacks, one in his early 40s, another about 3 years later resulting in a double bypass. Both my grandfathers died in their 30s from strokes. None of them did any exercise.

Will triathlon mean you live forever, no. Will sitting on the sofa watching sport mean you die middle aged? No.

So it's down to choices, down to how you do things. Ie starting from a zero fitness base and trying to Kona Qualify in the next 6 months is likely to lead to a greater chance of those heart things than if you took up darts. I would also suggest there is a better chance that after a few years of training you pick up on the first signs of things not being right a lot quicker - small changes in energy, strength are more apparent when you are tracking your metrics and more crtitically as understanding of your body patterns as most of us are.

Genes (predisposition) and environment (lifestyle).

You can dig yourself a grave by sitting in a recliner.
You can also dig yourself a grave by training yourself into it.

And Yes, an extreme endurance sports regimen (professional level) is unhealthy in the long term (exceptions confirm the rule).
Not necessarily as extreme unhealthy as resulting in a stroke or heart attack, but accelerated aging is a given..

Risk-Reward balance is different for everybody. There is no hard cut-off (training hrs. and intensity).

Life is a neat gamble, isn't it?
.

Thanks but these types of replies are a little like the ones I get from people who I talk to about drinking or smoking-life's a gamble, I know a guy who drank and lived to 100, I know a guy who didn't drink and died at 40 etc..

Is this sport going to decrease life expectancy as opposed to just being a normal active person who follows a healthy balanced diet?

If you're seriously asking this, go to your doctor and get his thoughts that knows hell of a lot more about your health background / genetics / family medical history, than a bunch of randoms on the internet who your simply going to probaly still question their wisdom on said subject (see your last reply to this thread).

Moderation is probaly the best described footnote in medical history for "healthy" living with just about anything....

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Not questioning wisdom at all, but I'm looking for something a little different than a 'people have heart attacks' or 'life is a gamble' type response ( no offenses to these replies).

Notwithstanding all the variables of medical history etc I would have thought there would be a wealth of knowledge on ST from people who have been there, done that and bought the book?

Is there a general consensus that this type of activity is unhealthy, or is this still a ongoing debate?

Of course it is...

One of your organs will fail you one day. Theres lots of pieces to this human machine. Things break.

Its a faith and trust we have with the body. Its an incredibly reliable thing, and its easy to think we are doing it some good by consistently doing what it was built to do, and making it better.

We probably are much better off than others, just in different ways...

---

Strava

Maybe yes. But not to the extent that being sedentary would be. Not sure where the stats come from in this article, but here's your answer:
Men who exercise moderately were seen to have a 58% reduction in mortality from CVD, while those who exercised at the higher levels of volume saw only a 34% reduction in mortality.

"Higher levels of volume" meant > 12 hrs per week on average for "many years", I think.

Coronary artery calcium scan seems like a good idea every few years or so, after age 35 as an endurance athlete. According to the MD quoted in the article, and to ST user: "dtoce" elsewhere on this forum. (apologies if misquoting or misapplying recommendations)

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

Every doctor I've talked to literally cringes when I mention endurance sports.
But I think that's part of the allure.
I remember watching Tim Don in the full halo on the rowing machine and the recumbent bike.
Prolly going against doctor's orders there.
There is a time to listen to doctors and there is a time to ignore them completely.

Consider reading the following books: The Haywire Heart and How Not to Die by Gregor. I tried to find the author of the first, and ended up cleaning my closet searching for my copy and found way too many transition bags. Of course, practice moderation when applying their principles as we should all things, even in taking it all in with A grain of salt.

I look at the obituaries - I don't see professional sportsmen / women living any longer than the average person.

Being superfit doesn't seem to be of any / much benefit in longevity - perhaps some of their later years are easier?

I'm interested in the number of healthy years, but I just don't think you can do an awful lot to "beat the system" of your body.

I’m no medical expert, but I think the premise of this thread is not sound.

Of course we’re likely to read about athletes that have heart issues, mostly because surprising events get attention. Nobody writes articles for the manyfold sedentary people that are affected. I’m sure people would try if they could monetize it.

This is a pretty good, relevant article by a scientist from Loughborough University: https://www.weforum.org/...lthspan-vs-lifespan/

If you're interested in the actual science of endurance exercise and heart health.
Look up Andre Le Gerche - Cardiologist https://baker.edu.au/research/staff/andre-lagerche


He would be the worlds leading expert on it. Bit biased because my wife works with him.
Consults and has done a lot of studies on pro triathletes, Orica green edge/Mitchelton Scott team etc

He is a very good athlete himself. Qualified for Kona, has run 2:26 marathon.
Has even presented at the Sports Medicine Conference at Kona on the topic.

Check out a triathlon podcast he gave an interview on this:
https://fitterradio.libsyn.com/fitter-radio-episode-332-dr-andre-la-gerche

From memory the take home is - your heart is like other muscles, if you keep over-stressing it, with little recovery you are risk of developing problems.
The sport isn't the problem, it's HOW you train for the sport.

Go to an Ironman awards ceremony and look at the winners of the 70+ age groups. They look pretty incredible.
I think on the whole, there are many more positives than negatives.

---

____________________________________

Are you ready to do an Ultraman? | How I calculate Ironman race fueling | Strength Training for Athletes |

Whenever I read or hear a question like this, I can only answer with this:

"Fill your years with life instead of your life with years."

Why should someone stop doing something he or she loves?

Perhaps there are a few studies which say to much sport is dangerous and unhealthy. But so much more things in life are dangerous and we do them anyway. In fact living is dangerous :D

I was thinking Andre as soon as I read the first post...

The article below is also pretty interesting.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/heart-attacks-of-the-mega-fit-how-safe-is-extreme-sport-20180328-p4z6m7.html

I'm sure that NOT doing triathlon (or other similar activity) will increase your probability of a host of diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, 101 problems from being overweight, and reduce your ability to survive Covid if you get it.

What about activities that AREN'T similar to triathlon?

https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...riathlon_P6427784-2/

The answer is 'no', it is not dangerous. In general, being active (in 3 sports) lowers long term mortality and certainly allows for a healthier/active lifestyle.

But, being an endurance athlete does increase the risk for some morbidities-like afib. And extreme sports may increase risk slightly as scarring has been noted in hearts but it's meaning is not yet known.

 

its funny we don't tend to hear much about this with swimming. i get the sense swimmers keep the intensity high but the volume modest esp as they get deeper into masters territory.

i suspect that there's a bit of a correlation between the tendency to eat a bit carelessly and grind out long hours in "hard-ish" zone in some endurance sport demographics and greater risks of problems.

It seems like any endurance activity has some inherent danger to it, but so does just about any activity anyone would do in the first place.

I simply don't think you can dwell on all possible outcomes for every thing you do. Take preventative steps, be mindful of your body, and enjoy!

Source for data that older triathletes develop heart issues even at the average rate of the general population?

No, triathlon is not a life span maximizing activity. If that's why you do it, stop. If all you want to do is live the longest possible then walk a bunch for exercise, lift some weights, and eat the healthiest diet possible.

---

Dimond Bikes Superfan

If you look at it as part of a moderate and well-balanced lifestyle, I think the sport/hobby is a winner.

Getting to perform your best is a combination of all those healthy things that we have read about.

• Adequate rest.
• Proper food.
• Booze and bad food in moderation or abstinence.
• Strength and flexibility training.
• Mental/spiritual/social connectedness.
• ____________stuff I forgot goes here.

Knowing how much time to invest in each one of these aspects can be challenging.

Having the discipline to honour each of them, as needed, even more challenging.

---

http://www.fitspeek.com the Fraser Valley's fitness, wellness, and endurance sports podcast

Article published last month in PLOS Medicine: "Our findings suggest that physical activity is not only associated with lower risk for cardiovascular disease, but the greatest benefit is seen for those who are active at the highest level."

A recent NYT story on the article states: "Dr. Dwyer (one of the authors of the study) also points out that the number of people in the study who completed extremely high amounts of intense activity was small, so it remains conceivable that long-term, intense exercise might, at some point, stop being good for hearts. That possibility requires more scrutiny."

How much of the training that an AG triathlete does, especially one that competes for multiple decades, can be labeled intense? I think the best that each of us can do is pay close attention to what the body is telling us, train consistently and get regular checkups, preferably by a physician who is interested in our hobby and its potential effects on our health.

Are there that many people that train more than 12 hours per week, 52 weeks a year, for several years? I certainly get over 12 hours for many weeks, but even last year when COVID boosted my numbers my weekly average was just under 10 hours. Along those lines, I've wondered how much one's offseason decreases the risks of heavy training. My pattern the last couple of years has been ~12 hours/ week of structured training for 6-9 months, a couple of months of moderate training that involves 5-6 hours of doing whatever I feel like, and one very light month of ~2-3 hours per week. I have to assume that helps. In any case, it doesn't make a difference for me. I'm 47-years old, love training for races, and do not intend to change anything in the immediate future.