Over 50's club

3 lurkers | 323 watchers

Dvorak Mar 2018 11:34am, 9 Mar 2018 15,649 posts	0 Dvorak Nice in-depth debunking there, Steve. Scientists: all they ever do is make stuff up, eh. They studied an active "elderly" cohort; and two other cohorts, one middle-aged to elderly and another aged 20-36, in which the participants did not partake of regular exercise. There would also be baseline data, as 20 y-o was quoted as the age where immune system decline starts. birmingham.ac.uk A key point I think is that it is not just being active, but continuing to be active. The people tested had not come to exercise late, but had been active throughout there lives. I'm sure there is much, much more to be found in this field. I wonder if there was any significant difference found between males and females in the study? And they also excluded those with "unhealthy" markers otherwise: I wonder what the results in people who passed the exercise threshold but were "unhealthy" would be (since they specifically excluded, that suggests there are some potential test subjects). Hillstrider, I would think it does. Unless, of course, it is found to be cycling itself which is "magic".
J2R Mar 2018 12:26pm, 9 Mar 2018 1,041 posts	0 J2R That's a fascinating and extremely encouraging study. I hope the benefits apply equally to runners - I'm sure they must. I also hope that I have not somehow missed a critical period because I only took up running at all seriously about 10 years ago (I'm now 57). I've always remained reasonably fit, though - I've never been a couch potato (and have never been overweight). I wonder what level of exercise is required to produce the benefits seen in these older cyclists?
Cyclops Mar 2018 6:17pm, 9 Mar 2018 3,378 posts	0 Cyclops I have just returned from a residential trip with Y4 children. The head teacher, who is 60 this year and retiring, has in 2 years gone from racing ahead and walking far too far and fast for the children to struggling to walk uphill at all and really suffering with her arthritic hip over two days of short walks.
steve45 Mar 2018 11:00am, 10 Mar 2018 2,422 posts	0 steve45 Dvorak...you're right..that was a bit silly me making wild comments as I did. But the study of the cyclists was only of 150 individuals. I'm very much for real evidence based data and sure, even some anecdotal information is worth sitting up and listening to. Magic in cycling..or running?! If only! Most of my cycling friends ( competitive) also tend to pay attention to things like diet, sleep, work/life balance as well as going out and doing the miles. Rather like my running friends. I used to enjoy "More or Less" on radio 4 ( new series soon) where stats and data were examined closely. One of my favourite books in the past was "How to Lie with Statistics". Thanks for the links which were good.
LazyDaisy Mar 2018 1:33pm, 10 Mar 2018 21,747 posts	0 LazyDaisy A book we've often recommended was Facts from Figures, M J Moroney, a Pelican published quite a few years ago but still a worthwhile read. Another vote for More or Less here too.
meadowsboy Mar 2018 3:57pm, 10 Mar 2018 743 posts	0 meadowsboy I love radio 4 mostly the factual programs but I always fall asleep about 10 minutes into them and have to find them on the i player to listen to the end
Columba Mar 2018 5:53pm, 10 Mar 2018 15,052 posts	0 Columba I used to like More or Less, which I sometimes heard while driving back to the office from whichever school I'd been visiting. Shock horror, 50% of people are below average.
Canute Mar 2018 6:19pm, 10 Mar 2018 1,828 posts	0 Canute The findings for the study of ‘elderly’ cyclists was indeed very encouraging, and add to a growing evidence for the health benefits of substantial amount s of exercise. However the criteria for inclusion in that study specified a high standard of both health and fitness. As a result, the findings offer only limited support for some of the claims they make on their webpage: ‘The findings emphasise the fact that the cyclists do not exercise because they are healthy, but that they are healthy because they have been exercising for such a large proportion of their lives.’ ‘However, importantly, our findings debunk the assumption that ageing automatically makes us more frail.’ Those claims have to be taken with a large pinch of salt. While I need no convincing that life-long exercise is healthy, my personal experience indicates that the second of those statements does not apply to me. I have exercised at least moderately for most of my life. Apart from two years in my mid 40’s when I averaged only about 2 hours exercise per week, I have averaged at least 5 hours of moderate intensity exercise each week for more than 65 years. For quite substantial periods have done far more than that. Over most of the past 45 years I have deteriorated steadily, though only slowly. In the past 5 years (since age 67) the rate of deterioration has been fairly rapid, except in my 70th year, when I spent several months preparing for my 70th birthday ‘heptathlon’ . My deterioration has been somewhat faster than WAVA standards. In my younger days, I would probably have scored well over 80% for endurance events; now I would struggle to achieve 70% even if I did some concentrated training. I am not complaining about my fortunes. I was delighted to run a few good races as a youngster and I am pleased to be as healthy as I am at 72. But I am definitely becoming more frail despite substantial regular exercise.
steve45 Mar 2018 10:17am, 11 Mar 2018 2,426 posts	0 steve45 Cyclops...My wife..who is many years younger than I am has arthritic hips which have deteriorated dramatically over the last two years. A seasoned ultra runner having done many 100 milers and a 370 miler she now struggles to do...100 miles and reduced her maximum efforts to fifty milers. But..her arthritis was not caused by running and her sports physio has told her that the only reason to cease will be because of pain and/or inability to run "properly" with reasonable form. Her condition began in her late teens and diagnosed as "juvenile arthritis" and now nearing fifty and exercised regularly the overall benefits are evident. A bit of bad luck that new hips will be on the agenda within two years. Your observations on yourself are interesting Canute. The thing with running is that we have clear markers of our ability by using the stopwatch--I often feel that I'm deteriorating but when I check back at my times over the same distances and courses every year I seem to be "hanging on" (!!) but my subjective effort in doing them indicates they are harder to do! I never began running forty years ago this July to stay fit or healthy, they were mere bonuses; I ran and still run because of the enjoyment I get from being out there. My lifestyle has also been one of being physically active ever since I was a kid (well, all kids in those days were active) and not having had a car for twenty years or more (what?!!) dictates a more physical day to day routine.
Canute Mar 2018 1:53pm, 11 Mar 2018 1,829 posts	0 Canute Steve, It is great that you performance as measured by time or distance is are not deteriorating; but now a greater effort is required. This is perhaps understandable as your main reason for running in the first place was pleasure. You had no need to push yourself when younger, but now it appears that you are motivated by both pleasure and a subliminal desire to maintain your pace – so the effort must be greater. One important question in the report of the study of elderly cyclists is what did the investigators mean by prevention of frailty. It appears that they meant prevention of an overall deterioration in physical well-being. Deterioration of running performance is actually only a very small part of frailty. A large volumes of running almost certainly damages the legs. Folklore says that it takes 10 years to achieve your peak as a runner. The far side of that peak is manifest in the observation that few people stay at the top of age-group world rankings for more than 10-15 years. This is consistent with the probability that a lot of running builds up a residue of damaged tissue in your legs due to repeated inflammation and repair. Running is especially damaging on account of the eccentric contraction at footfall. I do not think that this is a reason to stop running when you are older, but it maybe indicates that one should gracefully accept that decline in performance usually sets in after 10-15 years of high volume intense running. This might also be an argument for including cross training.