11–20 of 63 posts
The total number of heartbeats also predicts lifespan, although apparently not as accurately. So is the heartbeat total just a coincident or still a factor somehow?
I've seen this before and get the gist, but at face value, it's ridiculous. A human who runs every day may expend twice the heartbeats of a sedentary person. He or she will not live half as long, or anything close to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen this before and get the gist, but at face value, it's ridiculous. A human who runs every day may expend twice the heartbeats of a sedentary person. He or she will not live half as long, or anything close to it.
Why would someone who is very active have an average heart rate double that of a sedentary person?
A very fit person will have a resting heart rate of around 50-55BPM, and could have a rate as high as 160BPM or even higher during strenuous exercise. Say they maintain that rate for four hours per day, that brings the average up to around 70. (Actually more since it will be elevated for a while after exercising as well.) Still won't be double though.
The total number of heartbeats also predicts lifespan, although apparently not as accurately. So is the heartbeat total just a coincident or still a factor somehow?
I've seen this before and get the gist, but at face value, it's ridiculous. A human who runs every day may expend twice the heartbeats of a sedentary person. He or she will not live half as long, or anything close to it.
How do we slow our personal telomere shortening rate?
There is a very strong negative association between chronic stress and telomeres. The worse the stress is and the longer the episode, the more your telomeres are impaired. If a woman is chronically stressed or had low emotional support in childhood, her kids may get shorter telomeres in utero. Social isolation also seems to be terrible for telomere length.
Disclaimer: Telomeres are a relatively new area of interest. Studies showing the above haven’t been replicated enough to be comfortably stated as fact. Of course, telling correlation from causation is difficult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen this before and get the gist, but at face value, it's ridiculous. A human who runs every day may expend twice the heartbeats of a sedentary person. He or she will not live half as long, or anything close to it.
I think the idea is that a frequent runner will have a much lower resting pulse rate, and the “extra” beats they use while exercising will be more than offset by the fewer beats that accumulate during rest? I haven’t done the math though.
this makes me think that telomeres are not the main cause of aging-related death. My mental model is: if you run out of telomere before you get old, you start to get disease - and that’s maladaptive. So there’s evolutionary pressure to slow down your shortening rate, up to a point. Once it becomes unlikely that you’ll outlive your telomeres, there’s no more pressure. So your telomere length + rate becomes a measureme…
this makes me think that telomeres are not the main cause of aging-related death. My mental model is: if you run out of telomere before you get old, you start to get disease - and that’s maladaptive. So there’s evolutionary pressure to slow down your shortening rate, up to a point. Once it becomes unlikely that you’ll outlive your telomeres, there’s no more pressure. So your telomere length + rate becomes a measureme…
tl;dr might not be the bottleneck, so the telomere length and shortening rate is measuring something else that is.
"Some experiments have raised questions on whether telomerase can be used as an anti-aging therapy, namely, the fact that mice with elevated levels of telomerase have higher cancer incidence and hence do not live longer. Telomerase also favors tumorogenesis, which leads to questions about its potential as an anti-aging therapy.[36] On the other hand, one study showed that activating telomerase in cancer-resistant mice by overexpressing its catalytic subunit extended lifespan.[37]
A study that focused on Ashkenazi Jews found that long-lived subjects inherited a hyperactive version of telomerase.[38] " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomerase
Ambiguous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the idea is that a frequent runner will have a much lower resting pulse rate, and the “extra” beats they use while exercising will be more than offset by the fewer beats that accumulate during rest? I haven’t done the math though.
That's the assumption, but I have never seen or done the math either, which is ridiculous because it shouldn't take more than 5 minutes to get some estimates.
So, this is really rough napkin math, but here goes:
Assuming that...
... a sedentary person (Donald) has a resting BPM of 80.
... an active runner (Justin) has a resting BPM of 60, and a peak BPM of 180 (while running)
If Justin runs for a solid 2 hours, five times a week, he will have
158*60*60 + 10*60*180 = 676,800 beats per week
167*60*80 + 1*60*180 = 812,400 beats per week
(Edited to change names and fix math errors)
The total number of heartbeats also predicts lifespan, although apparently not as accurately. So is the heartbeat total just a coincident or still a factor somehow?
I've seen this before and get the gist, but at face value, it's ridiculous. A human who runs every day may expend twice the heartbeats of a sedentary person. He or she will not live half as long, or anything close to it.