Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

bjsm.bmj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 556 posts

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#81

Post by bagels »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #67
arendtio wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much time do you have to get into shape? When it takes 50 years, the statistic probably doesn't hold because you will be dead by then due to the negative influence of smoking on your health.

Its not cardiovasuclar, but the top 2 causes of death in the US are tied to obesity, which takes zero time to reduce. You just have to not eat, which is actually time positive. Most humans are just incredibly bad at impulse control.

It can take months to go from obese to not obese through calorie restriction

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#82

Post by elijaht »

kccqzy wrote: post #60
wrycoder wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only takes a few months to make substantial gains in c-v fitness.

Define substantial. I find that incredible. EDIT: Now that I've seen the replies, I realize that this is from a very low baseline. I'm personally going to the gym four to five days a week already and my own cardiovascular fitness has not seen much of an improvement in many months.

It’s true. Between myself and some close friends I have seen the following in ~6 months: - unable to run -> run a 10k - increase of ~50% in a all out 20 minute cycling test - max mile time 9min->6:30min

The human body can make incredible cardiovascular leaps when starting from a relatively low point

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#83

Post by makeitdouble »

llm_trw wrote: post #65
makeitdouble wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even simple waist-to-hip ratio assessement Settling for subpar "could be good enough" heuristics instead of doing actual measurements is partly why people are less receptive. Basically it'd just be telling them they're fat, and not what's their actual individual risk, and it would also make tracking progress overly difficult: what if after a year of exercice their VO2Max greatly improves while waist to hip only sli…

Waist-to-hip ratio is as accurate as dexascans and VO2Max measurements done in a lab. People don't want to hear it because they are out of shape.

Wait-to-hip ratio is an accurate measurement of cardio-respiratory capacity ?

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#84

Post by hamandcheese »

kccqzy wrote: post #60
wrycoder wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only takes a few months to make substantial gains in c-v fitness.

Define substantial. I find that incredible. EDIT: Now that I've seen the replies, I realize that this is from a very low baseline. I'm personally going to the gym four to five days a week already and my own cardiovascular fitness has not seen much of an improvement in many months.

I went from having not run in years to running a 5k in about 2 months. I was obese when I hit that goal, though I recently graduated to being merely overweight.

My VO2 max as reported by my Apple Watch has been making steady gains, though I'm still far below average for my age.

I didn't train hard, just consistently.

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#85

Post by FredPret »

ssgodderidge wrote: post #27
FredPret wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The poor VO2Max estimates on the Apple Watch is why I'm phasing out of wearing one. I track my actual VO2Max measurements in Apple Health via a shortcut, and I don't need a daily made-up number messing up my data.

I would love to see how this works. Where can I learn more? I’ve been pretty dissatisfied with the VO2Max on the watch overall.

You can create a shortcut that prompts you for text input, then appends the current datetime, and saves it to the health metric of your choice. You then export this to your home screen.

So when you get good data for your VO2Max (or anything else, really), you can easily save it and look at it on the Apple Health graphs.

The only way to get the Watch to stop messing it up with its daily hallucinated number is to turn off all fitness tracking (in the Privacy settings of all places).

But then half the reason for having the watch goes away.

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#86

Post by imiric »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #67
arendtio wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much time do you have to get into shape? When it takes 50 years, the statistic probably doesn't hold because you will be dead by then due to the negative influence of smoking on your health.

Its not cardiovasuclar, but the top 2 causes of death in the US are tied to obesity, which takes zero time to reduce. You just have to not eat, which is actually time positive. Most humans are just incredibly bad at impulse control.

To be fair, our diets and lifestyles changed drastically in the 20th century.

When we're bombarded with advertisements of highly caloric, processed, sugary foods engineered to flood our taste buds and trigger dopamine, we can't be surprised that people get addicted to it. Combine that with forms of entertainment, transportation, and a work culture that keep us sedentary, and it's no wonder many people struggle with being physically healthy.

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#87

Post by hinkley »

nullc wrote: post #43

But do they establish a causal arrow? If you're in chronic pain because you're dying of something you're not exactly going to be likely to do a lot of cardio workout. :) Without care you might conclude, for example, that rock climbing prevents becoming a quadriplegic since there aren't any quadriplegic rock climbers... when in fact to the extent that they're related at all rock climbing sometimes causes it.

Exercise does have some positive contribution to inflammatory response. Chronic pain is a pretty big bucket, though.

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#88

Post by plorkyeran »

BenFranklin100 wrote: post #23
FredPret wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The poor VO2Max estimates on the Apple Watch is why I'm phasing out of wearing one. I track my actual VO2Max measurements in Apple Health via a shortcut, and I don't need a daily made-up number messing up my data.

As the OP mentioned, absolute numbers are garbage, but trends are useful. Once a year just get an actual VO2Max test to peg the watch values too.

The trends are garbage too. According to my watch my VO2Max has swung wildly between 55 and 45 over the last year, while every other measurement points to my fitness staying mostly steady.

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#89

Post by buildsjets »

ashconnor wrote: post #49
BenFranklin100 wrote: post #17

I am disappointed by how poor primary care is in the developed world. It could easily be made better by including a VO2Max test and a DEXA scan every few years. On my own dime, I took both (cost was ~ $150 total from a private provider) and the DEXA scan revealed I carried too much visceral fat and my cardiovascular fitness was only average, things that never came up in my yearly physical. The same applies for basic…

Pretty sure Dexa scans and VO2Max tests are HSA/FSA eligible.

What about it? It’s still coming out of my pocket, albeit untaxed.

Re: Cardio fitness is a strong, consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality

#90

Post by llm_trw »

makeitdouble wrote: post #83
llm_trw wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waist-to-hip ratio is as accurate as dexascans and VO2Max measurements done in a lab. People don't want to hear it because they are out of shape.

Wait-to-hip ratio is an accurate measurement of cardio-respiratory capacity ?

Morbidity and mortality, which is what the article's title is about.
Post reply on HN