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

171–180 of 556 posts

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

#171

Post by sonofhans »

smileysteve wrote: post #106
m463 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

reminds me of the bicycle helmet stuff. There was a ted talk that said bicycle helmet laws would kill more people than save. The reasoning was preventing people from riding would also prevent increased fitness, and more lives were lost from that than saved from accidents. EDIT: I think this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07o-TASvIxY

There's real data out there that while a helmet has better survival rates than not; but cars give more room to bicycles without helmets, so the incident rate is lower.

The only data I’ve seen on that is one guy who self-sampled and self-reported. I’d be happy to see more.

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

#172

Post by mr_toad »

kamaal wrote: post #144

Not sure how true this is, I heard in the Joe Rogan podcast, cardio vascular fitness, like the extreme kind correlates with nearly the entire disease spectrum. It doesn't apply to something like 'acts of god' type things like Cancer or COVID. But it seems to be the best bet against aging, and other diseases. My favorite exercise in this regard is Swimming and Kettlebell training. Disclaimer: This is not an endorsemen…

Exercise is a factor in reducing the risk of several types of cancer. And fitness does reduce the effects of COVID even if it wont stop you getting it.

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

#173

Post by mvkel »

rhplus wrote: post #159
mvkel wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should know that vo2 measurements that aren't performed via gas exchange or blood measurement are a complete guess. The other thing is the denominator of vo2 is weight. So losing weight without working out at all will increase vo2

It really doesn’t matter for most amateurs trying to improve their health whether the metric is accurate or not. The huge benefit of fitness trackers is that a metric is a metric is a metric. Eat less, exercise more, sleep soundly - you can’t go wrong, and if the metric is steps, or HR, or pace, or calories burned, or (in this case) estimated VO2max and seeing improvements in those metrics relative to a baseline is a…

I disagree.

Weight loss doesn't automatically mean "healthier."

Using vo2 as a metric of "health" would not be correct if weight loss is the sole attribution of vo2 gain.

One can lose weight without doing a minute of exercise and vo2 would increase.

If one is interested in getting healthier, I think it's well worth the time to learn about how the metrics work.

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

#174

Post by Scoundreller »

Aerroon wrote: post #129
s1artibartfast wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There was a relatively recent study that found that BMR has actually been dropping over the last 30 years. The difference in men was large enough (7% iirc) that it would explain most of the obesity epidemic. Why it's dropping is still a n mystery though. Nevertheless, the solution is still the same: eat less. The study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10445668/

> Nevertheless, the solution is still the same: eat less.

Or make life harder! Quit the elevator. Quit the automatic transmission (and car). Quit the online shopping.

Making some progress with self-checkouts and pointless lineups at airports.

Less jokingly (hard to outrun a bad diet) but more pedanticly: drinking less (alcohol and calorific beverages) might be a better start than eating less.

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

#175

Post by s1artibartfast »

Aerroon wrote: post #129
s1artibartfast wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There was a relatively recent study that found that BMR has actually been dropping over the last 30 years. The difference in men was large enough (7% iirc) that it would explain most of the obesity epidemic. Why it's dropping is still a n mystery though. Nevertheless, the solution is still the same: eat less. The study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10445668/

I'm not an expert on the literature, but I do know Bmr isn't a fixed number. It is a function of activity, muscle mass, and other factors.

It seems that a largely sedentary lifestyle free from exertion matches both.

It would be insightful to see the sensitivity analysis for BMR with respect to strength, activity, muscle mass, ect.

I know there is a body of data about environmental hormones and BMR, ect, but my understanding is that the impact is barely measurable with large sample sizes. I expect that it can't hold a candle to activity. In my personal experience, my BMR can easily modulate by 1000 calories based on body composition and behavior. That is a huge impact.

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

#176

Post by snemvalts »

AbbeSomething wrote: post #99
m463 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

reminds me of the bicycle helmet stuff. There was a ted talk that said bicycle helmet laws would kill more people than save. The reasoning was preventing people from riding would also prevent increased fitness, and more lives were lost from that than saved from accidents. EDIT: I think this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07o-TASvIxY

This sounds ridiculous until you go to Amsterdam see that few wear helmets there. And everyone is cycling. They might be more inclined to cycle because they don’t need to wear a helmet. After years of cycling with helmet you get so used to it and it doesn’t bother you. But how many skip the bike because they never got used to wearing a helmet?

In Amsterdam they are commuting, and in a fantastic infrastructure where cars get red lights when bicycles approach on an intersecting cycleway. That's probably the main reason for safety and why they ride so much.

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

#177

Post by lambdaphagy »

eimrine wrote: post #142
kanbara wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

more like because it’s safe and there are penalties for injuring pedestrians and cyclists, and because the infrastructure is great. not riding a bike because a helmet is ??uncomfortable?? is ridiculous and probably self-selecting

[flagged]

I'm a pretty proficient cyclist (lifetime mileage in the tens of thousands) but there have still been a handful of incidents where I've been very grateful to have had a helmet.

It might be the case that helmets are a net negative for casual riders. But whenever I've done a spontaneous unplanned dismount at 20mph I didn't find that knowing how to fall helped me much.

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

#178

Post by uptownfunk »

Regardless of what it is, if I don’t get my morning run in, I am a very unpleasant person to be around! Running has changed my life in all ways- I am much more calm, tolerant, positive, energetic. If the whole country did a mandated morning run, assuming you’re able, I really think this world would be a much better place!!

Start slow, 5 minutes, breathe, go slow, and enjoy the beautiful weather here this time of year.

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

#179

Post by herdcall »

MPSimmons wrote: post #3

The Apple watch has a decent cardio fitness monitor. The absolute values aren't precise (since it uses VO2Max estimates, which is really only accurate if you're doing a metabolic stress test), but it's good to keep an eye on trends.

I've been seeing strange downtrends on my VO2Max numbers with Apple Watch: they have dropped from 40's to 20's over a matter of a few days and have been steadily trending down. I haven't changed my exercise patterns at all for years now. There are others on the Apple forum facing similar abrupt drops, anyone else here seeing it? I'm hoping it's the watch messing up and not my health!

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

#180

Post by johnfn »

Aperocky wrote: post #47

Fortunately, this seems relatively simple to change (compared to other things with this magnitude of impact). It was a transformative experience to go from 40 VO2max to 57 (as reported by Apple Watch, and losing 30lbs on the way) over the past 12 months. The best part about it is that I didn't even have to give up anything - the extra energy I gained from 90-120 minutes of aerobics per day also had the effect of maki…

What sort of workouts do you do? I've been trying to do the same thing, but I'm finding it difficult to get VO2max to go up consistently.
Post reply on HN