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

551–556 of 556 posts

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

#551

Post by [deleted] »

danielbln wrote: post #351
keybored wrote: post #266

Some of my peers are deep into running. I don’t get it. Running is sometimes fun for me but most often painful. Then I overheard one of them (the fittest) say to a budding runner that he [should] do mostly easy sessions. Okay what’s easy to him? He said that so slow that it can feel awkward and unnatural. What? Then I searched around and found out about Zone 2 and how you should do most of your work in that zone when…

I've been streak running (so running at least a mile per day with no exceptions, mostly 5ks during the week, 10-20k on weekends) for almost 8 years (2817 days). The single best tip I give to everyone is "slow down! run slow!" Of course, almost no-one adheres to it unless they are already well practiced. It's just deeply ingrained in peoples heads that "only if it's hard or painful it must work". Then people check out…

[deleted]

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

#552

Post by YeBanKo »

keybored wrote: post #266

Some of my peers are deep into running. I don’t get it. Running is sometimes fun for me but most often painful. Then I overheard one of them (the fittest) say to a budding runner that he [should] do mostly easy sessions. Okay what’s easy to him? He said that so slow that it can feel awkward and unnatural. What? Then I searched around and found out about Zone 2 and how you should do most of your work in that zone when…

I hated running and still do, but the only thing that makes it “fun” for me is running on the hills with intervals. On days I can sprint up a small hill the high afterwards is amazing. It does take a couple of nights of good sleep to recover though.

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

#553

Post by throwaway2037 »

whateveracct wrote: post #501
throwaway2037 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About lifting weights: The trick for me is to keep a diary of my current exercises and weight levels. (It's very simple -- just 5 mins or less to maintain each workout.) This will be very motivating if you can increase weight, reps, or number of sets ("total volume").

I already have a weekly planner I put in my traveler's notebook. This is a good idea! I already have a boolean "did I do it" tracker, but it would be nice to see the numbers go up :D Maybe put it in a spreadsheet.

I use a single printed sheet for each week. I carry last week plus this week. That helps me to update the current sheet based on last week. Then each week, I throw away the old sheet. It's enough for me. As long as I am progressing week over week, that is enough. Are you aware of meso-cycles? Basically: 4-8 weeks on, then one week at half weight, half reps, or full rest. You can really build a lot more muscle using meso-cycles.

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

#554

Post by whateveracct »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #553
whateveracct wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already have a weekly planner I put in my traveler's notebook. This is a good idea! I already have a boolean "did I do it" tracker, but it would be nice to see the numbers go up :D Maybe put it in a spreadsheet.

I use a single printed sheet for each week. I carry last week plus this week. That helps me to update the current sheet based on last week. Then each week, I throw away the old sheet. It's enough for me. As long as I am progressing week over week, that is enough. Are you aware of meso-cycles? Basically: 4-8 weeks on, then one week at half weight, half reps, or full rest. You can really build a lot more muscle using m…

I like that idea. It works with my weekly planner well. And mesocycles sound interesting - also easy to track in my planner. I'll give it a try!

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

#555

Post by fransje26 »

lukas099 wrote: post #481
fransje26 wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then it hit me. I’ve probably been jogging a lot in Zone 3. Or higher? Because the harder you go the more benefit, right? That's unfortunately not fully how it works. For maximum benefits, you would want to train your aerobic energy system, and to do that without risking injury, zone 2 is the recommended zone. The claim is that pain is gain, but more often than not, pain is your body telling you you are over the li…

As I understand, aerobic-only training increases your anaerobic threshold (you can do more without going anaerobic) while anaerobic training improves your anaerobic tolerance (you can continue to function with more lactic acid buildup)

That is globally correct, yes.

Some schools of training were maintaining for a long time that the process was fairly black and white, and that both systems should be trained separately, or else you would loose the training benefit of either.. Nature is rarely so stubbornly segregated, and, as it turns out, mixed training is perfectly fine.

Aerobic training will help you increase your anaerobic threshold, but training slightly above the threshold can be more efficient at increasing that threshold, if you are fit enough to recover from the lactic build-up before your next training. (Or if you have the luxury to increase your resting period so that you are fully recovered before you train again)

Anaerobic training will improve your anaerobic tolerance, but a good aerobic base will also help you improve your anaerobic tolerance, as your body will become more efficient at recycling the lactic acid back into ATP, delaying the moment when your muscles will be too saturated to function at the required level.

In general, while exercising, your muscles are using both ATP production means, aerobic and anaerobic. So, once more, you can see that by going slightly above your lactate threshold (but still with a good aerobic energy contribution) you are also contributing to improve your anaerobic tolerance, by staying longer in a range where your body needs to work harder to deal with the excess lactic build up. (Longer than a "pure" anaerobic training that cannot be sustained)

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

#556

Post by dllthomas »

lukas099 wrote: post #484
caeril wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bit different. There's no reasonable path to reverse-causality with smoking. "People prone to developing lung cancer are more likely to take up smoking" doesn't really make sense. On the other hand, "Fat and unhealthy people are more prone not to exercise" is a reasonable reverse-causality position, for all kind of reasons. Your knees hurt, you're self-conscious, it's extremely uncomfortable, your fat jiggle…

"People who smoke are more likely to do other things that the medical establishment condemns" is a plausible non-causal explanation for the correlation between smoking and lung cancer. I think that we just have to look at the best explanation for the current data to determine causality, but it’s always a guess.

That is a plausible explanation for a present correlation, but I think less so for when the correlation was first noted.
Post reply on HN