3 ms·
From the paper: "World champion master athletes in their 9th decade of life had a greater number of surviving motor units, reduced collateral reinnervation, be
by sndean 11y ago
From the paper:
"World champion master athletes in their 9th decade of life had a greater number of surviving motor units, reduced collateral reinnervation, better neuromuscular transmission stability and a greater amount of excitable muscle mass as compared with age-matched controls."
and
"The Masters Athletes (MA) consisted of track and field athletes ranked in the top 4 of their respective events at the world masters championships..."
I'm not sure how surprised I'm supposed to be about people who were world-class athletes some time within the past ~40 years ago having above average strength.
Though, I understand that you can't easily pull off a randomized controlled trial (long-term) for exercise.
- Someone 11y ago"World masters" championships are for older athletes. For example, in athletics, we have https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masters_athletics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masters_athletics: "Masters athletics is a class of the sport of athletics for veteran athletes in the events of track and field, road running and cross country running. The competitions feature five-year age groups beginning at age 35. Men as old as 105 and women in their 100s have competed in running, jumping and throwing events." Winners of these events need not have been world class athletes when they were young, and often weren't, but they typically have been exercising regularly more than other people. But yes, it is not that surprising that people who are world-class athletes in their age group score differently in some metrics than people who are not. Question is: in what metrics? This study researched that. It's not just that they have more muscles, the muscles they have work better, too.