4 ms·

The picture is taken from this study: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1933 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1933

by rerx 8y ago

The picture is taken from this study: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1933 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1933 (use Sci-Hub if you do not belong to an institution paying for access)

lotsofpulp 8y ago
Thank you! I couldn't come up with a reputable source on reverse image search to figure out if it's fake or not.
wjnc 8y ago
The fallacy in this article is as follows: (quote) "A cross-section of 40 high-level recreational athletes (“masters athletes”) who were aged 40 to 81 years and trained 4 to 5 times per week underwent tests of health/activity, body composition, quadriceps peak torque (PT), and magnetic resonance imaging of bilateral quadriceps." The 81 yr old that trains 4-5x (!) a week is a lot more special than the 40 yr old (that's my hypothesis at least). Thus any regression is spurious, since we are sampling from different quantiles! So you don't know anything about the correlation with age. I'm not disputing that training 4-5x a week keeps muscles strong and the body lean, but it's hardly prescriptive. It's like winning the lottery will make you richer when you retire. I've tried to reach the authors about this when the article came out, but alas. A letter to the editor in a to me unknown journal seemed not the best use of my time. I've even got code demonstrating the fallacy with quantile regression ;)
- maxerickson 8y ago
  The paper's discussion contains this statement: In addition, studying masters athletes partially limits the applicability of these data to the general population of aging adults who do not aggressively exercise 4 to 5 times per week. It's unfortunate that such a statement won't make it into popular treatments, but the paper doesn't get very far out over its skis.
  - wjnc 8y ago
    My point is they are not sampling from genpop And they are sampling Different populations with age rising. I've met quite a few fit 60 yr olds, but have never seen a that fit 80 yr old.
- citation_please 8y ago
  Huh. Well let's assume causality points in only one direction, genetics->tissue->ability, then I'm screwed and there's nothing I can do about it. Let's assume that it at least points partially in the other direction, ability->tissue, now I can keep my tissue healthy by exercising. Since I don't know for sure which direction causality points, I'm going to take the path of maximal self-determinism and try to stay fit as long as possible.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  Your criticism is spot on. Separately, though, there is a growing community of people using weight training on older folks. It seems incredibly effective. Check out The Barbell Prescription by the Starting Strength folks if you’re interested.
- henryw 8y ago
  Training 4-5x a week is within your control. Winning the lottery is not. I get up every weekday morning at 5 to 6am to do a spin or group fitness class and lift 1 to 2 times per week Arnold superset style. I'm loving this lifestyle. (I guess the gym being Equinox helps.)
  - jmull 8y ago
    > Training 4-5x a week is within your control. That may not be true for a large proportion of people in their 80s.
    - YinglingLight 8y ago
      Those in their 80s have nothing but free time. Of course they won't have the energy to train 4-5x a week if they have been sedentary the last half of their life.
    - henryw 8y ago
      Maybe they can start with 1-2x and then work their way up to 4-5x after awhile.
  - wjnc 8y ago
    I agree with jmull here. In my personal opinion things like intermittent fasting might be a lot more broadly applicable to the elderly than exercising 4x a week or becoming a triathlete.
cdubzzz 8y ago
See also: https://www.linsladephysiotherapy.co.uk/physio4u/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/rpsm.2011.09.1933_secure.pdf https://www.linsladephysiotherapy.co.uk/physio4u/wp-content/...

by rerx 8y ago

lotsofpulp 8y ago

Thank you! I couldn't come up with a reputable source on reverse image search to figure out if it's fake or not.

wjnc 8y ago

The fallacy in this article is as follows: (quote) "A cross-section of 40 high-level recreational athletes (“masters athletes”) who were aged 40 to 81 years and trained 4 to 5 times per week underwent tests of health/activity, body composition, quadriceps peak torque (PT), and magnetic resonance imaging of bilateral quadriceps." The 81 yr old that trains 4-5x (!) a week is a lot more special than the 40 yr old (that's my hypothesis at least). Thus any regression is spurious, since we are sampling from different quantiles! So you don't know anything about the correlation with age. I'm not disputing that training 4-5x a week keeps muscles strong and the body lean, but it's hardly prescriptive. It's like winning the lottery will make you richer when you retire. I've tried to reach the authors about this when the article came out, but alas. A letter to the editor in a to me unknown journal seemed not the best use of my time. I've even got code demonstrating the fallacy with quantile regression ;)

maxerickson 8y ago
The paper's discussion contains this statement: In addition, studying masters athletes partially limits the applicability of these data to the general population of aging adults who do not aggressively exercise 4 to 5 times per week. It's unfortunate that such a statement won't make it into popular treatments, but the paper doesn't get very far out over its skis.
- wjnc 8y ago
  My point is they are not sampling from genpop And they are sampling Different populations with age rising. I've met quite a few fit 60 yr olds, but have never seen a that fit 80 yr old.
citation_please 8y ago
Huh. Well let's assume causality points in only one direction, genetics->tissue->ability, then I'm screwed and there's nothing I can do about it. Let's assume that it at least points partially in the other direction, ability->tissue, now I can keep my tissue healthy by exercising. Since I don't know for sure which direction causality points, I'm going to take the path of maximal self-determinism and try to stay fit as long as possible.
toasterlovin 8y ago
Your criticism is spot on. Separately, though, there is a growing community of people using weight training on older folks. It seems incredibly effective. Check out The Barbell Prescription by the Starting Strength folks if you’re interested.
henryw 8y ago
Training 4-5x a week is within your control. Winning the lottery is not. I get up every weekday morning at 5 to 6am to do a spin or group fitness class and lift 1 to 2 times per week Arnold superset style. I'm loving this lifestyle. (I guess the gym being Equinox helps.)
- jmull 8y ago
  > Training 4-5x a week is within your control. That may not be true for a large proportion of people in their 80s.
  - YinglingLight 8y ago
    Those in their 80s have nothing but free time. Of course they won't have the energy to train 4-5x a week if they have been sedentary the last half of their life.
  - henryw 8y ago
    Maybe they can start with 1-2x and then work their way up to 4-5x after awhile.
- wjnc 8y ago
  I agree with jmull here. In my personal opinion things like intermittent fasting might be a lot more broadly applicable to the elderly than exercising 4x a week or becoming a triathlete.

cdubzzz 8y ago

See also: https://www.linsladephysiotherapy.co.uk/physio4u/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/rpsm.2011.09.1933_secure.pdf https://www.linsladephysiotherapy.co.uk/physio4u/wp-content/...