7 ms·

I'd like too see more study on the long term damage of endurance sports on the heart. I'm hoping to begin running marathons at the end of this year and ultramar

I'd like too see more study on the long term damage of endurance sports on the heart. I'm hoping to begin running marathons at the end of this year and ultramarathons next year. But reaching that level of fitness requires multi-hour runs, sometimes as many as twice a week. When training for mountaineering, I sometimes climb 5000+ feet in a day. Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords. This probably means I'm sustaining heart damage, at least temporarily. There are notable case of ultra runners dying, and autopsy shows long term heart damage. Some combination of duration and intensity seems to be dangerous, but the risk factors are not well understood yet.

assblaster 8y ago
I think it's possible to work out too much: 1) Scar tissue formation in heart after repeated episodes of prolonged ischemia (ultra marathon) 2) early joint wear necessitating joint replacements at earlier ages (marathon, lifting) 3) ligament and tendon damage requiring surgical correction (cross fit, power lifting) 4) high regeneration of tissue causes premature aging of tissues (increased cell replication and tendency for DNA damage) I think society's glorification of extreme exercise does more harm than good.
- wcarron 8y ago
  > I think society's glorification of extreme exercise does more harm than good. Which society? What glorification? According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_body_mass_index#WHO_Data_on_Mean_BMI_(2014) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_body_mass..., society has clearly moved in the complete opposite direction, with approximately 30% of the world population considered obese. I am aware that BMI doesn't take into account muscle mass, but really, most people who are obese by BMI standards aren't there due to powerlifting. They are simply obese. It is possible to work out too much, for sure. Most serious exercise programs have "easy weeks" specifically to give the body time to rebuild and recover. I've done many triathlons and sure, there is glorification of the IronMan distance tri; but it should be something that is glorified. It's an incredibly challenging event and worthy of praise. If anything, I think society needs to encourage, explicitly and with great zeal: 1. Hard exercise (long runs, swimming, lifting, rugby, cycling, etc.) at a bare minimum of 3 times per week for 1 hour or more. 2. The basic physiological fact of "Calories In, Calories out". A person is fat because they consume more calories than they burn (barring certain medical conditions/medications that cause weight gain). That's it. 3. Quality fuel. Ensuring people eat foods that provide the essential amino acids, necessary vitamins and minerals, and an even macro distribution of carbs, fats, and proteins. Lastly, I would gladly trade [2, 3, 4] in exchange for living a fulfilling and healthy life spent exercising and accomplishing goals like completing an IronMan Triathlon or breaking into the thousand pound club for lifting. The other option is wasting my life eating chips on my couch and getting fat.
  - neetdeth 8y ago
    > Which society? What glorification? The high-functioning, wealthy society of working age professionals. I think of the United States - and I assume most countries are the same, but perhaps to a lesser degree - as a cluster of societies that sometimes intermingle and share space with each other but are otherwise distinct. Obesity is a disease of the poor. In certain circles there is a glorification of extreme forms of exercise. Partially as an indicator of status, to demonstrate that you have the both the personal agency and excess resources to pour into a training program to achieve impressive feats. But also as a sacrifice to the gods of success. All the respected leaders in business are doing ultra endurance sports, so it would stand to reason that there is something, some X-factor it's contributing to their ability to achieve. It's worth asking whether there's any benefit to this kind of thing past a certain point. Are people their wasting time and causing long term damage to their bodies just to impress their friends? Your last sentence, by the way, gave me a laugh. It could be the dictionary example for false dichotomy. Not sure whether this was intentional.
    - wcarron 8y ago
      > It's worth asking whether there's any benefit to this kind of thing past a certain point. Are people their wasting time and causing long term damage to their bodies just to impress their friends? I think it's a bit presumptuous to categorize extreme exercise as "just to impress their friends". Was Alex Honnold free soloing El Cap just to impress his friends? I doubt it. The same can be said for almost all extreme challenges. Why climb Everest? Why run a marathon? Why go to the moon? To crib JFK: Because it's hard. Because you can. Because it's there and it's maaaybe, just maybe, possible. Regarding my last sentence, perhaps I could have phrased it better like this: I would rather destroy my body through hard work by trying to achieve difficult things like an IM triathlon than destroy my body out of apathy and sloth and gluttony. Either way, if all goes to plan, my body is gonna go to shit at a certain point anyway and I can't do anything about it. And then I die. So why not try to have some fun?
      - neetdeth 8y ago
        The false dichotomy persists in your rephrasing. You could maintain excellent fitness with a more moderate exercise regime. Sorry if it comes across as an attack on your lifestyle. It isn't meant to be. If you find extrinsic motivations morally suspect, then let me assure you I believe your motivations are entirely intrinsic and pristine. But regardless, there are such things as trends. It isn't presumptuous to assume that people do things for the social benefits. That's just being realistic. If it builds their social network, increases their status, widens their career prospects, makes it easier to find a better mate... perhaps they should be doing that thing, whether it's running an ultramarathon or doing a 6-hour headstand in a park. What does it matter? Except that if 6-hour headstands become the hot new thing that every young professional seems to aspire to, I'm going to ask about whether "society" should be glorifying something that's obviously going to lead to neck damage versus, say, a nice 6-hour foot race. That's all.
- HansLandaa 8y ago
  I really wish we had society where these issues were the primary health problems. Unfortunately, the reality is that most of society's health issue stem from a lack of enough quality exercise. Obesity is a significant problem.
scottious 8y ago
> There are notable case of ultra runners dying, and autopsy shows long term heart damage I wonder how much of this is pre-existing heart conditions that went undiagnosed versus running _causing_ heart damage. > Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords This is surprising to me... I've run almost 5000 miles and 6 marathons so far and this has not been my experience. Maybe it's due to over training? Have you asked a doctor about it?
- kudokatz 8y ago
  It's not as much about your "experience". IIRC there was scarring in heart tissue after running a marathon distance in a large majority of runners independent of training. This could plausibly impede blood flow if the heart's fitness dropped back to "normal" (i.e. in old age). That said, I still do distance running.
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  > This is surprising to me... I've run almost 5000 miles and 6 marathons so far and this has not been my experience. Do you track your resting heart rate on the days after running a marathon? It's been pretty consistent to me. If I sustain near max exertion for multiple hours, it takes at least a few days to feel normal again, and resting heart rate seems to be a very good indicator of the overall stress of the exertion. Obviously my RHR is dropping over time. These are temporary variations.
  - scottious 8y ago
    Yeah I peek at my heart rate graphs daily, but not with any kind of scientific rigor I just love marathon running and I'd hate for it to be hurting me long term...
  - snowwrestler 8y ago
    I've been reading this thread and I'm curious if you've had any cardiac checkups done. I had a friend who was very healthy and fit but, like you, experienced elevated heart rate (and some loss of energy) for a few days after hard exercise days. Turns out, he had a partial blockage in a cardiac blood vessel. It was not blocked enough to be noticeable under normal workloads. But under hard work loads, part of his heart did not get enough oxygen and experienced damage. Eventually he experienced a heart attack, which is when it was caught and stented. Every other vessel was clear... it was just one of those flukes. Who knows if you have the same issue, but I would suggest it's worth getting checked out.
crikli 8y ago
> When training for mountaineering, I sometimes climb 5000+ feet in a day. Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords. I'm curious, what is your living elevation? When you climb 5000+ feet in a day are you traveling to a higher elevation? And if so, after the movement are you staying at that higher elevation? I am not a doctor. But I ascend a minimum of 20K feet per month via the steepest trails I can find. This usually includes a movement of up to 7500 feet of gain in a few hours. I've never seen my resting HR affected and do not recall having seeing that happen to anyone doing the same work unless they lived at lower elevation and were visiting. If you're coming to an elevation much higher than your living elevation, doing a movement, and then staying at a higher elevation, then your elevated RHR is most likely due to the body's response to the reduced partial pressure of oxygen. But if you're doing a move and returning to your "home" elevation and your RHR stays up...again I'm not a doctor in any way but I'd really encourage you to talk to one.
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  You're probably in much better shape than I am. For you, a 5000 foot day is probably fairly routine. For me, it still takes some willpower. I'm sure I will adapt over time. But yes, to answer your question, I train at sea level and climb between to 6000-10000 feet on weekends, and sometimes high camp.
  - crikli 8y ago
    If your RHR is elevated at high camp that's to be expected as that's part of the physiological response to reduced partial pressure of oxygen. If your RHR is still elevated after your return to sea level...huh. I live at 6800 feet now but like you used to live at low elevation. I'd come out, hike up Pikes Peak (6700 feet start, 14100 foot finish) and then come back down to sleep at 6000ish feet. RHR would be up maybe 10-15BPM until I went home to sea level, then it went back down to normal literally on the drive home. So the response you're seeing, I mean what do I know I'm not a researcher, doctor or expert but I will say that seems odd. Check out this 40 minute podcast on altitude physiology. Super dense with really actionable information on the body's responses: https://www.scienceofultra.com/podcasts/29 https://www.scienceofultra.com/podcasts/29
rygxqpbsngav 8y ago
> Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords Not an expert, but that seems alarming. Please check https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSiS9qkJUU0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSiS9qkJUU0 Although regular exercise is great, complementing with good diet is a must too, I believe.
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  I think this is a little bit alarmist. My resting heart rate is in the low 50s and rises 2-3 bpm when I am sick or stressed (including during recovery from intense training). Looking at yesterday's run, my heart rate dropped from 182 to 138 in a little over a minute. I don't think I'm about to keel over just yet.
nabla9 8y ago
> Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords. Sounds like overtraining. If you overtrain, you are not exercising optimally and stop developing. You must increase the training volume gradually and take days off if the signs of overstraining appear. Increasing training often requires increased rest. You can't keep busy as usual and train hard. Pro-athletes sit and rest on a couch a lot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtraining#Signs_and_symptoms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtraining#Signs_and_symptom... >Elevated resting heart rate, a persistently high heart rate after adequate rest such as in the morning after sleep, can be an indicator of overtraining
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  "Overreaching" might be a better word. Overtraining would be doing that kind of workout every week instead of every few months. But yes, I'm probably making mistakes. I've never trained seriously until very recently. I reached my current level of fitness more or less by accident with a few thousand miles of hiking.
  - nabla9 8y ago
    Avoiding overtraining is one reason to train with good heart rate monitor. In some days you must run much slower than other days because of stress, lack of sleep and rest. When you hit your upper limits, it's a sing to slow down. Suddenly reduced HRV is another sign of overtrtraining. Good heart rate monitors (some Polar models with a strap) can do Orthostatic Test and give even more accurate information than heart rate. https://www.polar.com/blog/heart-rate-variability-and-orthostatic-test-lets-talk-polar/ https://www.polar.com/blog/heart-rate-variability-and-orthos...
  - ip26 8y ago
    Mountains, perhaps thanks to summit fever, really seduces people into overreaching, and cover up the clues at the same time. "I got to the summit, so it's all good!" you think. I really can't recommend "Training For the New Alpinism" enough. It really disabused me of that notion, and after a year or two of conscientious work I can hike the same trails with a smile & easy breathing, faster than I once could dripping sweat & suffering. A sport heart rate monitor is also extremely valuable.
ABS 8y ago
there is a good book on the topic: The Haywire Heart by Dr. John Mandrola, Lennard Zinn, Chris Case
saiya-jin 8y ago
> I sometimes climb 5000+ feet in a day Unless you mean proper climbing but rather you hike/scramble, that's not really anything extraordinary. I am a rather active person but by no means any endurance or ultra runner. Doing 1500m+ altitude gain hike (which I sometimes do over weekends, most usual one is 1000 -> 2500m) is a weekend warrior level, next day I go and do something else (usually easier). If you experience that elevated heart rate a whole week afterwards, that ain't normal IMHO, at least not for somebody who is on verge of starting marathons and planning for some lighter ultras soon. Get your heart/cardio/breathing checked by some experts. My personal theory is - we are not born equal, and some people can literally grow with almost any challenge, others are easily destroyed by the same. I am rather the latter but it has some positive aspect - I need to train harder than most to get to their levels, which brings good amount of mental fortitude.
decasteve 8y ago
It’s part of the recovery process. Let your body/heart recover to what’s normal for you before stressing it again. It needs time to adapt. There’s no such thing as overtraining, just under-recovering.
hsitz 8y ago
>> There are notable case of ultra runners dying, and autopsy shows long term heart damage. ??? I run ultras and marathons, am 55 years old, have trained 2500 - 3000 miles/year for years. I don't necessarily consider all this as building my health; I assume it helps in some ways and hurts in others. But I'm fairly plugged in and I've never heard of these "notable" cases of ultra runners dying with heart damage. Do you have links or specific references to any? Sounds to me like typical baseless conjecture (of which there is plenty) that gets thrown around and then accepted as fact by someone down the line.
- kbenson 8y ago
  I was a little curious, so I did some searching, and ran across a study about damage from long runs.[1] You may be aware of that already. I did eventually come across some stuff about a "dangerous lung disease" marathon runners are at risk of.[2][3] The news article seems a little scare-mongery (no surprise), but it appears to be backed by science, from the little I read into it. 1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4415847/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4415847/ 2: https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/343996/Running-marathons-can-risk-killer-lung-conditions https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/343996/Running-marathons-c... 3: https://err.ersjournals.com/content/23/134/416 https://err.ersjournals.com/content/23/134/416
  - hsitz 8y ago
    There's plenty of exercise science stuff, much of it conflicting. Also, even if some damage to health from running were 100% certain, you need to get a handle on just how likely and how dangerous the damage is. Is it analogous to exposure to a carcinogen that has a 95% chance of leading to cancer and death within 2 years? Or is it analogous to exposure to minor carcinogen that means you have, say, a 2% greater likelihood of developing cancer over the course of your life? For me, I see that I and all my running friends seem healthier and more vibrant than an average person of the same age. My heart is stronger, running improves bone density, (at least for me) improves strength and reduces pain in joints, improves my balance, helps keep me slim, etc. It gets me out every day, often into beautiful mountains with friends. For as long as I keep running I expect to reap these benefits. Would I stop or cut down if I were told, with certainty, that running would cause me to die, say, 2 years sooner than I would otherwise if I wasn't running? Not likely, it increases my quality of life in too many important ways. If that number were instead, say, 10 - 20 years, then yeah sure, I might cut down. But there is no science remotely resembling that. I don't think there's anything out there that establishes to any degree of confidence that lots of running reduces life expectancy at all.
paulcole 8y ago
If I die while running an ultra at least I'll die doing something I enjoy. I know it's not "good" for my body but I like it.
walkingolof 8y ago
There has been quite a bit written about this subject lately, there are mounting evidence that training hard have a negative impact on your heart. https://www.amazon.com/Haywire-Heart-exercise-protect-heart/dp/1937715671 https://www.amazon.com/Haywire-Heart-exercise-protect-heart/...
lurker_primo 8y ago
I think you should get yourself checked out. My resting heart rate is in 50s. It gets elevated when I'm running, riding, or working out, but returns to resting levels after only a couple of hours.
cafard 8y ago
Anecdata: I ran marathons and a few ultras (several 36 mile, one 50) in my late 20s. Through my 40s and 50s, my EKGs, and one ultrasound of the heart, have all come back clean; I'm not sure whether I've had one since turning 60. I'm 63 now, and haven't run for a couple of months, but that has to do with plantar fasciitis that I let get out of hand. The craziest of my running friends, measuring by ultras run, has said that she doesn't run far these days, but that's her knees.

assblaster 8y ago

I think it's possible to work out too much: 1) Scar tissue formation in heart after repeated episodes of prolonged ischemia (ultra marathon) 2) early joint wear necessitating joint replacements at earlier ages (marathon, lifting) 3) ligament and tendon damage requiring surgical correction (cross fit, power lifting) 4) high regeneration of tissue causes premature aging of tissues (increased cell replication and tendency for DNA damage) I think society's glorification of extreme exercise does more harm than good.

wcarron 8y ago
> I think society's glorification of extreme exercise does more harm than good. Which society? What glorification? According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_body_mass_index#WHO_Data_on_Mean_BMI_(2014) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_body_mass..., society has clearly moved in the complete opposite direction, with approximately 30% of the world population considered obese. I am aware that BMI doesn't take into account muscle mass, but really, most people who are obese by BMI standards aren't there due to powerlifting. They are simply obese. It is possible to work out too much, for sure. Most serious exercise programs have "easy weeks" specifically to give the body time to rebuild and recover. I've done many triathlons and sure, there is glorification of the IronMan distance tri; but it should be something that is glorified. It's an incredibly challenging event and worthy of praise. If anything, I think society needs to encourage, explicitly and with great zeal: 1. Hard exercise (long runs, swimming, lifting, rugby, cycling, etc.) at a bare minimum of 3 times per week for 1 hour or more. 2. The basic physiological fact of "Calories In, Calories out". A person is fat because they consume more calories than they burn (barring certain medical conditions/medications that cause weight gain). That's it. 3. Quality fuel. Ensuring people eat foods that provide the essential amino acids, necessary vitamins and minerals, and an even macro distribution of carbs, fats, and proteins. Lastly, I would gladly trade [2, 3, 4] in exchange for living a fulfilling and healthy life spent exercising and accomplishing goals like completing an IronMan Triathlon or breaking into the thousand pound club for lifting. The other option is wasting my life eating chips on my couch and getting fat.
- neetdeth 8y ago
  > Which society? What glorification? The high-functioning, wealthy society of working age professionals. I think of the United States - and I assume most countries are the same, but perhaps to a lesser degree - as a cluster of societies that sometimes intermingle and share space with each other but are otherwise distinct. Obesity is a disease of the poor. In certain circles there is a glorification of extreme forms of exercise. Partially as an indicator of status, to demonstrate that you have the both the personal agency and excess resources to pour into a training program to achieve impressive feats. But also as a sacrifice to the gods of success. All the respected leaders in business are doing ultra endurance sports, so it would stand to reason that there is something, some X-factor it's contributing to their ability to achieve. It's worth asking whether there's any benefit to this kind of thing past a certain point. Are people their wasting time and causing long term damage to their bodies just to impress their friends? Your last sentence, by the way, gave me a laugh. It could be the dictionary example for false dichotomy. Not sure whether this was intentional.
  - wcarron 8y ago
    > It's worth asking whether there's any benefit to this kind of thing past a certain point. Are people their wasting time and causing long term damage to their bodies just to impress their friends? I think it's a bit presumptuous to categorize extreme exercise as "just to impress their friends". Was Alex Honnold free soloing El Cap just to impress his friends? I doubt it. The same can be said for almost all extreme challenges. Why climb Everest? Why run a marathon? Why go to the moon? To crib JFK: Because it's hard. Because you can. Because it's there and it's maaaybe, just maybe, possible. Regarding my last sentence, perhaps I could have phrased it better like this: I would rather destroy my body through hard work by trying to achieve difficult things like an IM triathlon than destroy my body out of apathy and sloth and gluttony. Either way, if all goes to plan, my body is gonna go to shit at a certain point anyway and I can't do anything about it. And then I die. So why not try to have some fun?
    - neetdeth 8y ago
      The false dichotomy persists in your rephrasing. You could maintain excellent fitness with a more moderate exercise regime. Sorry if it comes across as an attack on your lifestyle. It isn't meant to be. If you find extrinsic motivations morally suspect, then let me assure you I believe your motivations are entirely intrinsic and pristine. But regardless, there are such things as trends. It isn't presumptuous to assume that people do things for the social benefits. That's just being realistic. If it builds their social network, increases their status, widens their career prospects, makes it easier to find a better mate... perhaps they should be doing that thing, whether it's running an ultramarathon or doing a 6-hour headstand in a park. What does it matter? Except that if 6-hour headstands become the hot new thing that every young professional seems to aspire to, I'm going to ask about whether "society" should be glorifying something that's obviously going to lead to neck damage versus, say, a nice 6-hour foot race. That's all.
HansLandaa 8y ago
I really wish we had society where these issues were the primary health problems. Unfortunately, the reality is that most of society's health issue stem from a lack of enough quality exercise. Obesity is a significant problem.

scottious 8y ago

> There are notable case of ultra runners dying, and autopsy shows long term heart damage I wonder how much of this is pre-existing heart conditions that went undiagnosed versus running _causing_ heart damage. > Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords This is surprising to me... I've run almost 5000 miles and 6 marathons so far and this has not been my experience. Maybe it's due to over training? Have you asked a doctor about it?

kudokatz 8y ago
It's not as much about your "experience". IIRC there was scarring in heart tissue after running a marathon distance in a large majority of runners independent of training. This could plausibly impede blood flow if the heart's fitness dropped back to "normal" (i.e. in old age). That said, I still do distance running.
jniedrauer 8y ago
> This is surprising to me... I've run almost 5000 miles and 6 marathons so far and this has not been my experience. Do you track your resting heart rate on the days after running a marathon? It's been pretty consistent to me. If I sustain near max exertion for multiple hours, it takes at least a few days to feel normal again, and resting heart rate seems to be a very good indicator of the overall stress of the exertion. Obviously my RHR is dropping over time. These are temporary variations.
- scottious 8y ago
  Yeah I peek at my heart rate graphs daily, but not with any kind of scientific rigor I just love marathon running and I'd hate for it to be hurting me long term...
- snowwrestler 8y ago
  I've been reading this thread and I'm curious if you've had any cardiac checkups done. I had a friend who was very healthy and fit but, like you, experienced elevated heart rate (and some loss of energy) for a few days after hard exercise days. Turns out, he had a partial blockage in a cardiac blood vessel. It was not blocked enough to be noticeable under normal workloads. But under hard work loads, part of his heart did not get enough oxygen and experienced damage. Eventually he experienced a heart attack, which is when it was caught and stented. Every other vessel was clear... it was just one of those flukes. Who knows if you have the same issue, but I would suggest it's worth getting checked out.

crikli 8y ago

> When training for mountaineering, I sometimes climb 5000+ feet in a day. Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords. I'm curious, what is your living elevation? When you climb 5000+ feet in a day are you traveling to a higher elevation? And if so, after the movement are you staying at that higher elevation? I am not a doctor. But I ascend a minimum of 20K feet per month via the steepest trails I can find. This usually includes a movement of up to 7500 feet of gain in a few hours. I've never seen my resting HR affected and do not recall having seeing that happen to anyone doing the same work unless they lived at lower elevation and were visiting. If you're coming to an elevation much higher than your living elevation, doing a movement, and then staying at a higher elevation, then your elevated RHR is most likely due to the body's response to the reduced partial pressure of oxygen. But if you're doing a move and returning to your "home" elevation and your RHR stays up...again I'm not a doctor in any way but I'd really encourage you to talk to one.

jniedrauer 8y ago
You're probably in much better shape than I am. For you, a 5000 foot day is probably fairly routine. For me, it still takes some willpower. I'm sure I will adapt over time. But yes, to answer your question, I train at sea level and climb between to 6000-10000 feet on weekends, and sometimes high camp.
- crikli 8y ago
  If your RHR is elevated at high camp that's to be expected as that's part of the physiological response to reduced partial pressure of oxygen. If your RHR is still elevated after your return to sea level...huh. I live at 6800 feet now but like you used to live at low elevation. I'd come out, hike up Pikes Peak (6700 feet start, 14100 foot finish) and then come back down to sleep at 6000ish feet. RHR would be up maybe 10-15BPM until I went home to sea level, then it went back down to normal literally on the drive home. So the response you're seeing, I mean what do I know I'm not a researcher, doctor or expert but I will say that seems odd. Check out this 40 minute podcast on altitude physiology. Super dense with really actionable information on the body's responses: https://www.scienceofultra.com/podcasts/29 https://www.scienceofultra.com/podcasts/29

rygxqpbsngav 8y ago

> Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords Not an expert, but that seems alarming. Please check https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSiS9qkJUU0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSiS9qkJUU0 Although regular exercise is great, complementing with good diet is a must too, I believe.

jniedrauer 8y ago
I think this is a little bit alarmist. My resting heart rate is in the low 50s and rises 2-3 bpm when I am sick or stressed (including during recovery from intense training). Looking at yesterday's run, my heart rate dropped from 182 to 138 in a little over a minute. I don't think I'm about to keel over just yet.

nabla9 8y ago

> Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords. Sounds like overtraining. If you overtrain, you are not exercising optimally and stop developing. You must increase the training volume gradually and take days off if the signs of overstraining appear. Increasing training often requires increased rest. You can't keep busy as usual and train hard. Pro-athletes sit and rest on a couch a lot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtraining#Signs_and_symptoms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtraining#Signs_and_symptom... >Elevated resting heart rate, a persistently high heart rate after adequate rest such as in the morning after sleep, can be an indicator of overtraining

jniedrauer 8y ago
"Overreaching" might be a better word. Overtraining would be doing that kind of workout every week instead of every few months. But yes, I'm probably making mistakes. I've never trained seriously until very recently. I reached my current level of fitness more or less by accident with a few thousand miles of hiking.
- nabla9 8y ago
  Avoiding overtraining is one reason to train with good heart rate monitor. In some days you must run much slower than other days because of stress, lack of sleep and rest. When you hit your upper limits, it's a sing to slow down. Suddenly reduced HRV is another sign of overtrtraining. Good heart rate monitors (some Polar models with a strap) can do Orthostatic Test and give even more accurate information than heart rate. https://www.polar.com/blog/heart-rate-variability-and-orthostatic-test-lets-talk-polar/ https://www.polar.com/blog/heart-rate-variability-and-orthos...
- ip26 8y ago
  Mountains, perhaps thanks to summit fever, really seduces people into overreaching, and cover up the clues at the same time. "I got to the summit, so it's all good!" you think. I really can't recommend "Training For the New Alpinism" enough. It really disabused me of that notion, and after a year or two of conscientious work I can hike the same trails with a smile & easy breathing, faster than I once could dripping sweat & suffering. A sport heart rate monitor is also extremely valuable.

ABS 8y ago

there is a good book on the topic: The Haywire Heart by Dr. John Mandrola, Lennard Zinn, Chris Case

saiya-jin 8y ago

> I sometimes climb 5000+ feet in a day Unless you mean proper climbing but rather you hike/scramble, that's not really anything extraordinary. I am a rather active person but by no means any endurance or ultra runner. Doing 1500m+ altitude gain hike (which I sometimes do over weekends, most usual one is 1000 -> 2500m) is a weekend warrior level, next day I go and do something else (usually easier). If you experience that elevated heart rate a whole week afterwards, that ain't normal IMHO, at least not for somebody who is on verge of starting marathons and planning for some lighter ultras soon. Get your heart/cardio/breathing checked by some experts. My personal theory is - we are not born equal, and some people can literally grow with almost any challenge, others are easily destroyed by the same. I am rather the latter but it has some positive aspect - I need to train harder than most to get to their levels, which brings good amount of mental fortitude.

decasteve 8y ago

It’s part of the recovery process. Let your body/heart recover to what’s normal for you before stressing it again. It needs time to adapt. There’s no such thing as overtraining, just under-recovering.

hsitz 8y ago

>> There are notable case of ultra runners dying, and autopsy shows long term heart damage. ??? I run ultras and marathons, am 55 years old, have trained 2500 - 3000 miles/year for years. I don't necessarily consider all this as building my health; I assume it helps in some ways and hurts in others. But I'm fairly plugged in and I've never heard of these "notable" cases of ultra runners dying with heart damage. Do you have links or specific references to any? Sounds to me like typical baseless conjecture (of which there is plenty) that gets thrown around and then accepted as fact by someone down the line.

kbenson 8y ago
I was a little curious, so I did some searching, and ran across a study about damage from long runs.[1] You may be aware of that already. I did eventually come across some stuff about a "dangerous lung disease" marathon runners are at risk of.[2][3] The news article seems a little scare-mongery (no surprise), but it appears to be backed by science, from the little I read into it. 1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4415847/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4415847/ 2: https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/343996/Running-marathons-can-risk-killer-lung-conditions https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/343996/Running-marathons-c... 3: https://err.ersjournals.com/content/23/134/416 https://err.ersjournals.com/content/23/134/416
- hsitz 8y ago
  There's plenty of exercise science stuff, much of it conflicting. Also, even if some damage to health from running were 100% certain, you need to get a handle on just how likely and how dangerous the damage is. Is it analogous to exposure to a carcinogen that has a 95% chance of leading to cancer and death within 2 years? Or is it analogous to exposure to minor carcinogen that means you have, say, a 2% greater likelihood of developing cancer over the course of your life? For me, I see that I and all my running friends seem healthier and more vibrant than an average person of the same age. My heart is stronger, running improves bone density, (at least for me) improves strength and reduces pain in joints, improves my balance, helps keep me slim, etc. It gets me out every day, often into beautiful mountains with friends. For as long as I keep running I expect to reap these benefits. Would I stop or cut down if I were told, with certainty, that running would cause me to die, say, 2 years sooner than I would otherwise if I wasn't running? Not likely, it increases my quality of life in too many important ways. If that number were instead, say, 10 - 20 years, then yeah sure, I might cut down. But there is no science remotely resembling that. I don't think there's anything out there that establishes to any degree of confidence that lots of running reduces life expectancy at all.

paulcole 8y ago

If I die while running an ultra at least I'll die doing something I enjoy. I know it's not "good" for my body but I like it.

walkingolof 8y ago

There has been quite a bit written about this subject lately, there are mounting evidence that training hard have a negative impact on your heart. https://www.amazon.com/Haywire-Heart-exercise-protect-heart/dp/1937715671 https://www.amazon.com/Haywire-Heart-exercise-protect-heart/...

lurker_primo 8y ago

I think you should get yourself checked out. My resting heart rate is in 50s. It gets elevated when I'm running, riding, or working out, but returns to resting levels after only a couple of hours.

cafard 8y ago

Anecdata: I ran marathons and a few ultras (several 36 mile, one 50) in my late 20s. Through my 40s and 50s, my EKGs, and one ultrasound of the heart, have all come back clean; I'm not sure whether I've had one since turning 60. I'm 63 now, and haven't run for a couple of months, but that has to do with plantar fasciitis that I let get out of hand. The craziest of my running friends, measuring by ultras run, has said that she doesn't run far these days, but that's her knees.