Runners and Heart Problems Health Study

dbanks80
dbanks80 Posts: 3,685 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I was reading this article and it has me kind of scared to continue running. To all the runners what do you think of this study?

http://todayhealth.today.com/_news/2012/12/03/15625246-running-farther-faster-and-longer-can-kill-you?lite

Replies

  • dbanks80
    dbanks80 Posts: 3,685 Member
    Bump
  • astrampe
    astrampe Posts: 2,169 Member
    A lot more people die from obesity related heart problems than from running marathons.....And as a purely recreational runner, very few people actually runs multipla marathons....Even if they do, it's stil healthier than sitting on the couch eating a donut......
  • RunningDirty
    RunningDirty Posts: 293
    "The good news is that the mice seemed to improve after they stopped running and were allowed to return to normal rodent life."

    Good for the mice! :wink:
  • PixieGoddess
    PixieGoddess Posts: 1,833 Member
    I'm going to start by admitting that I did not read the article. Then I'm just gonna say one thing:

    I'd rather live running, however long I'm here, than not.
  • DonniesGirl69
    DonniesGirl69 Posts: 644 Member
    If I die running, I'll die happy.

    However, I have several (and by several, I mean ovr a dozen) friends who have run more than 10 marathons and more than 20 half marathons. All are alive, well and still running numerous distance races.
  • dbanks80
    dbanks80 Posts: 3,685 Member
    Thx. I do feel great after I run.
  • drgndancer
    drgndancer Posts: 426 Member
    First, the results here are extremely arguable, and you'll find as many people in the scientific community that disagree as agree. Second, if you read the entire article, even this study indicates that runners in general live longer than the average by a pretty goood amount. The "dangers" this study points out are in running extreme distances on a regular basis. Unless you do multiple marathons in a year, this does not apply to you most likely. Recreational running, defined as an hour or so a day at a reasonable (one assumes training) pace, is praised by the study.
  • Doodlewhopper
    Doodlewhopper Posts: 1,018 Member
    Running must not everyone. I see a lot of 70 - 80 year old runners who can still kick ^zz.
  • sunsnstatheart
    sunsnstatheart Posts: 2,544 Member
    I don't run marathons so I don't worry about it. Seems to me that the whole "everything in moderation" rule applies here.
  • scottb81
    scottb81 Posts: 2,538 Member
    Running too hard, for too long, too often can be bad for overall health.

    However, running aerobically (at and below the aerobic threshold), for long times, often, is not overly stressful and is beneficial for the health.

    2d however - Most recreational runners run too hard for their current fitness level most of the time.

    Source: Maffetone's Big Book of Endurance Training and Racing
  • ejwme
    ejwme Posts: 318
    Did you know that in 2009, according to the US census, 33,800 people died in motor vehicle accidents? Do you remember hearing anything in the news about the horrible risk of death people run just by getting in a car? By comparison, do you remember the swine flu pandemic of 2009? Worldwide, 14,286 people died of swine flu (less than 4,000 in the US), and it dominated the news for months. What is published by news agencies does not necessarily represent what, by any other measure, should attract our attention.

    It's a risk/reward balance. And without seeing the actual study, it's hard to tell how solid their science or conclusions are. I'll wait for several studies to come to the same conclusion before I fall out of love with long distance running. It honestly sounds like shenanigans to me.
  • TinaDay1114
    TinaDay1114 Posts: 1,328 Member
    Seems to me that the whole "everything in moderation" rule applies here.

    ^^ THIS. I think if you do push to the wall every day doing the same thing over and over, some part of your body will suffer an overuse injury. But I think most people -- even those who love running long distances -- tend to mix things up, cross-train, strength train, etc. I find I've learned a lot about how hard I can push, and at the same time, where I've made mistakes when I haven't listened to my body well enough. And now I'm a little better at doing both -- pushing harder, and pulling back when I need to.

    The study doesn't sound conclusive in any way, so I'd just go with what works for you (and what fits your health, your heart history, all that).
  • BrianSharpe
    BrianSharpe Posts: 9,248 Member
    Personally I think it's alarmist and poor journalism. The problems that have been observed (if you look at some of the original studies) applied only to long term, extremely high volume (I think they used the word chronic exercisers) and fast paced (8mph and faster) runners.

    It would be more useful if they published an article about household safety as we are all far more likely to die in an accident at home than we are due to running related heart problems. Risk is relative......I'll keep on running, it still stacks the odds in may favour.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Personally I think it's alarmist and poor journalism. The problems that have been observed (if you look at some of the original studies) applied only to long term, extremely high volume (I think they used the word chronic exercisers) and fast paced (8mph and faster) runners.

    It would be more useful if they published an article about household safety as we are all far more likely to die in an accident at home than we are due to running related heart problems. Risk is relative......I'll keep on running, it still stacks the odds in may favour.

    I read the entire article and it seemed more balanced than alarmist. Obviously the "running will kill you in the long run" meme was emphasized first, as that is what would attract the most attention, but they at least quoted someone of equal qualifications to present to opposite opinion. I mean they didn't make up the data and, although there is disagreement over how to interpret it, the "anti marathon" position is not an exaggerated response (even if it turns out to be wrong).

    I have mixed feelings about these studies. I think it is wrong to dismiss them out of hand because they are saying something that a lot of people may not want to hear. However, I also do not think they are definitive in any way.

    That's the way this type of research goes. The only way to get large volumes of data is to examine large population group studies. However, the larger the study, the less stringent the data collection methods tend to be (sheer logistics), and the less context you have.

    I also think one must exercise caution against overinterpreting what I call "micro" data without looking at the big picture. E.g.: the fact that troponin levels are elevated after running a marathon is noteworthy, but not necessarily significant unless you are able to track the effects over the long term.
  • SpleenThief
    SpleenThief Posts: 293 Member
    From a scientific standpoint this article leaves us with "need more research".

    O’Keefe’s editorial, which she says is more like a “documented blog than an actual study.”
    The problem, Wright says, is that the big studies cited in the editorial don’t have information on people’s hearts at the outset.

    It's possible these studies were flawed. We need more study.

    Also there's this:

    The bad news, for runners of marathons and the like, was that those who ran over 20 to 25 miles per week ended up with the exact same risk as the couch potatoes in the study, O’Keefe says.

    the term "couch potato" means different things to different people. Endurance athletes have the same mortality risks as morbidly obese smokers?

    Finally note they article doesn't even cite the two studies quoted so we can't review.
  • kmorganlfc
    kmorganlfc Posts: 115 Member
    Forget the science. Has anyone ever read about an epidemic of heart related problems and deaths amongst athletes and the millions of distance runners/joggers over the last few decades since running for health and sport has been a global phenomenon? Thought you hadn't. Me neither. Case closed.
  • SpleenThief
    SpleenThief Posts: 293 Member
    Forget the science. Has anyone ever read about an epidemic of heart related problems and deaths amongst athletes and the millions of distance runners/joggers over the last few decades since running for health and sport has been a global phenomenon? Thought you hadn't. Me neither. Case closed.

    But the article makes no claim of such an epidemic or outbreak. They're simply saying that endurance athletes have average lifespans.
  • CarsonRuns
    CarsonRuns Posts: 3,039 Member
    Most recreational runners run too hard for their current fitness level most of the time.
    This is so incredibly true. I see it all the time on this site. I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade and certainly am not bragging, but I see people running their "easy runs" at around my easy run pace and their race times are at paces that are minutes per mile slower than mine. Just for comparison, my 5K pace is about 3:00 per mile faster than my easy run pace.

    Slow down. Stay aerobic. :)
  • kmorganlfc
    kmorganlfc Posts: 115 Member
    Forget the science. Has anyone ever read about an epidemic of heart related problems and deaths amongst athletes and the millions of distance runners/joggers over the last few decades since running for health and sport has been a global phenomenon? Thought you hadn't. Me neither. Case closed.

    But the article makes no claim of such an epidemic or outbreak. They're simply saying that endurance athletes have average lifespans.

    Exaclty. But the inferance made by people is grounded in a paranoia that running isnt healthy and must therefore be avoided. I'd be quite happy with an 'average lifespan'. Wouldnt anyone else? The very amateur psychologist in me is formulating the hypothesis that panicking after reading such reports is nothing more than an avoidance strategy, which provides some kind of excuse not to do any excercise. But of course, I could be wrong about that. :wink:
  • sjohnny
    sjohnny Posts: 56,142 Member
    I ended up with a heart problem from running. I injured my IT band and couldn't run for a couple of weeks and it broke my heart.
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    Most recreational runners run too hard for their current fitness level most of the time.
    This is so incredibly true. I see it all the time on this site. I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade and certainly am not bragging, but I see people running their "easy runs" at around my easy run pace and their race times are at paces that are minutes per mile slower than mine. Just for comparison, my 5K pace is about 3:00 per mile faster than my easy run pace.

    Slow down. Stay aerobic. :)

    I thought I was the only one who was noticiing this too. I'm in the same boat and have taken some double takes.
  • Colstriper
    Colstriper Posts: 71 Member
    Forget the science. Has anyone ever read about an epidemic of heart related problems and deaths amongst athletes and the millions of distance runners/joggers over the last few decades since running for health and sport has been a global phenomenon? Thought you hadn't. Me neither. Case closed.

    People have been running for recreation for way longer than the past few decades, +1!!!
  • BrianSharpe
    BrianSharpe Posts: 9,248 Member
    I ended up with a heart problem from running. I injured my IT band and couldn't run for a couple of weeks and it broke my heart.

    For the win.........

Categories