> Of course, this type of single-snapshot-in-time study can’t tell us whether the athletes’ training actually changed their muscle health over the years or if the athletes were somehow blessed from birth with better muscles, allowing them to become superb masters athletes.
I really appreciate this kind of honesty. It's rare that a popular article explicitly points out possible confounders.
I sure hope so! I'm 42 now, and I just came back in from a bike ride - only my second since a 5 month layoff caused by a combination of weather, travel and shoulder surgery - and I'm beat. And gawd was I slllooooowwwww out there tonight. Uuuggghhh.
But hey, I know it will come back with time, and - more to the point - I know how important it is to stay active. After the whole heart-attack thing back in 2014, I'm pretty committed to staying active from here on out. Keeping my heart healthy is priority #1, anything else is just gravy at this point.
"I sure hope so! I'm 42 now, and I just came back in from a bike ride - only my second since a 5 month layoff caused by a combination of weather, travel and shoulder surgery - and I'm beat."
Interesting bit about individual response to exercise. Michael Mosley, MD, has an episode, "The Truth About Exercise" BBC2 [0],[1],[2] that is worth watching. During the show his genetic profile indicates he gets an approximate 3-5% improvement in V02 Max, no matter how much exercise he does.
Cardiovascular failure taught me a lot by pushing my system to its lower limit. When walking 45 minutes is the only physical activity you can take, the only way you can feel warm blood smoothly pushing and the only time you'll feel your heart pulsing sound and clear you learn a lot.
It's my understanding from my reading of pop-science books (specifically, Nick Lanes) that mitochondria can be selected for within your own body.
As you age, mutations naturally produce slightly broken mitochondria who do a slightly worse job at making energy. However, if you are exercising vigorously, those poorly functioning mitochondria will die off (apoptosis) and you will maintain a (relatively) "fitter" population of mitochondria inside your muscles, as those are the ones that are left to reproduce.
If you don't ever exercise, you'll probably feel fine (all else being equal) but secretly, you're cultivating a weak population of mitochondria within your own muscle cells. At some point the weakness of that population will become apparent.
"Of course, this type of single-snapshot-in-time study can’t tell us whether the athletes’ training actually changed their muscle health over the years or if the athletes were somehow blessed from birth with better muscles, allowing them to become superb masters athletes."
I really wish they hadn't used world class athletes, who almost always have major genetic advantages.
Also, even if the difference is 100% in the diet and exercise regimen (which I consider vanishingly unlikely, given the established and increasing knowledge base of how genetic factors influence major age-related illnesses), a 14% increase in muscle mass between "sedentary" and "world-class athlete" doesn't suggest the greatest ROI for a more moderate regimen.
I think there's value in this study; the study of extremes often yields useful hints for future research. But the way it's reported here is pretty bad. This kind of crap will continue until the prevailing attitude shifts away from the concept of "successful aging". Where would we be if Jonas Salk had focused on "successful polio"?
"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.
"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.
As someone who has recently quit smoking (6 months) and started a daily regimen of 1.5 hrs of serious cycling (including 45 min up a steep incline) at 2000m (6500ft) altitude at age 34 (2 weeks down; with a couple of breaks for alternatives like hikes or longer bike trips), this article makes me feel like I've made the right decision, despite daily aching muscles. I'm using the hope of joining a group cycle trip across Tibet to Nepal from southwest China[0] in September as a mental crutch.
As someone who has recently quit smoking (6 months) and started a daily regimen of 1.5 hrs of serious cycling (including 45 min up a steep incline) at 2000m (6500ft) altitude at age 34 (2 weeks down; with a couple of breaks for alternatives like hikes or longer bike trips), this article makes me feel like I've made the right decision
Definitely. Take it from me, the alternative(s) are no fun. I got lazy about biking and running and everything, let my weight creep up, and was over-stressing myself way to hard, and ultimately had a heart-attack. Luckily I lived and the doctors say I should be fine, but they all hammered me on the importance of staying active and fit from here on out.
Luckily I never smoked, so I have that going for me at least. But yeah, quitting smoking is definitely a Good Call if you care about your health.
This seems fairly obvious but it's good to have it confirmed as I'm 60 now. I usually cycle about 100 miles a week and I'm glad I'm not wasting my time!
People often ask me if I worry about tearing muscles/sore joints when I run, ride my bike or lift weights. In college, I kind of worried about those things, but now sitting in a chair from 8-10 hours a day makes me worry way more about heart health/blood pressure, etc.
I just kind of hope to offset all of that sedentary time in front of the monitor, and indeed do hope that all this activity benefits me down the line, be it muscle elasticity, heart health, lung function, whatever.
Try a standing desk if you can. I find that aside from tired feet I feel a lot more energetic throughout the day and no longer get and aches in my back that I used to experience when sitting
[+] [-] algorias|10 years ago|reply
I really appreciate this kind of honesty. It's rare that a popular article explicitly points out possible confounders.
[+] [-] mindcrime|10 years ago|reply
But hey, I know it will come back with time, and - more to the point - I know how important it is to stay active. After the whole heart-attack thing back in 2014, I'm pretty committed to staying active from here on out. Keeping my heart healthy is priority #1, anything else is just gravy at this point.
[+] [-] jjrp|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bootload|10 years ago|reply
Interesting bit about individual response to exercise. Michael Mosley, MD, has an episode, "The Truth About Exercise" BBC2 [0],[1],[2] that is worth watching. During the show his genetic profile indicates he gets an approximate 3-5% improvement in V02 Max, no matter how much exercise he does.
Get out on the bike and enjoy living.
[0] https://vimeo.com/51836895
[1] http://www.sciencefocus.com/feature/genetics/high-street-gen...
[2] http://www.bbc.com/news/health-17177251
[+] [-] agumonkey|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rsync|10 years ago|reply
As you age, mutations naturally produce slightly broken mitochondria who do a slightly worse job at making energy. However, if you are exercising vigorously, those poorly functioning mitochondria will die off (apoptosis) and you will maintain a (relatively) "fitter" population of mitochondria inside your muscles, as those are the ones that are left to reproduce.
If you don't ever exercise, you'll probably feel fine (all else being equal) but secretly, you're cultivating a weak population of mitochondria within your own muscle cells. At some point the weakness of that population will become apparent.
[+] [-] zeroxfe|10 years ago|reply
I really wish they hadn't used world class athletes, who almost always have major genetic advantages.
[+] [-] 0xcde4c3db|10 years ago|reply
I think there's value in this study; the study of extremes often yields useful hints for future research. But the way it's reported here is pretty bad. This kind of crap will continue until the prevailing attitude shifts away from the concept of "successful aging". Where would we be if Jonas Salk had focused on "successful polio"?
[+] [-] bryanrasmussen|10 years ago|reply
I mean if they had 10000 exceptionally fit people for their age, that might start to mean something.
[+] [-] civilian|10 years ago|reply
It's a good motivation for working out. I often think: "I'm squatting 180lbs now, so that I can sit down onto and stand up from a toilet when I'm 80."
[+] [-] hyperchase|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anpk|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sndean|10 years ago|reply
"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|10 years ago|reply
"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.
[+] [-] contingencies|10 years ago|reply
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20091026172350/http://www.geocit...
[+] [-] mindcrime|10 years ago|reply
Definitely. Take it from me, the alternative(s) are no fun. I got lazy about biking and running and everything, let my weight creep up, and was over-stressing myself way to hard, and ultimately had a heart-attack. Luckily I lived and the doctors say I should be fine, but they all hammered me on the importance of staying active and fit from here on out.
Luckily I never smoked, so I have that going for me at least. But yeah, quitting smoking is definitely a Good Call if you care about your health.
[+] [-] julian55|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] altotrees|10 years ago|reply
I just kind of hope to offset all of that sedentary time in front of the monitor, and indeed do hope that all this activity benefits me down the line, be it muscle elasticity, heart health, lung function, whatever.
[+] [-] justinhj|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] known|10 years ago|reply