There are, however, a fair number of studies that very definitively link muscle mass and ability to balance with good health and resistance to injury in old age. I'm guessing that old people who can run have higher muscle mass and better ability to balance than non-running peers, leading to the correlation.
Sport Injuries and Injury Statistics
The Analysis of Injury Rates in Running « Condensed Science
Why do you expect us to do your homework for you?
But those links were just about injury rates. Try a Google search for "running inflammation" and start reading. Oh wait, here's the link: running inflammation - Google Search
or this one: cause of running inflammation - Google Search
How about increased cortisol levels? cortisol and running - Google Search Now, increased cortisol is not necessarily a bad thing as a response to a stressor, but when your cortisol is elevated for long periods of time it starts to wear on your body.
Really, how hard have you actually been looking for this information? You sound like you are trying to be smug- "Neener neener, you can't prove it!". If you aren't satisfied with the ideas contained in the Primal Blueprint and you can't be arsed to search Google a little bit and you aren't willing to try an n=1 experiment, why am I wasting my time explaining this?
Actually, it looks like he did Google it, and it came up with scientific peer-reviewed journals that tells a different story about chronic cardio. Hate the scientists and their research if you must, but don't hate the original poster for being a sceptic. That's just, you know, cult behaviour.
Originally Posted by jfreaksho
Doesn't these studies just show that a little chronic cardio is better than no training at all? Makes sense to me.
I agree with this. It would be a challenging study, but comparing Strength training versus moderate endurance training versus heavy endurance traning versus any other training regimens would be interesting. Most modes of exercise will have positive outcomes when compared with the general population(which is way too sedentary, on average). I think the more interesting questions of "what is the optimal balance of strength vs. cardio?", and "what is the optimal mix of intensities?" are ones that would be particularly useful - but unfortuantely quite difficult to quantify in longer-term studies.
Originally Posted by Noctiluca
I clearly am doing lots of homework here. I've read Mark's books (you should see all the underlining!!) and I've read a couple of studies that seem to indicate chronic cardio being linked to a longer life! So, I'm still skeptical on Mark's take on this topic.
I appreciate your research, thanks. Actually, your posts are helping me clarify my question. Mark references studies that say that CC (can we call Chronic Cardio CC?) increases inflammation. This seems an obvious (and not necessarily bad thing) to me...
When you do 300 pushups (not in a row ), what happens for the next 72 hours...you have inflammation in your pecs! (at least I do). When you go for a 2 hour run...wouldn't it make sense that there is inflammation in your heart/cardiovascular system (heart is a muscle) for 72 hours? But doesn't it make your heart stronger...just like your pecs?
So, let me clarify...what I'm really looking for are studies that suggest that CC leads to shorter life, because what I really care about is longevity...and so far the research I've found suggest CC is a benefit to longevity.
P.S. not trying to be smug. I'm sharing information and hoping others share theirs. It's an internet forum after all
Last edited by G-Man; 12-10-2011 at 10:07 AM.
listen, bro, if you run a lot, you will die EARLY AND UGLY.
Here is another study (below). This one compares several elite athletes--some probably had a more primal-type workout regimen (wrestling sounds pretty primal to me). This study says that aerobic athletes had particular longevity vs other elite athletes. Again, no causation, but it sounds like chronic cardio is correlated with increased longevity.
Sarna S, et al, Health status of former elite athletes. The Finnish experience. Aging. 1997 Feb-April;9(1-2):35-41. They looked at athletes that participated in elite sports between 1920-1965 including skiing, hockey, soccer, basketball, boxing, wrestling, cross country skiing, track and field, wight lifting and compared to healthy controls. "We found that former aerobic sports athletes in particular have a high total and active life expectancy and low risk for ischemic heart disease and diabetes in later years." Follow up data was obtained in 1985 and only 65.9% of original cohort was still alive.
And, just to clarify, I really dug Primal Blueprint, and I eat pretty primal (maybe not quite 80%, but I'm pretty good). I'm just skeptical on Mark's take that CC is bad for you. I have posted 3 studies now that show CC is correlated to longer life. I can't find one that suggests the opposite. Does anyone have one? Mark, are you out there?
Last edited by G-Man; 12-10-2011 at 10:18 AM.
studies can go to hell, have you ever seen aerobic athletes? they are ugly and weak, rail thin and frail. it's no way to live a life.
Thanks for the thorough research (sarcasm should be obvious here).
Originally Posted by dado
I guess these don't count as studies but,
Originally Posted by G-Man
Philadelphia Marathon: Two Runners Dead After Collapsing During Race
Jorge Fernandez, Half-Marathon Runner, Dies After Finishing Rock 'N' Roll San Antonio Race
Autopsy is inconclusive on dead Chicago marathon runner | WBEZ
Family Shocked By Half-Marathon Runner's Death | NBC Dallas-Fort Worth
I didn't read this one, note: The Science of Sport: Deaths during running: Is exercise safe?
Not a lot of folks die from heavy lifting, sprinting, or walking. The above examples are the extreme end of 'chronic cardio' of course, but I don't see how grinding yourself down often can be good for you.
Moderation man. If you (in general, not the OP) enjoy these activities, knock yourself out, you won't die like that. Also, for people that truly enjoy these activities it shouldn't matter whether they'll add or shave 5-10 years to your life, should it? that amount of time is rather insignificant as far as I'm concerned. If you told me that I will FOR SURE live 10 years less if I keep up the muay thai, jiu-jitsu, lifting, etc I'd keep doing them anyway, because the alternative isn't appealing. I don't care to be an old man that gets to live to 90 but didn't use his body in his youth. I'd rather kick it early on but be able to remember having fun moving my body through space.