Discussion boards hosted by Cycling UK
https://forum.cyclinguk.org/
My records from the hospital in East Anglia that did the echos.Jdsk wrote: ↑11 Jul 2022, 2:58pmI always dread these conversations, but... which country and which records are those, please?axel_knutt wrote: ↑11 Jul 2022, 2:46pm I've had numerous echos. My aorta was normal in 2009 & 2012, but the most recent ones are missing from my records.
Thanks
Jonathan
Thanks.axel_knutt wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 11:30amMy records from the hospital in East Anglia that did the echos.Jdsk wrote: ↑11 Jul 2022, 2:58pmI always dread these conversations, but... which country and which records are those, please?axel_knutt wrote: ↑11 Jul 2022, 2:46pm I've had numerous echos. My aorta was normal in 2009 & 2012, but the most recent ones are missing from my records.
It's really difficult discussing exercise in a forum where there's such a range and there are so many competitors and so many actively training.axel_knutt wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 11:28am Exercise is very good for you, in fact getting none at all is about as bad for you as smoking, but the benefits don't accrue without limit. People like to assume that if a bit of exercise is good, then more is better, but it isn't. There's a law of diminishing returns with the health benefits of exercise, and it only takes a relatively small amount to get most of the health benefit you're ever going to get.
Plotting the data from Arem & Gebel, it's easy to see why the ACSM & NICE exercise recommendations are set where they are, and they're in stark contrast to my own exercise levels as a cyclist:
Arem Gebel.png
I think that a very good question but unfortunately I’m not able to give you ‘The Answer’. On a personal level I think taking advantage of offered screening can be wise but otherwise I’m now minded to draw back from pushing myself to the limit of what I think that I can manage and avoid situations where I might get drawn into what might be unusually heavy exercise for me. Life’s full of chance and luck, the idea is to try and load the dice in your favour and not to take unnecessary chances.Bsteel wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 8:12amApart from the Aortic screening as suggested by Johnathon what is the action to ensure you stay beneath the point of terminal damage ?Carlton green wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 6:31am It is important that people do not inadvertently exercise beyond what their body can sustain without terminal damage and that they understand that just because they believe themselves to be fit and in sound enough health for what they are doing doesn’t guarantee that they are.
I only mentioned that screening programme because there was a reference to the possibility of death caused by something to with a blood vessel. And because of the effect of the outbreak on screening programmes.Carlton green wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 11:55amI think that a very good question but unfortunately I’m not able to give you ‘The Answer’. On a personal level I think taking advantage of offered screening can be wise but otherwise I’m now minded to draw back from pushing myself to the limit of what I think that I can manage and avoid situations where I might get drawn into what might be unusually heavy exercise for me. Life’s full of chance and luck, the idea is to try and load the dice in your favour and not take unnecessary chances.Bsteel wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 8:12amApart from the Aortic screening... what is the action to ensure you stay beneath the point of terminal damage ?Carlton green wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 6:31am It is important that people do not inadvertently exercise beyond what their body can sustain without terminal damage and that they understand that just because they believe themselves to be fit and in sound enough health for what they are doing doesn’t guarantee that they are.
The guidelines are very simple, and should help to reduce any concerns about starting exercise or supporting others in doing so.Jdsk wrote: ↑11 Jul 2022, 9:40am NHS advice: "Physical activity guidelines for older adults":
https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/exercise/e ... er-adults/
which includes what to do "if you have not exercised for some time".
Speak to your GP first … well, in an ideal world you’d be able to get an appointment to do so and they wouldn’t be snowed under with genuinely ill people. To be fair my acquaintances husband should have gone and seen a Doctor before returning to cycling again, he wasn’t in the best of health - perhaps understandably feeling a bit run down - but who wants to trouble a Doctor or can even ‘get’ an appointment to see their GP?Older adults should do some type of physical activity every day. It can help to improve your health and reduce the risk of heart disease and stroke.
Speak to a GP first if you have not exercised for some time, or if you have medical conditions or concerns. Make sure your activity and its intensity are appropriate for your fitness.
Thanks for the graphs and paper references.axel_knutt wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 11:28am Exercise is very good for you, in fact getting none at all is about as bad for you as smoking, but the benefits don't accrue without limit. People like to assume that if a bit of exercise is good, then more is better, but it isn't. There's a law of diminishing returns with the health benefits of exercise, and it only takes a relatively small amount to get most of the health benefit you're ever going to get.
If i read that right, you are doing 92 hours of exercise a week? That is a lot, I reckon i do a fair bit at @ 18 hours!axel_knutt wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 11:28am Exercise is very good for you, in fact getting none at all is about as bad for you as smoking, but the benefits don't accrue without limit. People like to assume that if a bit of exercise is good, then more is better, but it isn't. There's a law of diminishing returns with the health benefits of exercise, and it only takes a relatively small amount to get most of the health benefit you're ever going to get.
Plotting the data from Arem & Gebel, it's easy to see why the ACSM & NICE exercise recommendations are set where they are, and they're in stark contrast to my own exercise levels as a cyclist:
Arem Gebel.png
I'm a patient at an oversubscribed GP practice and have cause to contact them regrettably often. I have never waited more than 2 days for an appointment offered even in the worst of the pandemic, although sometimes I chose to take a later one for a reason. Sometimes I spoke to a triage nurse over the phone first, but it was always dealt with appropriately.Carlton green wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 12:16pm - but who wants to trouble a Doctor or can even ‘get’ an appointment to see their GP?
One can only speak as one finds. Talking to friends and relatives they all report difficulty and great difficulty in getting to see a GP. So far I appear to be in reasonable health so have had little need to contact a Doctor, but IIRC there’s always been a quite noticeable delay between asking for an appointment and one being available. YMMV is true of many things.mjr wrote: ↑15 Jul 2022, 8:28amI'm a patient at an oversubscribed GP practice and have cause to contact them regrettably often. I have never waited more than 2 days for an appointment offered even in the worst of the pandemic, although sometimes I chose to take a later one for a reason. Sometimes I spoke to a triage nurse over the phone first, but it was always dealt with appropriately.Carlton green wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 12:16pm - but who wants to trouble a Doctor or can even ‘get’ an appointment to see their GP?
What's your experience? Have you actually struggled to get appointments, or are exceptional problems reported in the news colouring your opinion?
They may be overemphasising the problematic instances. “I phoned the doctor and got an appointment promptly” is not an interesting anecdote to tell friends.Carlton green wrote: ↑15 Jul 2022, 12:04pm
One can only speak as one finds. Talking to friends and relatives they all report difficulty and great difficulty in getting to see a GP. So far I appear to be in reasonable health so have had little need to contact a Doctor, but IIRC there’s always been a quite noticeable delay between asking for an appointment and one being available. YMMV is true of many things.
No, the graph is in MET hours per week, not hours, so if your 18 hours was at ~12mph, that's about 7.4METs, giving 133 METhr/wk.foxyrider wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 9:31pmIf i read that right, you are doing 92 hours of exercise a week? That is a lot, I reckon i do a fair bit at @ 18 hours!axel_knutt wrote: ↑12 Jul 2022, 11:28am Exercise is very good for you, in fact getting none at all is about as bad for you as smoking, but the benefits don't accrue without limit. People like to assume that if a bit of exercise is good, then more is better, but it isn't. There's a law of diminishing returns with the health benefits of exercise, and it only takes a relatively small amount to get most of the health benefit you're ever going to get.
Plotting the data from Arem & Gebel, it's easy to see why the ACSM & NICE exercise recommendations are set where they are, and they're in stark contrast to my own exercise levels as a cyclist:
Arem Gebel.png