Heart Health

One-Off

Tom Curren status
Jul 28, 2005
14,222
10,424
113
33.8N - 118.4W
The number one cause of death in the USA (and in the world) is heart desease.

"A reduction in total cholesterol is considered the gold standard in preventative cardiovascular medicine."

My primary care physician told me years ago that I have risk factors (father who died of a heart attack and now myocardial bridge) that lower my thresholds for healthy cholesterol levels. He also said that one of the factors in their calculation is age and so that even if I maintain my current levels, sooner or later my age would push me into the risk category. Well my last visit my LDL level went over the threshold and he prescribed a statin (atorvastatin). Yesterday I went for a three month check up and he said the results were "dramatic." My LDL went from 130 to 60.

He asked me if I changed anything else and I mentioned that now that I am retired I exercise more. I explained my routines. He encouraged that and suggested I favor aerobic exercise and repeated his warning that when I do resistance not to lift heavy (this is not a general recommendation but for my given situation).

I got curious about the relationship of cholesterol and exercise and found the following article.


Warning- the heavy lifters here might not like it. It says nothing against heavy resistance training, but for lowering cholesterol, volume seems to be better than intensity. I remember in "The Barbell Prescription" Dr. Sullivan reluctantly concedes that for cardiovascular health LSD (long slow distance) was the best.

Some quotes from the article-

Regarding aerobic training-

"Those authors consequently suggested that the training volume, as opposed to the training intensity, is the key to improving the lipid profile.."

"The evidence suggests that a moderate-intensity exercise programme will be effective in increasing HDL cholesterol. This will have a positive impact upon atherosclerosis (hardening of artery walls through plaque and fat accumulation [13]) via HDL cholesterol-facilitated removal of LDL cholesterol. To directly reduce LDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels, however, the intensity of aerobic exercise must be increased—something that may not be possible in individuals with a limited exercise capacity or other risk factors."


Regarding resistance training-

" The authors concluded that low- to moderate-intensity resistance training results in greater benefit to the lipid profile than high-intensity resistance training, although the mechanisms underlying this difference are unclear."

"This study once again demonstrated the limited additional benefit of increasing the resistance training intensity when equalizing the training load by reducing the numbers of sets and repetitions being completed to compensate for the increased weight being lifted. "


" During resistance training, it has been shown consistently that the increased volume of movement via increased numbers of sets and/or repetitions has a greater impact upon the lipid profile than increased intensity (e.g. via high-weight low-repetition training)."
 
Last edited:

One-Off

Tom Curren status
Jul 28, 2005
14,222
10,424
113
33.8N - 118.4W
Are you supplementing magnesium?
Nope.

Just in food and in the multi I take. My BP since I retired has gone down about 20 points. Was 130/90, now 110/70. Retirement is great heart medicine. I highly recommend it if you have heart issues. The earlier the better.

 

john4surf

Kelly Slater status
May 28, 2005
8,996
3,685
113
CBS, CA
When PPK had his heart challenges a few years ago, I decided to check in with Scripps Cardiology (my next door neighbor is a PA in the cardio department). I too have a daily atorvastatin and a few more prescriptions for the heart (I did not take care of myself like I wish I should have when I was young). With the meds my BP is around 115/70. Cholesterol is not an issue etc., When I started getting out of breath going up a couple flights of stairs, off to Scripps for stress tests. Results included 5 or 6 stents, a pacemaker and a few additional heart meds resolved the issues.
 

One-Off

Tom Curren status
Jul 28, 2005
14,222
10,424
113
33.8N - 118.4W
Thanks for posting that. Several things jumped out to me. The first is that we’re turning out a lot of useless studies. Out of all the authors searched, very few controlled for confounding factors or provided adequate definitions of what was being measured. Consequently, the authors were able to use only 13 studies in their meta analysis. They need to start teaching logic in junior high and high school again. Turning out useless papers is not helpful- quite the opposite.

Second, they sort of found that low-moderate intensity is better for lipid profiles. This means hypertrophy training in higher rep ranges which are more aerobic, conforming the studies about aerobic training in a different way. I also wonder about the effect on body comp- did they measure that? I didn’t read all the way. Most of the subjects were previously sedentary.
I did not read the linked studies, just their meta analysis and I am not qualified to critique their methodologies. I figured PubMed, nlm.nih articles, would be peer reviewed and reliable.

I only see sedentary subjects mentioned in the aerobic exercise studies. Also, I should have mentioned that with regards the aerobic exercise, intensity shows some advantage- from their conclusion - "To directly reduce LDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels, however, the intensity of aerobic exercise must be increased..."

Anecdotally- I've recently gone from doing a 13 mile run once a week to doing a 6.5 mile run once a week. It was not a choice but dictated by circumstances. I do the 10K at a lot faster pace (under 8:00 minute mile) than I would do the 13 miler. So higher intensity. Could that have contributed to my cholesterol drop or was it purely meds?

In the resistance training section they either did not describe the condition of the subject or they were described as "untrained" or "healthy." Untrained does not necessarily mean sedentary. Two years ago I was "untrained" in resistance but was also running marathons.

In favor of resistance training they say, "The authors suggested that additional physiological systems benefited from resistance training, making it potentially more effective." Kind of speculative. I think I will continue to do both. I have a running day and a barbell day and 3-4 days of surfing (with some body weight exercises in the evening- push ups, hollow holds, side planks...)

If you can point me to other (better) studies comparing exercise modalities and their effects on cholesterol or cardio vascular health please link them.


But bottom line- exercise is good for the heart. :jamon: Who knew?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: john4surf and PRCD

PRCD

Tom Curren status
Feb 25, 2020
12,776
8,797
113
Seems like you’ve done everything you can for your heart but you were dealt a tough hand genetically.
 

One-Off

Tom Curren status
Jul 28, 2005
14,222
10,424
113
33.8N - 118.4W
I could only do 30 pushups in 50 seconds so time to give up the cheesecake. :cautious:
That's about where I am. I did three sets to failure today- 30, 25, 20. I expect by the end of summer to be able to do 40.

Ridiculous thing about the study though- those who could do 40 had 96% less chance of heart desease than those who could only do 10. But the cohort studied were male fire fighters in Indiana. What kind of fire fighter can only do 10 push ups????
 

One-Off

Tom Curren status
Jul 28, 2005
14,222
10,424
113
33.8N - 118.4W
Female fire fighters.
"Retrospective longitudinal cohort study conducted between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2010, in 1 outpatient clinics in Indiana of male firefighters aged 18 years or older."

Maybe the 40 push guys were in their 20's and the ten push up guys were administrators in their late 60's? Ten years later having heart issues might not be so uncommon?

That thing you said earlier about study designs....
 
  • Like
Reactions: PRCD

PPK96754

Miki Dora status
Apr 15, 2015
4,699
5,933
113
78
Kauai's north shore ~
When PPK had his heart challenges a few years ago, I decided to check in with Scripps Cardiology (my next door neighbor is a PA in the cardio department). I too have a daily atorvastatin and a few more prescriptions for the heart (I did not take care of myself like I wish I should have when I was young). With the meds my BP is around 115/70. Cholesterol is not an issue etc., When I started getting out of breath going up a couple flights of stairs, off to Scripps for stress tests. Results included 5 or 6 stents, a pacemaker and a few additional heart meds resolved the issues.
I had a Low BP in May, got dizzy, sweaty, drunk-like. Drove myself over to the EMT house down the street from me and told them my symptoms. They hooked me up and my BP was in the Low 30's. Took the ride to Wilcox Hospital. Phuckers didn't turn on the siren!! Got stashed in emergency for a few hours, then had a Cat Scan. Bong machine was loud. All good.
Finally got a room and started feeling better. Got a few hours of sleep and the attending Doctor came in and showed me a graph. Showed a regular heartbeat and then "flat lined" for like a slow count to 3, and then my heart reengaged. Flat lined again, then reengaged. She gave me a funny look and said I might have to go to Oahu for a Pacemaker. .Phuck me!

She then told me my Cardiologist will give me a stress test in the morning and make a decision then about going to Oahu.
Overnight at the hospital and a 0900 hrs stress test. Got to around 3 minutes until I couldn't go on. Cardiologist said I was good to go. Passed the stress test. I was supposed to head to California in two days. My travel partner freaked out. "what if it happens again while we're traveling? I told him to go on without me and finish the trip". He ghosted me. lol. lame.
Still only on 3 daily pills. Amlodipine 5mgs, a Atorvastatin 80mgs and Xarelto, which replaced my daily 80 mgs "baby aspirin" at a whopping $257.00 for 42 pills.

I balked, but then again thought, "it's for your health, dumb ass. Pay the phucken tab" :roflmao:
Back to work, 5 nights, 6+ hours
I'm living in a free world!! :socrazy:
 

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
68,628
23,301
113
62
Vagina Point
My travel partner freaked out. "what if it happens again while we're traveling?"
I would have just said go if I were your travel partner and hoped for the best.

You would be having a heart attack and I'd be saying "You're fine! Come on! Have an aspirin. Drink a beer. Pete!" :dancing:
 
Last edited:

VonMeister

Duke status
Apr 26, 2013
20,251
6,977
113
JOE BIDENS RAPE FINGER
Any exercise is good for your lipid profile. If there is a findable difference in type of exercise it is benign. Food will have a larger impact on your lipid profile.

Here''s the bad news....your ability to change your numbers is very limited and genetics is responsible for a lions share. Perfect diet and health can reduce your numbers by around 10% if your a high responder but generally a statin is you best option. There are so many statins available you can find one that you respond well to and avoid the over hyped and overblown side effects. Statins are probably responsible for saving more lives than any other medicine.
 

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
68,628
23,301
113
62
Vagina Point
That's about where I am. I did three sets to failure today- 30, 25, 20. I expect by the end of summer to be able to do 40.

Ridiculous thing about the study though- those who could do 40 had 96% less chance of heart desease than those who could only do 10. But the cohort studied were male fire fighters in Indiana. What kind of fire fighter can only do 10 push ups????
Have you seen the research on grip strength as a predictor for morbidity?

My grip is so weak.

I should be dead.
 

Mr Doof

Duke status
Jan 23, 2002
24,915
7,826
113
San Francisco, CA
With one of these:

1654795670039.png

Anyway, is current medical thinking still saying that the HDL/LDL ratio is a more useful number when considering the lipid side of heart health?
 

Mike_Jones

Tom Curren status
Mar 5, 2009
11,497
2,323
113
The number one cause of death in the USA (and in the world) is heart desease.

I didn't have to read past the opening sentence to know that this article is snake oil.

Roibust cholesterol is a requirement of all animal life forms, including humans. A study was done sometime around the 1970's which examined bodies of people who died from blocked coronary arteries, It discovered a buildup of amyloid plaque along with tiny shriveled-up cholesterol particles. The mainstream media's conclusion ever since the study has been that "cholesterol" kills people, in spite of any number of intervening studies which found this conclusion to be totally false.

The walls of coronary arteries harden and crack due to glycolysis and bleaching. In most victims both are caused by fructose and alcohol ingestion. The jury is still out on the mechanism which causes the amyloid plaque, but not on the mechanism which causes the shriveled choilesterol particles. They are caused by glycolysis and bleaching in the liver's cholesterol factory.

Again, it's caused by fructose and alcohol ingestion. It has nothing to do with ingestion of ":cholesterol" or fat.
 
Last edited: