Been running for 45 years as a "sub elite" college \post college \master\grand master.
Few years back my calcium score was 1200 and my cardiologists freaked out.
At the same time research started coming out with a potential of high inflammation stressing the liver resulting in increased plaque output. Apologize for for hack job description.
There seems to be a few posts on this subject in more detail. Especially a few weeks ago.
BTW I know of four runner friends who died of brain cancer.
I would keep running as much as you want, but start getting more into weight lifting and core and balance exercises as get into the masters years and older age. get regular checkups and blood work done in case something genetic is going on you need to treat
I'll be the first to admit that this isn't a scientific study, but I've seen an alarming number of older lifelong competitive athletes with health problems. A-fib, other heart rhythm issues, enlarged rupture-prone aortas, calcified arteries, and so on.
On the cosmetic side, a large number of them look way older than their actual age and have leathery, wrinkled faces and hands.
While I have seen similar things in lifelong runners, I think they are the exception to the rule.
My fellow runners in their 60s and 70s are far better looking than their sedentary peers and in far better health. That was the case 20 years ago when they were in their 40s and 50s when we first started running together.
However, even though extremely competitive seniors are far healthier than their sedentary peers, my extremely competitive running peers seem to have a disproportionately large number of heart and immune disorder problems.
Why?
Of course, it could just be I'm looking at a small sample of the overall running population but here's my take on why lifelong seriously competitive runners seem to have more problems than lifelong recreational runners. I think it's just because we push our bodies harder.
As our cells age, they become less efficient at producing energy and less efficient at removing the waste byproducts of energy production from the body. As competitive runners we produce massive amounts of energy byproducts (compared to our sedentary peers and even to recreational runners) that must be rapidly removed from the body or else they cause long-term health problems.
When you're young, you can survive on the belief "if the furnace is hot enough, it will burn anything." But with age, you can no longer get away with that approach.
Eating healthy is a big part of the solution of staying healthy as we get older, but as extreme exercisers reach advanced age, it's not enough.
As we age... 60 for some of us, 50 for others... our cells become so inefficient that that they simply cannot get enough of the nutrients they need from even the healthiest of diets to operate to keep every system of the body operating as efficiently as they did when we were in our teens.
To me, this does not mean that you should quit training seriously and become a recreational runner instead of a competitive runner. To me, it means that serious runners need to supplement their diets with nutrients that have been shown to reduce inflammation, counter the effects of antioxidants, and allow muscles to recover faster from extreme exercise.
Since there are some studies that seem to show a possible link between various types of cardiovascular disease and extreme endurance exercising, I take several supplements recommended by my cardiologist for overall heart and arterial health. Also, starting at age 70, I started seeing a cardiologist twice a year to try to catch any minor heart problems before they become major heart problems.
If you're on Medicare, this is free! Granted I have to come out of pocket for the supplements and for a few of the cardiac tests but overall it's far, far less expensive than open heart surgery... or a funeral, for that matter.
EDITED: Oh and as another poster said... you must add weightlifting to your routine if you're not already doing so.
This post was edited 5 minutes after it was posted.
What is the definition of “training seriously?” I’ve trained “consistently” for the past 50 years and feel great. Mid 60’s and still putting in 30 miles per week with one medium/hard effort. 87,000+ lifetime miles.
Generally an average of 1 hour of moderate training or half an hour of intense training a day.
If you run 4-5 miles a day at 8-9 min/mile pace from Monday-Friday and race a 5K on Saturday, you'll be fine. But if you train like a typical college runner with 70+ miles and 2-3 hard workouts each week, you'll almost certainly regret it if you keep doing that for 20+ years.
Sort of agree on the mileage but it depends! I have had people scare me into not running for a few years due to hip/joint replacements on their end.
I quit running at 18, then took it back up at 33. I missed out on 15 years of PRs but I also feel fresher at 40 and am not chasing PRs from age 18-22, etc.
I was in ROTC in the fall of 2004 as a junior in college, and my major told me he quit running and said it was bad for you due to joint/knee/hip issues. He ran a ton on pavement and concrete, and the Army's PFT is all about intense running each time...
What helped me get into fairly good shape for my first half, 1:45:06, was just walking every day before my 12-week build in the summer of 2017! And that half was unusually hot, 72'F at 7:30 a.m. that morning. Would have gone faster...!
I do think running in moderation, over the years, will keep you healthy. Cross-training, PT, rolling and a good diet are what is needed to sustain the big mileage (50 and up).
This post was edited 22 seconds after it was posted.
I disagree with your worldview and belittling the integrity of jobby hoggers, sub 3:07 ‘Thon wannabes, Pure Hate channelers, and holy grail seekers of the perfect race.
Shame on you for trying to turn the noble pursuit of personal athletic excellence into something to be laughed at. You sir, are a joyless unhappy clam stuck in the sand jealous of the dolphins who swim freely above you in the glittering sea. So Sad!
I should shoot for a 3:07 marathon just for the ability to be like Greggggggg! ;)
In all seriousness, I think there is virtue in just trying to get better--no matter your time. Going from a 4-hour marathoner to 3:30 is solid for some people and a huge win, in terms of lifestyle change, even if they never touch the times on LRC.
This post was edited 4 minutes after it was posted.
While I have seen similar things in lifelong runners, I think they are the exception to the rule.
My fellow runners in their 60s and 70s are far better looking than their sedentary peers and in far better health. That was the case 20 years ago when they were in their 40s and 50s when we first started running together.
However, even though extremely competitive seniors are far healthier than their sedentary peers, my extremely competitive running peers seem to have a disproportionately large number of heart and immune disorder problems.
Why?
Of course, it could just be I'm looking at a small sample of the overall running population but here's my take on why lifelong seriously competitive runners seem to have more problems than lifelong recreational runners. I think it's just because we push our bodies harder.
As our cells age, they become less efficient at producing energy and less efficient at removing the waste byproducts of energy production from the body. As competitive runners we produce massive amounts of energy byproducts (compared to our sedentary peers and even to recreational runners) that must be rapidly removed from the body or else they cause long-term health problems.
When you're young, you can survive on the belief "if the furnace is hot enough, it will burn anything." But with age, you can no longer get away with that approach.
Eating healthy is a big part of the solution of staying healthy as we get older, but as extreme exercisers reach advanced age, it's not enough.
As we age... 60 for some of us, 50 for others... our cells become so inefficient that that they simply cannot get enough of the nutrients they need from even the healthiest of diets to operate to keep every system of the body operating as efficiently as they did when we were in our teens.
To me, this does not mean that you should quit training seriously and become a recreational runner instead of a competitive runner. To me, it means that serious runners need to supplement their diets with nutrients that have been shown to reduce inflammation, counter the effects of antioxidants, and allow muscles to recover faster from extreme exercise.
Since there are some studies that seem to show a possible link between various types of cardiovascular disease and extreme endurance exercising, I take several supplements recommended by my cardiologist for overall heart and arterial health. Also, starting at age 70, I started seeing a cardiologist twice a year to try to catch any minor heart problems before they become major heart problems.
If you're on Medicare, this is free! Granted I have to come out of pocket for the supplements and for a few of the cardiac tests but overall it's far, far less expensive than open heart surgery... or a funeral, for that matter.
EDITED: Oh and as another poster said... you must add weightlifting to your routine if you're not already doing so.
Most letsrunners plodding long distances day in and out — to make it concrete, let’s say running more than ~3 hours/week (beyond which no health benefits have been demonstrated) — fundamentally don’t understand the difference between these two statements…
1) Most runners are healthier than the average land whale American;
2) Running too much is not good for the body.
… and take refuge in ambiguously fudging the two and telling themselves they are doing what they love. Good for you if you actually love pointlessly plodding day in and out more than all the other rewarding things you could be doing in life.
I'll be the first to admit that this isn't a scientific study, but I've seen an alarming number of older lifelong competitive athletes with health problems. A-fib, other heart rhythm issues, enlarged rupture-prone aortas, calcified arteries, and so on.
On the cosmetic side, a large number of them look way older than their actual age and have leathery, wrinkled faces and hands. On the performance side, 2+ decades of intense training wears down your muscles, joints, and tendons. The best masters runners are often those who didn't train much in their youth and still have fresh legs, and the exceptions to this like Lagat usually take long extended breaks after each season.
Those issues aren't exclusive to runners either. If anything, the cardiovascular issues among long-time cyclists and XC skiers are even more common. The one common trend is that prolonged endurance training isn't good for your health and isn't worth it from a performance standpoint.
When you're young, perhaps from your early/mid teens through your early/mid 30s, go ahead and put in those miles. Chase those victories and PRs, enjoy the time with your college teammates, and dream of making the Olympics or Olympic Trials. But after that, hang up the spikes and just jog or hike to stay fit. A few sub-par late-career years aren't worth a heart valve replacement.
You’re right. Exercise is terrible for you and running will kill you.
You should absolutely just inject yourself with at least 8 boosters instead. It’s safe and effective, so be sure to SPIKEVAX yourself OP.
I wonder if some of the health problems can be attributed to heavy ingestion of processed carbohydrates and sugar, with less in the way of healthy fat and protein.
This! A lot of "healthy runners" have terrible diets and then justify it with, "Look at me! I'm a fit runner!". They look good outwardly but, internally, their plumbing is clogged or those processed foods with nitrates and sugars are fueling conditions that they cannot feel yet.
1.45 for a half marathon at age 40 if you're male is not fast.
Maybe you need to be a bit less cautious. Running in your twenties was never something to be scared of.
All the metrosexuals on this board scared of running. There are other sports which are more technical where you can challenge your skills without load bearing as much as running. Running is one of the most gentle of pastimes you can do.
I quit running at 18, then took it back up at 33. I missed out on 15 years of PRs but I also feel fresher at 40 and am not chasing PRs from age 18-22, etc.
What’s “15 years of PRs” worth? Jack squat, except in your head of course.
Not reading this full thread for my own sanity, but let me just add my anecdotal pov: as an avid runner and hypochondriac, I have had a few appointments with my Ivy-league educated cardiologist to go over my long-term health concerns with marathon training /endurance training. She said endurance training is preferable to not being physically active at all and none of the studies I referenced are super credible or comprehensive. She has no reservations at all about endurance training and fully supports it. Her only note was that very rarely endurance runners can develop calcium buildup in their arteries/hard / hardening of arteries, but she said this can happen with age even if you’re not an endurance athelete so it’s something to be aware of but not reason to not run. So I say as long as you don’t have an anatomical defect and are aware of any changes to your body, keep on running.
I'll be the first to admit that this isn't a scientific study, but I've seen an alarming number of older lifelong competitive athletes with health problems. A-fib, other heart rhythm issues, enlarged rupture-prone aortas, calcified arteries, and so on.
On the cosmetic side, a large number of them look way older than their actual age and have leathery, wrinkled faces and hands. On the performance side, 2+ decades of intense training wears down your muscles, joints, and tendons. The best masters runners are often those who didn't train much in their youth and still have fresh legs, and the exceptions to this like Lagat usually take long extended breaks after each season.
Those issues aren't exclusive to runners either. If anything, the cardiovascular issues among long-time cyclists and XC skiers are even more common. The one common trend is that prolonged endurance training isn't good for your health and isn't worth it from a performance standpoint.
When you're young, perhaps from your early/mid teens through your early/mid 30s, go ahead and put in those miles. Chase those victories and PRs, enjoy the time with your college teammates, and dream of making the Olympics or Olympic Trials. But after that, hang up the spikes and just jog or hike to stay fit. A few sub-par late-career years aren't worth a heart valve replacement.
I’m so on board with this. Yes you are correct, it won’t be a popular viewpoint on letsrun…but it needed saying…and repeating. And good on you for having the courage to say it.
I'm sure that there will be many who either close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears to try and ignore it, or who will come right out and attack your view as you have dared to criticise an activity that they are emotionally linked to and have invested a great deal of time and effort.
That is the one area that you didn’t mention in your post. I wonder how many are actually addicted to the activity of running, to the detriment of other things like family, friends and career? A good few I reckon. And I say this from the standpoint of being a good way down that exercise addiction road in my earlier years, so I can recognise the signs quite well in others…
Official guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American College of Sports Medicine state that every adult should accumulate 30 minutes or more of moderate-intensity physical activity on most,...
I turned off comments because there were too many to respond to effectively - sorry. Older athletes can damage their hearts by training too hard, provoking ...
In my 47th year of running. I’ve run over 100,000 miles.
raced all over the world. Probably, the only thing I ever did right. I never considered at the beginning the health benefits.
I still don’t although I see the cringy pain of people passing by me and looking at this runner who is clearly wasting his time if he’s worried about time or health.
A quote borrowed from Grover Cleveland Alexander fits. If I don’t continue trying to do it, “ I’ll go all to pieces”
This is basically a twist on the aged old running is bad for your knees saying. Yeah, there have been runners with knee problems but there have been plenty of other folks that never have run a step in their lives that develop knee problems. Basically, genetics.
Number one risk factor for knee osteoarthritis (aka wear and tear of the knee joint) is obesity.
It has been shown repeatedly that osteoarthritis is not more frequent in runners, contrary to popular belief.
