Best way to measure health/wellness

[jacob]

@zarathustra - Researchers have increasingly turned their attention on "old" athletes, meaning people who actually keep performing after age 50 ... While there is a decline, it's very small (about 10%/decade) meaning that you can beat 30-40yo potatoes well into your 60s and 70s. This goes for muscle volume as well as VO2max. Rather than debating which is better, just do the upkeep on both. What's the use of muscles if you can't fuel them at spec? What's the use of VO2max if you don't have any muscles to fuel at spec?

[bryan]

also, resting heart rate is probably a really simple test you can take

[7Wannabe5]

Honestly, I still think there's a lot of genetic luck of the draw going on with aerobic capacity because my resting heart rate is consistently quite low (58-62) and pretty much all I have done for fitness for the past 10-15 years (since I've been mostly self-employed and able to mostly schedule my own days) is around an hour of very moderate (nothing that makes me sweat or unable to converse) exercise most days. Or maybe really pushing it doesn't make that much difference over the long run?

[zarathustra]

@jacob - yeah but supposedly there is such a strong correlation between the leg muscle and the VO2 max and that is why for a long time they thought it was the VO2 max (according to this person). (for those that didn't listen to the podcast, cross-country skiers are your fittest lot!)

as for me, for the last year I have been training in powerlifting using Wendler's 5/3/1 program (just the squat, deadlift, bench, & overhead press) w/ some assistance lifts like RDLs, front squats, hip thrusts, pull ups, and mobility work PLUS cycling for transport as well as cycling for exercise (1-2.5 hours) once or twice a week. and some hiking in there, I suppose, when I get a ride from someone else going. every now and then I do 100 burpees in a day by splitting them up (2 sets of 50). I do these comfortably. I find that I am able to maintain my fitness when I travel and don't do much for a week to a month.

[jacob]

@zarathustra - One thing to keep in mind wrt these studies is that there's a stronger correlation between people from the same activity group (athlete, fitness enthusiast, weekend-warrior, couch potato) than there is between people from the same age group. A 60 year old athlete will have more markers in common with a 40 year old athlete than with another 60 year old jogger.

A lot of these studies pick people from the same age group but randomly from the activity-level group. Since there aren't many athletes left even after age 30---a high level of physical fitness is just not a priority anymore in this culture---they need massive sample sizes to capture the few athletes left. Whereas usually they can't afford to test so many people. And if they can, the signal is lost in the noise (type II).

I'm not saying that the result is useless. Well, I guess I'm not saying that it's useless in general. Just that being in the athlete or fitness group would likely mean that one has both better VO2max and better leg strength.---That is, unless one specializes completely, e.g. ultra-running or max squat competitions.

Put it another way ... that a correlation exists on the population level does not imply that it still exists at the conditioned sample level.

The conclusion I derive is that it's better to focus on which is the healthiest group (athlete, fitness, ... potato) and in that group ... if health is important, which ones are the healthiest. E.g. we do know that long distance runners and cross country people (high VO2max) do tend to fall over from albeit typically nonlethal heart attacks at a too young age [compared with random people at the same age]. Although the data is less solid on powerlifters (massive leg strength), they do seem to have a similar affliction.

[1taskaday]

Just saw a photo of Art de Vany on his website at 78 yrs,taken recently.
He is my role model for health as I age.

[7Wannabe5]

So, which group is healthier, fitness enthusiasts or people who engage in a good deal of regular moderate exercise and some manual labor? IOW, convince me that I should push myself beyond the level of an hour of water aerobics/light strength training most days, walking for transportation and digging garden pits as necessary if my resting pulse at age 50 is 58, and the two physical activities I most enjoy and hope to continue into my 80s require good knees. It is also possible that I might be convinced to lower my BMI if I am presented with compelling evidence that it is a better indicator for a middle-aged woman (estrogen protection a factor) than waist-to-hip/height ratios. Otherwise, I shall carry on with my current Big Polish Girl practice, since it seems to afford me both the ability and the luxury of mostly doing most of what I want to do.

[1taskaday]

At 47,my first aim through my excercise/fitness routines is PAIN-FREE.

Is it my imagination or has every second person now days either neck/back/shoulder or hip pain? (Even people in their 30's!!!).

Listening to people moaning about their aches and pains is so frustrating especially when they do nothing to try and help themselves.Usually they want to pop a pill and make the pain magically disappear.

Sorry but not to generalize (but I'm going to anyway),men seem to be the greatest moaners as they age-God protect me from "Grumpy old men".

Chronic pain/aches drain a person of energy and vitality.

It should be the first aim of any fitness routine or measurement of wellness-do you suffer from chronic restricting pain anywhere in the body?If yes fix that first!

7Wannabe,Manual labour is surely as good or if not better than strength training-even more enjoyable if done outside.

[7Wannabe5]

@1taskaday:

I agree with you about the chronic pain and aches. Next on the list, and not unrelated, would be the ability to fall asleep easily and sleep soundly. I was so busy last month doing things I really wanted to do, I found that sometimes I would just come home, topple over and fall asleep on the carpeted floor next to the very low table where I work on my laptop. Then I would wake up and do the next thing. I don't know what the right word for that is. Like I would be thinking, "I'm not 22, so I don't have the stamina to chase 5 year olds all day, walk everywhere I go, maintain 3 gardens, do water aerobics every evening, and date 3 men." but then I would get up again and keep on trying. Like even though I was never pushing myself so completely in the moment, like when I used to run, I was still "wrecking" myself or maybe more like "using myself up" with my overall lifestyle. So, I'm thinking something like "ability to fall asleep on a cement pad" might be a good indicator of overall health and fitness.

[enigmaT120]

It probably depends on the manual labor. Some jobs are very repetitive and don't involve much of the body except what is directly involved, and many others (splitting wood for most people*) aren't symmetrical. On my vacation days when I'm thinning trees -- falling, bucking, limbing, and yarding -- I certainly don't feel any need to lift weights. I use a chain saw for falling and bucking, but hand tools or just hands for the rest. But when I get home from my mostly sedentary job and it's dark, I can't do that so I work out on my $75 garage sale Soloflex. Boring, but it keeps me from hurting myself when I do have real work to do.


* Now you guys have me doing this... this summer I started experimenting with splitting wood from both sides so that my left arm could get more of a workout from lifting my freaking heavy monster mall and aside from the obvious initial lack of precision it seemed to work OK. But there was a big strength difference at first, even allowing for how often I missed when starting to use my left arm more.

[1taskaday]

7Wannabe,I have two words to describe that frenetic activity(even if you do say you love doing all that stuff).

Warning you may not like them...

1st Female martyr and 2nd "Out of balance"

What are you like?

"Topple over,fall asleep on floor,wake up and do the next thing."

Something always "gives/suffers" from working at a pace like this...

Prioritize...put yourself first.

[7Wannabe5]

@1taskaday:

I hear you on the female martyr syndrome, BTDT and lapsed a bit into it a couple weeks ago under stress of multiple simultaneous family crises. Very well do I remember the years when I was working full time, driving long commute, hauling kids to lessons, cooking dinner every evening and had fantasies about locking myself into anonymous women's bathroom stalls and not coming out. That's not what I'm talking about. I was busy all the time in September, and I was loving it. It was like I was in the zone. Like everyday the postman was bringing some new challenging, fun, interesting or sensually fulfilling item to my mailbox. If I could figure out what I did right (if anything) to make that happen, I would definitely do it all the time. It even felt good toppling over onto my carpet, like collapsing on the beach after a hard swim. I'm thinking it may be the case that I am somebody who usually under-paces herself because I put too many things I really don't much want to do on my list. When I have no reason to procrastinate, I want to get up and go, even if my body has hit the wall.

[jacob]

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archi ... as/413971/

[Dragline]

To mix a couple threads, are these people innocent/worthy or guilty/unworthy?

Perhaps we have degenerate alcohol-and-heroin-abusing white junkie problem resulting from cultural deficiencies in suburban and rural areas that have bred a generation of lazy and stupid people.

Compare with urban crack epidemic circa 1990.

[Ego]

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archi ... as/413971/

In January, a CDC Vital Signs report found that alcohol poisoning kills more than 2,200 Americans a year, three-quarters of them adults aged 35 to 64. A 2012 Health Affairs study found that life expectancy for white, female high-school dropouts has fallen so much over the past 18 years that these women are now expected to die five years younger than their mothers did.

Incredible statistics.

A few years ago Wired ran a great story about how Americans have become so accustomed to taking pills to solve problems that the placebo effect has gotten stronger. It got so bad that drug companies began offshoring drug trials because real drugs weren't testing any better than placebos with Americans but worked just fine overseas.

It seems we've now reaching the point where reasonable amounts of pills and drink no longer solve the problems. They have no other choice but to up the dose.

With half of all Americans taking a prescription at least once a month, it may be a good baseline measurement for health and wellness.

[jennypenny]

With half of all Americans taking a prescription at least once a month, it may be a good baseline measurement for health and wellness.

Here's we go again.

I wouldn't rank all prescriptions equally. Sure, there a lots of pills that people take daily to cure lifestyle diseases, and they might be a good indicator of (bad) health. (And let's agree to ignore any related pills to mental health for the moment.) Some pills are to tweak deficiencies that aren't the result of lifestyle, though. Are they really indicators of bad health? Some deficiencies can be fixed with diet and non-prescription supplements, but some can't. Are all supplements an indicator of bad health, or only prescription ones?

Maybe we should distinguish between 'bad' health and 'fragile' health. Someone who needs a prescription supplement for something like iron or B12 or thyroid hormone or low testosterone might be in 'good' health, but their dependence on that supplement makes them more fragile than other healthy people.

---
Full disclosure: I admit I'm not a healthy person, but I'm not healthy in the not-my-fault sort of way and not the did-this-to-myself sort of way, so I'm always trying to adjust your definition so I get included on the 'healthy' list.

[Ego]

Yeah, that's true. For prescriptions to be an accurate measure we'd have to distinguish between drugs that solve problems that could be better solved in another way and those that do not.

[jennypenny]

to be an accurate measure we'd have to distinguish between drugs that solve problems that could be better solved in another way and those that do not.

That's a good way to look at it. I also feel differently about a person who takes lipitor because changing their lifestyle didn't help and a person who takes lipitor so they don't have to change their lifestyle.

[Ego]

That's a good way to look at it. I also feel differently about a person who takes lipitor because changing their lifestyle didn't help and a person who takes lipitor so they don't have to change their lifestyle.

That's where you lose me. Right now we're going through the culture shock of witnessing just how drastically different many Americans are from.... everyone else? The gap seems to be widening. What we consider positive lifestyle changes - eat a pizza only twice a week, don't eat all the leftover Halloween candy and get more iceberg lettuce into your body - is not really a change at all when you consider how we ate a hundred or a thousand years ago.

Last night we went to buy a sofabed on craigslist and found the seller, an obese young woman, sitting on it with a drink in one hand a slice of pizza in the other and the smell of marijuana in the air. I asked about the bike in the corner and she told me about how she is an avid cyclist. The disconnect is astounding. We didn't buy it.

[Slevin]

Yeah, that's true. For prescriptions to be an accurate measure we'd have to distinguish between drugs that solve problems that could be better solved in another way and those that do not.

I have probably been reading too much Taleb recently, but I think this is just a measure of fragility. Fragility in this case would be the second order derivative of health. Those who are not incredibly sick and take medicine and supplements "to keep them healthy" rather than trying to solve the problem by adjusting lifestyle are increasing fragility (because the lifestyle is certainly not helping the situation and negative side effects often outweigh the small gains made by supplements). People who are very sick (i.e. somebody with an autoimmune disease, etc) are already in bad health, and a lifestyle change is not going to change the situation. Thus the side effects of taking a pill won't make things much worse for the person. Thus the medicine is more likely to be good for them than bad for them even over long periods, and so they are decreasing their fragility, or increasing antifragility.

So our metric may need to take into account its first and second derivatives.