If you are currently a member of The Proving Ground, this post may seem unnecessary or redundant. Please pass it along to your endurance buddies. If you are a runner or other endurance athlete, please take a look at the following post. Dr. Arthur DeVany (http://www.arthurdevany.com/) has done some excellent research on this topic. I am a firm believer in brief, intermittent workouts which demand and develop competency in a broad range of physical skills and abilities. Basically, do a lot of different things hard and fast every now and then. It is what attracted me to CrossFit.
The endurance training model is quite the opposite. The concept is simple- train your activity (running, biking, swimming, rowing, etc.) chronically, many times slowly and over long periods of time and great distances. Most physicians will tell you that jogging is great for your health. Endurance athletes are viewed by many as the fittest people on earth. I believe both of these claims are horribly wrong.
The following study describes the increased occurence of ventricular arrhythmias that triathletes have and the subsequent elevation of risk of sudden cardiac death. It seems that death is a frequent companion to endurance competitions. This is sad and unnecessary.
Let me say that I enjoy the occasional 5k road race. They are fun and the parties afterward are usually good. I believe that performing endurance activities occasionally probably does little to no harm and may be fun if you like that sort of thing. However, as I looked around after the 5k organized by Happys last night, it dawned on me that most people there probably ran way too much and could be so much more happy and healthy by diversifying their activities, adding an element of randomness and doing much less work! You can run a very respectable 5k time without having to TRAIN for it!
There are numerous other reasons to leave the chronic endurance training and overexercise in general by the wayside. Such activities were not a part of the lives of our ancestors, speed up the aging process, promote chronic stress and necessitate abmysmal nutrition due to the energy demands they elicit. I will save these for later posts.
In the meantime, just do different activities, hard and fast, every now and then. Acute, not chronic. The natural world does not resemble a metronome. Neither should we.
Ventricular Premature Beats in Triathletes: Still a Physiological Phenomenon?Philip Claessensa, Christophe Claessensb, Marc Claessensb, Hilde Bloemenb, Mieke Verbanckb, Robert FagardbaDepartment of Cardiology, Imeldaziekenhuis, Bonheiden, Belgium, andbDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Leuven, Belgium
Address of Corresponding AuthorCardiology 1999;92:28-38 (DOI: 10.1159/000006943)
Key Words
Arrhythmia
Cardiomyopathy
Diastole
Exercise
Hypertrophy
Abstract
Sudden death is a tragic fact, unexpectedly arising in all age groups. Ventricular arrhythmias are the main cause. At the end of a maximal exercise test more ventricular premature beats were noted in a group of well trained triathletes compared with a similar control group. The etiology is multifactorial. When these ventricular premature beats are associated with specific structural and functional heart adaptations, echocardiographically and electrocardiographically well-documented, then those 'banal' ventricular premature beats cannot longer be considered as a physiological phenomenon. In these circumstances the involved subject is a candidate for dangerous arrhythmias and 'sudden cardiac death'. Purpose: The principal cause of 'Sudden cardiac death' is ventricular arrhythmias. We explore the incidence of ventricular premature beats (VPB) in triathletes, who engage in enforced endurance sports. Methods: Fifty-two triathletes were compared with twenty-two control subjects with comparable anthropometric parameters in function of structural and functional cardiac adaptations. Maximal exercise tests were conducted on a stationary bicycle and a treadmill. During the last two minutes of each test, the VPB were registered. Results: Statistically significant differences emerged in the cardiac structure and function between the triathletes and the controls. There were signs of cardiac hypertrophy and arguments for a supernormally diastolic left ventricular function in the triathletes. The performance capacity was also significantly higher in the triathletes. The maximal heart rate was significantly higher in the control group. The number of VPB was significantly higher in the triathletes. The increased risk of VPB in the triathlon group is caused by several factors: the degree of cardiac hypertrophy, the increased diastolic reserve, the duration of the exercise, the existence of an aortic insufficiency jet and some specific electrocardiographic findings. Conclusions: The triathlete has an increased risk of VPB during maximal efforts. We doubt the traditionally accepted view of the physiological nature of those VPB and suspect that the limit of physiological cardiac adaptations to sport efforts is exceeded with the appearance of VPB. The triathlete with VPB and with specific electrocardiographic and echocardiographic findings is a candidate for 'sudden cardiac death'.
Copyright © 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel
Author Contacts
Dr. Philip ClaessensRubenslei 352018 Antwerp (Belgium)Tel. +32 3 232 28 03, Fax +32 3 233 36 51E-Mail
jan.claessens@village.uunet.be
Article Information
Received: Received: May 18, 1999Accepted after revision: July 20, 1999Number of Print Pages : 11Number of Figures : 5, Number of Tables : 11, Number of References : 30
Journal HomeJournal ContentGuidelines??entry3a??
-->
Editorial BoardAims and ScopeSubscriptionsSearch in this issue
This journal is part of the third subject package of the Karger
Journal Archive CollectionInformation on packages
(PDF)Free
sample issuesFor non-native English speakers and international authors who would like assistance with their writing before submission, we suggest American Journal Experts for their
scientific editing service.
© 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel
Ron sure doesn't.
Power and Grace
I attempt to refrain from the "study wars" as I call them. Your study says one thing. Mine says another. Who's right? Who cares!? 
