Mark Sisson claims that training is no guarantee of health . I found this article posted in the Rivendell Reader, a quarterly magazine. Although the focus is on "endurance training," the implications for all bikers who are seeking a healthier lifestyle are loud and clear.
Sisson appears to have all kinds of fitness credentials, however the food supplement business he runs on his site, gave me pause. (My Dr. holds that for those with a balanced diet, both vitamins and food supplements are a waste of money) The linked article focuses on endurance training, but elsewhere Sisson makes the same points about bikers who overdo it on weekly rides.
Addendum: Rivendell's Grant Peterson had this take on Sisson's article: "Mark Sisson didn't actually say it, but if you buy his message & apply it to riding, then maybe the long death marches that aren't that fun in the first place, aren't that good for you in the second place."
Peterson then rejects the high carbo biking diet and so-called cardio- healthy "high pulse" approach to exercise, both of which he claims are systematically destroying the health of bikers. Sisson's sobering list of "disturbing coincidences?" which may be linked to overtraining include collapse, early onset of "old age" diseases, and sudden death of famous bikers. Peterson reevaluates the whole notion of biking as exercise, concluding: "I'll enjoy slow rides more, and I won't feel guilty when I'm not near my max effort."
So the gauntlet is thrown. Where exactly are we headed on our bikes?
Bikes and accessories, reviews, touring, discussions, photos, open comments.
Interesting article with many good points. Probably true although I don't think it applies unless you are a very hard core trainer. It does lend support to keeping the exercise reasonable, keeping carbs to a minimum, and including some upper body workout in the mix - which I have started to do at HealthSport - makes me realize I have arms as well as legs. Good discussion and worth thinking about as we move through the aging process. Mark Sisson is fun to read, as well. Thanks, Gordon.
ReplyDeleteTim Haskett
Tim, How does one determine a "reasonable" level of exercise that is appropriate for one's age? Are there signs of over exercising? Is there a point where a cyclist begins to do damage to the body? Finally, what is your take on the calcium deficiency that some attribute to cycling? I've seen my share of "bird-like" older cyclists...
ReplyDeleteIt seems like the underlying assumption of the article is that the only worthwhile goal is long life. If so, then quality of life is being ignored. For example, the mental benefits of choosing an exercise goal and working to achieve it...are totally discounted.
ReplyDelete10:02 Peterson's point is that the quality of life is being discounted--if not completely ignored-- by over-zealous cyclists.
ReplyDeleteI suppose we all want a great quality life but we disagree on how to get there.
In the end I realize that something out there is going to get me; I just don't want to feel I'm helping it along in the name of "quality of life." So I take the following as a Draconian warning; not a challenge.
"Chronic high-level training naturally depletes glycogen, which causes the body to release the adrenal hormone cortisol to cannibalize muscle tissue in order to help make new glucose (gluconeogenesis). Besides tearing down valuable muscle, chronic cortisol release carries with it a litany of negative effects. It suppresses immune function, which opens the door not only for short term upper respiratory infections, but may leave the door open for longer term, more serious issues (asthma, cancer, heart disease [which we know has a strong inflammatory component]). Chronic cortisol release also reduces calcium uptake by bones, and it's not surprising that so many runner/triathletes -- especially women -- have low bone density."