| Re: Leg muscle/heart rate question?
gds wrote:
> Maggie wrote:
> > RonSonic wrote:
> > > On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:31:39 GMT, "chris c"
> <cchris@frontiernet.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >I am a newbie. Just got into cycling last summer (again) but
did
> it
> > when I
> > > >was younger (10 yrs. ago). I am trying to do at least 10 miles
per
> > day now.
> > > >I did more during the summer sometimes. Schedules are so hectic
of
> > course. I
> > > >ususally use a stationary cause of the crappy weather. I am
> riding
> > a
> > > >comfort bike but would like to get a racer this spring. I used a
> > cannondale
> > > >racer in my younger days when 50 mile rides were nothing. I lost
a
> > lot of
> > > >weight since summer which keeps me very interested and I feel
> great!
> > > >My first question is ... how long does it take to get some leg
> > muscle
> > > >definition? My legs are not muscular, but they are skinny now. I
> try
> > to use
> > > >a harder setting on the bike sometimes. Does this increase
muscle
> > faster?
> > > >Second question..... Can you overdo a workout by getting your
> heart
> > rate up
> > > >too fast (ex: heart attack) ? Sometimes I push myself hard , I
> think
> > almost
> > > >to the limit. I never get faint , but I think I get borderline
> dizzy
> > > >sometimes.
> > >
> > > How long's a string and can it be too long?
> > >
> > > Just how old are ya and what kinda shape are you in?
> > >
> > > Not that I could give you any specifics anyway, but it's good to
> know
> > whether
> > > we're talking about a 40yo in crappy shape or a 55yo in pretty
good
> > shape.
> > >
> > > At 49 and recovering from many years off the bike there are a few
> > things I can
> > > tell you. First your recovery will suck compared to years ago. I
> can
> > get great
> > > benefits from 2 intense rides a week, much more than that just
> makes
> > me sore
> > > without any resulting strength or speed payoff. Might as well
just
> > whack my legs
> > > with a stick for all the good it does. At least not more than two
> > weeks in a
> > > row.
> > >
> > > And it is intensity that you need to increase muscularity and
> > strength. Making
> > > circles with your feet, fast or slow will not do it. There's
> cycling
> > training
> > > tips and advice all over the internet, some of it actually makes
> > sense and
> > > works. Google.
> > >
> > > When I first started back on the bike last year I had recently
quit
> > smoking
> > > (again) and the game was having my cardio and legs take turns
being
> > the weaker
> > > link. At one point I got into good enough shape that I needed
more
> > leg to work
> > > the CP system hard enough to really feel it. I'm riding 4-5 times
a
> > week and 2
> > > of those are usually some sort of high intensity work like
sprints
> or
> > intervals.
> > > I'll only do one day of intensity if I do something otherwise
> > draining that week
> > > like an extremely long ride. Or three days of intense work if I
> know
> > I won't be
> > > pushing it the next week. I think that's probably the sort of
> thing
> > you're
> > > ready for, get in some strength and speed work.
> > >
> > > As for heart attack risks, hell if I know. My guess is that if
> you've
> > been
> > > pedaling hard enough to max out the heart rate and start losing
> > composure
> > > without dying by now you're probably okay. I do suggest that you
> keep
> > that sort
> > > of thing on the trainer until your bike handling skills are back
to
> > expert.
> > > That's how people get hurt, out riding their brain's oxygen
supply.
> > >
> > > You know the standard warning "Do not begin this or any other
> > exercise program
> > > without the advice of a physician." Well I figure I didn't ask a
> > doctor before
> > > taking up chain smoking and a sedentary lifestyle, I don't figure
I
> > need his
> > > permission to get back in shape. If I'm going to keel over from a
> > heart attack
> > > rather it be after a ride I enjoyed than a cardio stress test
that
> I
> > had to pay
> > > money for.
> > >
> > > Ron
> >
> >
> > Hey, a nuclear cardio stress test is a great thing. My brother was
a
> > chain smoker all his life...he decided to go for the test and they
> > found two blocked arteries. He would have had a heart attack.
They
> > roto rootered the blockages and now he is fine. I would never
> suggest
> > anyone do anything without getting a stress test first if they are
> over
> > 40. I have another friend who never smoked, he is active, he lives
a
> > decent lifestyle of exercise and diet and he had two blockages as
> well.
> > He is only 44 years old. He had the blockages cleared and now he is
> > back to exercising. They both prevented heart attacks by getting
> that
> > test. It's fairly easy to go in and roto rooter a blockage to
> prevent
> > a heart attack down the road. Its not that easy recovering from a
> > massive one. A little prevention is a good thing. Go getted Nuked
> in
> > that stress test. This is your Mommy speaking. Its a few hours out
> of
> > your life and could save your life. Now that you changed your life
> > around, you want to keep living, don't you?
> > Maggie.
>
>
> Funny, you go get the test and they find problems and they fix them.
> But where were the symptoms? There's some data coming out that all
this
> intervention leads to very little improvement in life expectancy but
a
> big improvement in the interventionists bank account.
> Sure, if you have problems intervention works-but there is a lot of
> evidence that the number of surgeries is more related to the number
of
> surgeons than to the incidence of desease. (And I hereby lump
invasive
> cardiologists in with the surgeon even though they are technically
not)
Oh! and there is also evidence that the risk of a "cardio event" is not
very well correlated with the high blockage. In fact most such events
happen with blockage in the 40-60% range, a range in which most
cardiologists test will not register as a "problem"
There are real problems with cardiac desease. But there are also not so
valuable "interventions" and "solutions" Beware!
|