'Serious cycling keeps you young, say scientists'...

[nez]

Ps before anyone asks I do in Essex I wouldn't in Derbyshire! And I don't think I'm all that fit.

[irc]

Wooooo!! Never realised I was superfit!!!!

Well - I'm only approaching 54 But I'm sure I'll still be able to average just over 10mph next year.


And another sign of fitness ....

A typical test for ageing, for instance, is to see how fast someone can get up from a chair, walk three metres, turn and walk back and sit down. Taking more than 15 seconds indicates ageing,

I think my 85 yr old dad could pass that test. Of course he isn't typical as he walks round the golf course 2 or 3 times a week.

[cycleruk]

I would have thought any reasonably fit cyclist could do that. It is only 10 mph average but obviously you would have to keep going for the 6 & 1/2 hour. I was just looking at a few 100k hilly audax rides (Populaires) that I have done and times ranged from 5'-16" to 6'-25" for the very hilliest one . (includes refreshment stops).

[LollyKat]

According to http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cycl ... 59058.html
A super fit over 55 can do 100k in 6.5 hrs. Who qualifies?

That's just the men. Women are super fit if they can do 60km in less than 5.5 hours. As I can do 100k in 6 hrs does that make me super super fit?

[nez]

No it makes you a chap.

[LollyKat]

Mmmm, I think my husband might have something to say about that....

[Grandad]

A super fit over 55 can do 100k in 6.5 hrs.

Is this a flat 100k or a very hilly 100k?

At 79 with a heart condition I can do the flat one comfortably but no chance of one with more than 2 significant hills. (I had no trouble with ultra hilly audax rides until 6 years ago but not in 6.5 hours)

[beardy]

I think that they were using Audax rides as a sort of vetting for the subjects. 100k in 6.5hours is your standard flat Audax. You do of course get more time to do a hilly Audax, I wonder if they remembered this when selecting the candidates. Not that it matters as a hilly Audax in its longer time span is more of a challenge to your fitness than a flat one in 6.5 hours.

[Al Wright]

On the benefits of cycling, I read of a study carried out some years ago in the Netherlands, involving elderly cyclists, which indicated that in addition to the physical fitness aspects, cycling seemed to improve some "background brain function". The report also included the observation that some of those benefits could also be achieved by standing on one leg for prolonged periods!
Well, I much prefer to ride a flat 100km in 6.5 hours than to stand on one leg for 1 minute.

[bigjim]

I don't think cycling is any sort of holy grail. It's just a part of keeping busy as you get older. Being active IMO is a big part of staying healthy in old age. I don't believe for one minute that regular intense excercise is good for you. I'm not aware of any pro athletes living any longer than the general fit population. Reg Harris was dead at 72 and I've just read the history of Charlie Westlake [his memorial sportive today] a lifelong hard rider. He died at 78 which I suppose is pretty average. Tommy Godwin at 63!
Look at those who recieve 100 year telegrams. Most of them normal people who have had a busy/active lifestyle. Steady and regular for me. Goes for exercise as well.

[beardy]

Those who are receiving their 100 year telegrams would probably have spent their first 50 years without cars. Cars were really becoming widespread in the 1970s and prior to that most people were getting exercise just going about their normal daily lives.

Now machines are doing so many of our manual tasks for us that most people are only getting significant exercise if they make the effort of doing it deliberately and cyclists are one of the groups of people doing this. The recent rise in popularity may be why they are singled out as a group in this study.

It may just be a way of saying idle people are going to die early but a lot of idle people dont even know they are idle!

[mjr]

It is going to be interesting to see what happens now the first "non cycling generation" is hitting middle age from the looks of some graphs (UK cycling hit a low point around 1970 and has been bumping along the bottom most of the time since).

[pwa]

I think Bigjim has it about right. Athletes push their bodies too hard and don't usually enjoy a long, healthy later life. For health, moderate exercise on a daily basis is ideal. But diet is important too. A fry-up is bad news, whether at home or in the middle of a ride.

[Audax67]

I think Bigjim has it about right. Athletes push their bodies too hard and don't usually enjoy a long, healthy later life. For health, moderate exercise on a daily basis is ideal. But diet is important too. A fry-up is bad news, whether at home or in the middle of a ride.

I was just beginning to wonder how many years a PBP takes off one's life. OTOH when I was stented in 2008 the cardiologist told me that without cycling I'd have made his acquaintance 10 years earlier.

[beardy]

I think they are talking about different ways of pushing your body too hard.

On PBP the bulk of the riders are only exerting themselves a fair bit below their maximum heart rate and seeing how long they can keep going like that.
I hope the damage referred to here is from athletes who are pushing themselves to, or beyond (can it be exceeded?) their maximum heart rate too frequently.