Yes, we know endurance activies (which is what the Maasai engage in vs. sedentary strength training) enlarges the arteries and the heart muscle – both are part of our evolutionary biology as it allows a higher per stroke volume of blood. (Endurance athletes also have higher blood volume which accounts for the larger arteries.) If you’re a more efficient endurance animal, you’re a more efficient hunter/gatherer. Same with hunters who haven’t eaten – their autophagy mechanisms are on full throttle, ketones driving their endurance and mental sharpness. (There’s a fun 1 hour show on Disney with Chris Hemsworth & Dr. Peter Atilla on this topic where Hemsworth fasts for four days before catching his meal to break the fast. Atilla shows Hemsworth’s bloodwork to validate his state of ketosis during the hunt, etc.)
But, when I first read the story of the Maasai, I did some digging and there’s no scientific validation backing the theories of their activities creating the larger arteries and keeping members of the tribe alive. Another paper – can’t recall – said we don’t know how many of the tribe would actually start dying of CVD by their late 50s or 60s because of their circumstances.
Individuals studied in the US who had enlarged or larger arteries still suffered CVD like the Maasai but did also had heart attacks, so the theoretical protection wasn’t there.
Example? I sat next to Dr. Ken Cooper – the father of US aerobics – on a flight and asked him about Fixx (along with Steve Prefontaine, Dave Scott, etc., who all went to the Cooper Clinic) and he said Fixx had a “strong heart” and large arteries from their testing, etc., but he also said his clinic also saw Fixx was having coronary issues and wanted him to follow up with his cardiologist immediately. Fixx said his running would take care of any issues (which was the mindset at the time) and passed away a few weeks later. (Cooper talked about Pre and his off the charts VO2 max and incredible testing…felt he could have been the best ever.)
It’s hard though to equate individual variances with overall statistics.
The simple logic (total blood flow though an artery), is that given a known level of total plaque, the larger the artery, the higher the blood flow would be. It doesn’t promise unlimitted longevity, merely that the critical point would be reached later in life, than it would have been if that artery was smaller in diameter.
But fluid dynamics state otherwise. More plaque (inside the arterial wall) continues to build up and restrict blood flow and where the arteries “bend” induces more damage to already injured arterial walls due to force of the fluid in those vulnerable locations.
Also, larger arteries can’t offset the plaque injuring the endothelial cells which protect the inside of the artery and release nitric oxide, which in healthy arteries optimizes blood flow. Larger arteries won’t stop plaque rupture, either…
I wonder, though, how many HIT people actually train with the kind of intensity that was employed in that West Point study?
My recollection from reading the report was that the no-rest training sessions were absolutely brutal, with subjects sustaining extremely high heart rates throughout the whole session, due to being rushed between a large number of machines.
Put your average middle aged client through the same routine, and the dropout rate would likely be very high. I don’t think your average Super Slow studio, doing a big 5, comes close to the intensities used at West Point. It probably isn’t doable or sustainable over the long run for most people.
Didn’t say that you did. But there are those who reference the West Point study to prove that HIT is effective as cardio, and then use or sell a much milder version.
Yes, of course a chunk of plaque can still break loose, but larger arteries do allow enough blood flow given the same level of plaque so the cardiac tissue stays perfused with enough oxygen. No matter how we figure it, larger arteries are better than smaller. It doesn’t guarantee infinite perfection, it’s just better than smaller.
No the artery walls incur damage, that is what causes the plauge to stick to them.
Yup, what nw-lfter said. I did see also where taller people statistically also tend to have less arteriosclerosis. One of the reasons suspected is because they have wider arteries as a result of their height. Wider arteries a plus.
No upper limit to the benefits of physical activity:
“In this study, we found no evidence of a threshold for the inverse association between objectively measured moderate, vigorous, and total PA with CVD. Our findings suggest that PA is not only associated with lower risk for of CVD, but the greatest benefit is seen for those who are active at the highest level.”
Lifelong endurance sport participation Is a much different concept than physical activity. It doesn’t take much looking around to see people who have worked long hours all their life without a trace of coronary vascular disease.
Quote:
“ We found a linear dose–response relationship for PA, whether measured as moderate-intensity, vigorous-intensity, or as total volume, with risk of incident of CVD. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals for increasing quarters of the PA “
The original Pub Med post was fine, but the poster seemed biased against steady-state cardiovascular activity. Of course the original poster did nothing to clarify this, thus losing credibility with more educated opinions on cardiovascular conditioning. It is my opinion that a beneficial conversation about cardiovascular conditioning with members of traditional high intensity training groups cannot be had. The myth that sufficient cardiovascular conditioning can be had with resistance training has been too entrenched with half-truths and outright lies.
That should get the old SuperSlow blood flowing!
Kaatsu that!
True. It seems likely, however, that the people in this study who were tripling the government’s exercise guidelines are pretty likely to be endurance sport enthusiasts.
Besides, it doesn’t change the scientific facts that cardiovascular conditioning is accomplished best by cardiovascular conditioning activity. Resistance training is not the choice of methodology for cardiovascular conditioning. I know cardio is not resonating with the HiT community, but please no more myth building. I will no longer rehash cardio on any HiT forum. There are many other items of equal interest to me.
Atp…please show me where my bias against steady state cardio occurs ( by the way I do steady state cardio myself).
Be careful Atp YOUR bias is showing. When it comes to certain topics you clearly are on a hair trigger and see arguments when they are not even there.
That is why I had asked you if you had even read the title of the post, which clearly claims to do the cardio, but not too much. Now where does it state not to do steady state? Surely we would all agree, without it actually being openly stated, that 30 to 40 minutes of steady state cardio, 2 to 5 times a week, is not overdoing it? Certainly when putting it in context against chronic marathon / triathlon / running streak types that do far more.
Atp…
You will no longer rehash cardio on any HIT forum?
I think that we will all believe that when we see it.
This post is a prime example. You’ve just been triggered by the word cardio…EVEN when the post stated to do cardio.
You are too easily wound up, to the point where on occasions like this, you’ve wound yourself up, even when there is no need.
Maybe you need to go for a nice walk or relaxing jog to calm down…
I took this as a response to my comment about the Oxford Study I posted, not a comment on the study you posted. I do think it seems likely most of the participants in the Oxford Study who were tripling the government’s recommended activity goals were endurance athletes of some sort. It is hard to get that much activity otherwise given modern sedentary lifestyles, but since the Oxford Study didn’t divide the participants in this way, we don’t know for sure.