So, with all the talk about whether or not we're "built to run," do you think that reducing the amount of running (assuming that was true) would lead to an overall increase in population blood pressure? Yes, there are other factors such as diet but, if blood pressure is improved with aerobic activity exclusively (conversely, BP goes up without aerobic activity) and if humans as a whole are doing less of that, wouldn't it follow that BP would rise across the population?
Long-term aerobic exercise controls high blood pressure as effectively as antihypertensive drugs. That’s the encouraging conclusion of an important new study from Germany – the first to investigate long-term exercise as a single therapy for hypertension.
Ten newly-diagnosed hypertensive middle-aged men, who had previously led sedentary lifestyles, were assigned to a three-year aerobic exercise programme comprising two supervised training sessions per week, starting with walking and intermittent slow jogging and building to a maximum of about 60 minutes of long-distance running.
Blood pressure was measured at rest and during cycle ergometry at the beginning of the study period, and then under identical conditions six months, 1.5 years and three years after the onset of training.
The results speak for themselves: after six months of training, pressures during exercise were significantly lower (170/100mmHg compared with 184/107), although BP at rest had not fallen significantly; after 1.5 years of training, there was a significant reduction in resting BP (from 139/96 to 133/91) and after three years resting BP had fallen still further to 130/87, while pressure during exercise had fallen to 167/92.
In total, resting systolic blood pressure (the higher of the two measurements) decreased by 6.5% and diastolic by 9.4% over the study period. The corresponding percentage falls for BP during exercise were 9.2% and 14%. According to the authors, this effect was ‘more intensive than what we found using various antihypertensive medications’.
They regard the large reductions in BP during exercise as particularly encouraging, since BP during exercise has been found to correlate more closely with organ damage than resting pressures.
Other studies examining the effects of aerobic exercise over shorter study periods have noted only mild reductions in resting BP. And the German researchers believe that the duration of exercise intervention may be the most important factor in reducing BP.
They are in no doubt that it is the exercise, rather than any associated factor, that was responsible for the dramatic falls in blood pressure. Weight loss is often recommended as a route to healthier blood pressure, but could not have been a factor in this study since the subjects experienced no significant changes in body weight during the training period.
They conclude: ‘The reduction in BP in hypertensive patients seen after long-term aerobic training therefore implies that exercise has a beneficial effect in the management of hypertension and that pharmacological treatment can be deferred or probably prevented in hypertensive subjects who regularly engage in aerobic sports activities.
‘Regular exercise implies a beneficial effect in the management of hypertension that is comparable to that of drug therapy. An additional advantage of physical activity is other healthy “side effects” that are known to influence cardiovascular risk. The disadvantage of taking drugs daily with its risk of side effects and costs may be avoided, and patients feel that they can affect their wellbeing and are not victims of disease.’
Med Sci Sports Exerc, vol 36, no 1, pp4-8, 2004
Okay, there's no comparison with anaerobic exercise and they used previously sedentary subjects so possibly ANYTHING would help them... but I was trying to get some discussion and feedback!
I just bought the December 6 edition of Time magazine and the title is "The Year in Health." The main story is about high blood pressure in America, a "crisis...spinning out of control."
I was on BP meds for 11 years and was able to get off about two years ago but it seems that my readings are sliding back up again and, frankly, it scares the shit out of me! Mostly, I guess I'd prefer to go through life with no problems and then just die in my sleep at a ripe old age but we don't always get to control these things.
I worked hard and got pretty fanatical when I got the BP down before and got off the meds. I guess I've slacked off some since then but I haven't gained a bunch of weight or changed my diet THAT much. I've worked out religiously but shifted to more weight training(anerobic) than aerobic and I'm still wondering if the standard recommendations are actually correct afterall. "They" always talk about doing 20-30 minutes of AEROBIC exercise 3-4 times a week and I figured that was just because there wasn't much data on the benefits of anerobic exercise, although some has been posted on forums like these. Now I'm shifting back to doing more aerobic exercise just in case but maybe the problem is diet or the inevitability of genetics.
Originally posted by Q.: They regard the large reductions in BP during exercise as particularly encouraging, since BP during exercise has been found to correlate more closely with organ damage than resting pressures.
Other studies examining the effects of aerobic exercise over shorter study periods have noted only mild reductions in resting BP. And the German researchers believe that the duration of exercise intervention may be the most important factor in reducing BP.
More... so does this mean that the higher BP that occurs during weight-lifting is damaging our organs and we should start waiting in line for the elliptical machines???
I'll offer an opinion, although, 1) I can't get the entire article without paying for it, so I have only the abstract to comment on, and 2) I think that bryanc could offer a much more informed opinion than I can, if he chooses to do so.
Anyhow, I'll comment on a few things. 1) It's a small, uncontrolled study. This limits the applicability of the conclusions. 2) The patients studied were previously sedentary. As such, the results apply to those who were previously sedentary and undertake regular aerobic exercise(not sure how precise a definition for sedentary can be offered). The results wouldn't apply to people who develop hypertension despite having been aerobically active, i.e., the results wouldn't apply to most of us. 3) I can read only the abstract, so I don't know what the precise exercise protocol was. As such, I don't know if the exercise protocol is one that previously sedentary people will be able to adhere to over the long term----this is an important consideration in treatment planning, unfortunately. It's easy to recommend exercise, but it's hard to ensure that people will actually stick with it.
There may well be other glaring or subtle flaws in the study that I've missed, especially since I've read only the abstract.
Quote:
They regard the large reductions in BP during exercise as particularly encouraging, since BP during exercise has been found to correlate more closely with organ damage than resting pressures.
I think that the correlation they're talking about is one in which those who are already hypertensive, and who demonstrate a more extreme hypertensive response to exercise tend to have more profound end-organ morbidity. But I'm not an expert in this area and I haven't read nearly enough about it to know if my impression is correct.
Quote:
So, with all the talk about whether or not we're "built to run," do you think that reducing the amount of running (assuming that was true) would lead to an overall increase in population blood pressure? Yes, there are other factors such as diet but, if blood pressure is improved with aerobic activity exclusively (conversely, BP goes up without aerobic activity) and if humans as a whole are doing less of that, wouldn't it follow that BP would rise across the population?
Seems like a sensible enough proposition, although it makes the a priori assumptions that 1) we're getting less and less aerobic exercise, and 2) the incidence of hypertension is increasing. I don't know if 1 and 2 are correct, but they could well be.
Originally posted by russ: Seems like a sensible enough proposition, although it makes the a priori assumptions that 1) we're getting less and less aerobic exercise, and 2) the incidence of hypertension is increasing. I don't know if 1 and 2 are correct, but they could well be.
First of all, I felt the same way about the study... the conclusions seemed shaky based on the abstract alone. Is this a peer reviewed journal? According to Time magazine, #2 is the case.
As to my own BP, I've read/heard that it's supposed to be higher in the morning. Mine was 107/73 with a pulse of 56 first thing this morning but it rises during the day so the higher numbers could just be a response to what goes on during my day.
For example, did you know the average man or woman's blood pressure goes up higher during masturbation than during actual sex? Heart rate goes up much more during coitus -- especially sex with the man on top -- but BP rises most during masturbation, especially if someone else is doing the diddling.
In other words, if someone is stimulating your privates, your BP goes up more than if you were doing your own dirty work, but even the latter provokes a bigger BP surge than intercourse.
That's not what anyone asked, but when you're full of useless information, as I am, some of it is just bound to spill out and leave a stain.
Here's an answer to the question asked, from Len Kravitz, Ph.D., in the July-August 2001 issue of IDEA Personal Trainer magazine:
"[P]rogressive resistance exercise modestly reduces resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure. It is is important to note that even small reductions in blood pressure have a beneficial effect in reducing cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality."
He goes on to say that circuit training is not better than traditional strength training in reducing BP.
The actual numbers, based on a meta-analysis of 11 studies:
ST reduces systolic (the top number) by about 2 percent and diastolic BP (the bottom number) by about 4 percent.
ST raises blood pressure dramatically (as high as 320 for systolic BP and 250 for diastolic BP) while you're doing it, but that's actually not a bad thing.
The lower your maximal exertional blood pressure (according to a 2000 study in American Journal of Cardiology), the closer you are to death.
Oh, and eat your fruit and vegetables. Those have been associated with a slower rise in blood pressure over a period of years than would occur among men not eating them.
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: but BP rises most during masturbation, especially if someone else is doing the diddling.
You didn't provide a source for that one... should we even ask where you got your information???
Quote:
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: He goes on to say that circuit training is not better than traditional strength training in reducing BP.
Does he address aerobic vs. anaerobic training or is circuit training, in this case, considered a form of aerobic exercise?
Quote:
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: ST reduces systolic (the top number) by about 2 percent and diastolic BP (the bottom number) by about 4 percent.
ST = Strength Training...?
Quote:
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: The lower your maximal exertional blood pressure (according to a 2000 study in American Journal of Cardiology), the closer you are to death.
Huh? That seems strange to me. If while doing the same lift at different points in time ones BP is actually lower, that's a bad thing?
I've also wondered if there's any benefit to giving your blood vessels a good stretch from the rise in exertional blood pressure while lifting to help keep them more elastic...?
Quote:
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: Oh, and eat your fruit and vegetables. Those have been associated with a slower rise in blood pressure over a period of years than would occur among men not eating them.
Mom was RIGHT! (dammit!)
Of course, does this imply that when not eating fruits and veggies one would likely be eating something else to reach satiation... such as burger and fries (SUPER SIZE ME!)? That's a whole other issue.
Originally posted by Q.: </font><blockquote>quote:</fon t><hr />Originally posted by Lou Schuler: but BP rises most during masturbation, especially if someone else is doing the diddling.
You didn't provide a source for that one... should we even ask where you got your information???
You got me there. I got it from a printout of a paper that lists five sources at the end, but but doesn't list the author or journal. So I'm not sure where the material originated.
Quote:
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: He goes on to say that circuit training is not better than traditional strength training in reducing BP.
Does he address aerobic vs. anaerobic training or is circuit training, in this case, considered a form of aerobic exercise?
No, he doesn't consider circuit training a form of aerobic exercise, just a form of ST (which indeed means "strength training") that comes closer to aerobic exercise than traditional sets and reps.
Aerobic exercise has a much more dramatic effect on BP -- 8 to 10 points for systolic and 6 to 10 points for diastolic.
But you also have to do a lot more exercise to get that effect -- 30 to 45 minutes a day "most days of the week," albeit at a low intensity. A good hump would probably be enough, if you could last at least a half-hour, and find someone willing to do it "most days of the week."
(If you come across the latter, and it's not a straight cash transaction, you have my everlasting admiration.)
Quote:
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: The lower your maximal exertional blood pressure (according to a 2000 study in American Journal of Cardiology), the closer you are to death.
Huh? That seems strange to me. If while doing the same lift at different points in time ones BP is actually lower, that's a bad thing?
It's not the same lift -- after a while, that would cease to be your maximal exertion. I got into this a bit in my award-winning "Death by Exercise" feature for MH.
People whose heart rates have the greatest range from high to low have the healthiest hearts. The unhealthiest people have the narrowest range -- their resting heart rate is continually elevated and their maximal heart rate from exertion isn't very high.
Apparently, it works the same way with blood pressure. We know people with the highest blood pressure, chronically, are screwed. (I also read that Time magazine feature.) And now Dr. Kravitz shows that those whose blood pressure doesn't spike up the way it should during exercise are the weakest sheep in the flock.
In other words, highs and lows are good. That midrange is deadly.
I've also wondered if there's any benefit to giving your blood vessels a good stretch from the rise in exertional blood pressure while lifting to help keep them more elastic...?
That would be my guess. I saw one study that said heavy lifting makes your blood vessels stiffer and less elastic, but I find it very hard to believe that this is a life-threatening adaptation. I mean, show me the pile of bodies of weightlifters who control their weight and don't take steroids.
Quote:
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: Oh, and eat your fruit and vegetables. Those have been associated with a slower rise in blood pressure over a period of years than would occur among men not eating them.
Mom was RIGHT! (dammit!)
Of course, does this imply that when not eating fruits and veggies one would likely be eating something else to reach satiation... such as burger and fries (SUPER SIZE ME!)? That's a whole other issue. </font>[/quote]That same study did show that eating red meat raises blood pressure.
But I'm wary of all the studies linking red meat or saturated fat to this or that catastrophic heart condition, unless the researcher looks at people in neutral or negative energy balance vs. those who're gaining weight.
Weight gain, unless it's deliberately induced by adding muscle mass, is bad for you, no matter what you're eating to produce the excess flesh.
And weight loss is almost always good for your health. (I mean, if it's chronic diarrhea that causes the weight loss, that's bad ...)
If you lose weight while eating meat and lifting weights and living a clean and healthy life, you're still going to get all the benefits of weight loss. You just won't be very popular with certain groups of exercise and health professionals.
Originally posted by Lou Schuler: But you also have to do a lot more exercise to get that effect -- 30 to 45 minutes a day "most days of the week," albeit at a low intensity. A good hump would probably be enough, if you could last at least a half-hour, and find someone willing to do it "most days of the week."
Hmmm, maybe I can get a prescription for that!
Thanks for your responses, both entertaining and informative!
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Lou Schuler:
but BP rises most during masturbation, especially if someone else is doing the diddling.
You didn't provide a source for that one... should we even ask where you got your information???
I think you can be our case study , B. Put on a blood pressure cuff, and spank the monkey to your heart's content. Let us know what the readings are [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Originally posted by russ: </font><blockquote>quote:</fon t><hr /> quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Lou Schuler:
but BP rises most during masturbation, especially if someone else is doing the diddling.
You didn't provide a source for that one... should we even ask where you got your information???
I think you can be our case study , B. Put on a blood pressure cuff, and spank the monkey to your heart's content. Let us know what the readings are [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font>[/quote]All in the name of science, right doc?
Originally posted by Q.: </font><blockquote>quote:</fon t><hr />Originally posted by russ: </font><blockquote>quote:</fon t><hr /> quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Lou Schuler:
but BP rises most during masturbation, especially if someone else is doing the diddling.
You didn't provide a source for that one... should we even ask where you got your information???
I think you can be our case study , B. Put on a blood pressure cuff, and spank the monkey to your heart's content. Let us know what the readings are [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font>[/quote]All in the name of science, right doc? </font>[/quote]Maybe we could get the results published in the SW Texas Journal of Sex Research with you as lead author and subject [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Linear Mode
