Health news

E

Eye

Guest
Active, middle-aged men able to complete more than 40 push-ups had a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes -- including diagnoses of coronary artery disease and major events such as heart failure -- during 10 years of follow-up compared with those who were able to do less than 10 push-ups during the baseline exam.

Source: Science Daily, feb 16th 2019
 
Eh I'll probably be lucky to live till I'm 65. My poor health and bad genetics play a key role. Not kidding as all type of cancers kill my male relatives in their 60's.:(
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,185
Location
Spudlandia
Had to try (fearing for the worst lol, been ages since i did push-ups). I managed 45 (balls to the floor, so to speak). I could probably do 2-3 more if this had been earlier in the day.

I do some weightlifting weekly so it would have been a bit embarrassing if i didn't pass 40.. 45 is nowhere near good though, i could do 100+ in my 20's (~27 years ago), been slacking off for many years (started training again last year in December).

@Couchpotato;; then healthy food + active life (doesnt need to be weight lifting) is very vital. Megadosing Vitamin C can also be important.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
3,263
Location
The land of rape and honey
News? Being in shape is good for your health?

I didn't know that ;)

I guess I can live longer now, hurray!
 
Well push up is a different measure of being in shape. If you took the time to read the article they talk about long distant runners not having the physical strength to do push up. I realize that you consider runners out of shape but whatever....

News? Being in shape is good for your health?

I didn't know that ;)

I guess I can live longer now, hurray!
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
7,758
Location
usa - no longer boston
I do know some of you take extra vitamin D.

Vitamin D and preventing fractures, cardiovascular benefits, cancer prevention, for the latest details see this article:
Vitamin D supplements aren’t living up to their hype
Recent studies say taking extra amounts of the nutrient may not be a boon for every body
Source: ScienceNews, January 27, 2019

Also mentioned in the article:
At high doses, “there are some studies that do show harm,” says Davis, of the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements. Participants in the VITAL study, which included a daily dose of 2,000 IUs, did not appear to have any major side effects. But some pills are sold at much higher amounts, as high as 50,000 IUs to be taken weekly.

And some pills contain the less-accessible form of vitamin D produced by plants, called D2, not the version made by the human body, called D3.

One paper published in 2018 in Cancer Research examined 19 studies of vitamin D’s association with prostate cancer. That analysis found that higher levels of vitamin D were associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer, although the researchers say this could be due to detection bias — perhaps the men with high vitamin D were more health conscious and more likely to get screened for the disease.
[…]
Rosen, from the Maine Medical Center, doesn’t think the supplements will make a dramatic difference in health, but agrees that a 2,000-IU supplement won’t do harm either. “When I go and talk to doctors I say, ‘How many [of you] are taking vitamin D?’ The hands go up,” he says. Most of them. When he asks why, the doctors respond, “ ‘Eventually it’s going to be proven that it prevents something.’ ” Belief in vitamin D runs deep.

That said, there are certain populations that doctors already know may need supplements to reach even minimally adequate levels: babies who are exclusively breastfed, some people with dark skin, some who live in northern latitudes and people who don’t have much exposure to daylight because they live in institutions such as nursing homes or hospitals.
[…]
In the end, people have to consider their own personal circumstances, she says. Herman doesn’t immediately suggest supplements when a patient appears to have inadequate levels of vitamin D. Often these patients are overweight, which could be affecting their vitamin D levels. “I usually recommend they get more physically active and get in the sun first,” she says. “If people could master the basics, they wouldn’t have to worry about supplements.”
 
Vitamin D should be taken with Vitamin K-2. Some reports suggests it's not good to take D it if you are low on Vitamin K. So it's a rather uninteresting article since Vitamin K is not taken into account here it seems.

Also,

"1,100 IUs of vitamin D (that’s about twice the recommended dietary allowance, or RDA)"

This is wrong.

"A statistical error in the estimation of the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) for vitamin D was recently discovered; in a correct analysis of the data used by the Institute of Medicine, it was found that 8895 IU/d was needed for 97.5% of individuals"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28768407

I wouldn't go over this dosage though just to be sure.

Like always when buying vitamins, do your research... There's a ton of shitty vitamin products that are much better avoided. The Vitamin D i buy is in gelcaps + fatty acids (required for the body to even take up this vitamin) and it has vitamin K-2 (MK-7) and Astaxanthin.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
3,263
Location
The land of rape and honey
My health issue went away completely after taking Vitamin D supplements for around 6 months.

Of course, I have no idea if that's the reason - but it's the only tangible explanation that makes any kind of sense.
 
If you don't see much of the sun, vitamin D supplement is a necessity.
If you live in sunny area, taking it will cause a disaster in your organism, it's as simple as that.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
I saw the push-ups article and was on the news also. I made sure I could do 40 right after I saw the news :) I use to be able to do a lot more in my 20's but doing 40+ push-ups at the beginning of your workout is good enough for me. Plus, I do them on dumbbells so I can go lower.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2010
Messages
2,838
Location
Wolf Light Woods
Well push up is a different measure of being in shape. If you took the time to read the article they talk about long distant runners not having the physical strength to do push up. I realize that you consider runners out of shape but whatever….

It's really not that complicated. If you can do 40 push-ups, you're probably in good shape.

I don't know which article you're reading - but I'm pretty sure the majority of long distance runners can do a decent amount of push-ups.

If we're talking about Marathons - that's another thing. That's extremely bad for your body - as far as I'm concerned.

I didn't study any science to come to that conclusion. I tend to use my brain instead.
 
You are a confused puppy and I'll leave it at that.

It's really not that complicated. If you can do 40 push-ups, you're probably in good shape.

I don't know which article you're reading - but I'm pretty sure the majority of long distance runners can do a decent amount of push-ups.

If we're talking about Marathons - that's another thing. That's extremely bad for your body - as far as I'm concerned.

I didn't study any science to come to that conclusion. I tend to use my brain instead.
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
7,758
Location
usa - no longer boston
Back
Top Bottom