Is cycling bad for the heart??

[PaulSB]

I suggest that there are potential heart issues for cyclists, indeed for everyone. The schwerpunkt is whether those are issues of any concerning magnitude, whether there's a differential between the great unwashed and cyclists (and within that sub-sets of cyclists) and whether any change in cycling behaviour (in this context) might or should be considered. Like @fossyant , the OP and you, I suspect, I'll aim to mitigate as many of the key risks cyclists face (to ALARP), which are . . . . . off topic.

What a wonderful word, glad I Googled it. Yes, agreed and i do make every effort to avoid cycling calamity all of which is off topic.

Personal experience proves to me as a survivor of a heart attack and brain haemorrhage the high fitness level cycling has given me far outweighs the as yet unproven risk to a tiny minority of long distance riders. I'd hazard a guess any elite endurance athlete in any physical discipline faces the same potential issue.

The rest of us can just get on with it!

 

[YellowV2]

There are equal or greater risks just living I would suggest, travelling around by whichever means you choose, crossing roads etc. In fact doing nothing and being sedentary is probably an even worse!
As the article suggests the research study is into highly trained athletes not the majority who are recreational to various degrees.

 

[gzoom]

There are equal or greater risks just living I would suggest

Actually I would say pretty much everything in life is balance of risks, contrary to internet forum beliefs I personally think there is rarely (if ever) a real ‘right vs wrong’ situation. Everything is shad of grey, and certainly in medicine its more about risk management than anything else. My real value in my job is essentially risk advocation, anyone who thinks they know the answer to anything in my experience is usually wrong.

For actual mortality risks, your actually annual risk of death doesn’t go above 10% till you hit about 90, and even at 90+ you are more likely to live for another year than die. The balance really only swings to more than 50% annual mortality rate once you hit your mid 90s.

 

[Jameshow]

There are equal or greater risks just living I would suggest, travelling around by whichever means you choose, crossing roads etc. In fact doing nothing and being sedentary is probably an even worse!
As the article suggests the research study is into highly trained athletes not the majority who are recreational to various degrees.

They just called me up and said they need my data asap....just saying...!🤣🤣🤣

 

[Gwylan]

Looks like the scientific evidence∆∆∆∆ suggests cycling is dangerous for your health!!

Oh dear me. Life is fatal, make the most of it, death is inevitable, that's it.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

They just called me up and said they need my data asap....just saying...!🤣🤣🤣

They need couch potato controls 😂

 

[YellowV2]

Actually I would say pretty much everything in life is balance of risks, contrary to internet forum beliefs I personally think there is rarely (if ever) a real ‘right vs wrong’ situation. Everything is shad of grey, and certainly in medicine its more about risk management than anything else. My real value in my job is essentially risk advocation, anyone who thinks they know the answer to anything in my experience is usually wrong.

For actual mortality risks, your actually annual risk of death doesn’t go above 10% till you hit about 90, and even at 90+ you are more likely to live for another year than die. The balance really only swings to more than 50% annual mortality rate once you hit your mid 90s.

View attachment 683865

The graph and statistics are brilliant, who would have thought the older you are the higher the risk of death, priceless! We need to be told this, what an age we live in.

 

[Jameshow]

The need couch potato controls 😂

Pretty much on point ATM!🤣🤣🤕🤕

 

[Jameshow]

The graph and statistics are brilliant, who would have thought the older you are the higher the risk of death, priceless! We need to be told this, what an age we live in.

More research needed obvs!!

 

[vickster]

More research needed obvs!!

And a GCN video . Must be a conspiracy theory

 

[Ajax Bay]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41569-020-0354-3
[We don't know. Emboldening mine, and I'm an endurance athlete and exceeded the "usual" (aka conservative, not too much that people will be deterred from attempting) most my adult years, including recently.]

Abstract​

Regular aerobic physical exercise of moderate intensity is undeniably associated with improved health and increased longevity, with some studies suggesting that more is better. Endurance athletes exceed the usual recommendations for exercise by 15-fold to 20-fold. The need to sustain a large cardiac output for prolonged periods is associated with a 10–20% increase in left and right ventricular size and a substantial increase in left ventricular mass. A large proportion of endurance athletes have raised levels of cardiac biomarkers (troponins and B-type natriuretic peptide) and cardiac dysfunction for 24–48 h after events, but what is the relevance of these findings? In the longer term, some endurance athletes have an increased prevalence of coronary artery disease, myocardial fibrosis and arrhythmias. The inherent association between these ‘maladaptations’ and sudden cardiac death in the general population raises the question of whether endurance exercise could be detrimental for some individuals. However, despite speculation that these abnormalities confer an increased risk of future adverse events, elite endurance athletes have an increased life expectancy compared with the general population.

Key points​

• Regular, moderate, aerobic physical exercise reduces cardiovascular and all-cause morbidity and mortality.
• Endurance exercise imposes huge demands on the cardiovascular system and, therefore, endurance athletes develop profound adaptations to exercise.
• Sinus bradycardia, large QRS voltages, modest increases in left and right ventricular cavity size and high peak oxygen consumption are well-recognized features of an endurance athlete’s heart.
• Some lifelong endurance athletes have an increased prevalence of high coronary artery calcium scores, myocardial fibrosis, right ventricular dysfunction, atrial fibrillation and sinus node disease compared with healthy non-athletes, with unknown consequences.
• Long-term outcome data and information from studies identifying the concurrent factors that predispose healthy endurance athletes to developing these abnormalities are needed.

https://www.outsideonline.com/healt...ndurance-athletes-heart-health-research-2021/
https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/n...t-largest-artery-differently-in-men-and-women
Professor James Leiper (BHF Associate Medical Director) commented:
"For athletes who train in endurance exercise, their hearts must work harder to pump blood around the body – and research has shown that in some cases, this can cause changes to the heart.
“This new finding shows the impact this could also have on the main blood vessel in the body and how this differs between men and women. Further research will now be needed to determine the cause of vascular stiffening in male athletes and to assess the impact this might have on other areas of the cardiovascular system before we can make a fully rounded conclusion.
“It is important to note that exercise is proven to reduce the risk of heart and circulatory diseases, helping to control weight and lower both blood pressure and cholesterol. Its benefits far outweigh any potential risks, so the general advice remains to continue moderate intensity exercise regularly.” [NB No advice (because no evidence) of whether to discontinue high intensity exercise, so get out on those spring hill climbs!]
Bike clean and prepped; weather good; tyres pumped: have a great weekend's riding.

 

[Ajax Bay]

The graph and statistics are brilliant, who would have thought the older you are the higher the risk of death, priceless! We need to be told this, what an age we live in.

Medical profession on point, adding value by "risk advocation" perhaps, but failing to communicate. "Is-cycling-bad-for-the-heart?"

 

[gzoom]

The graph and statistics are brilliant, who would have thought the older you are the higher the risk of death, priceless! We need to be told this, what an age we live in.

Risk of death at even 80 is only 5% per year. Data helps everyone to understand risk, without understanding risk you cannot make any real decisions expect based on hearsay and maybe following the guidance of Internet experts .

Data (and especially the digital version of it) is what the world is built on (in the west at least).

 

[matticus]

View attachment 683865

And yet women STILL moan about "male privilege" !?!

 

[Ajax Bay]

Risk of death at even 80 is only 5% per year. Data helps everyone to understand risk, without understanding risk you cannot make any real decisions expect based on hearsay and maybe following the guidance of Internet experts .

OK - so from the risk of death graph you shared and the data therein, please could you help us with an example of a "real decision" one might make "based on" an understanding of those data. 'Non'-decisions might include increasing attention to funeral plans, EPAs, inheritance planning, reviewing private healthcare arrangements (if any), talking to family, maybe.
If there is science showing that cycling/exercise more than a certain quantity or intensity is 'bad for your heart' then please share. That would be 'data that helps everyone to understand risk [and allow] real [informed] decisions'.