I'm committed to taking the rest of the month off from the track, probably my longest break from running in about 4 years, and it'll be about 7 weeks.
In the mean time, I'm doing Stairmaster and Concept 2 rower. Usually the 20 min hill program on the Stairmaster (level 16), then some weights... focusing on the upper body, core, hip flexors, abductors, etc... and other areas I've trained less on during the season. Then I do a 2000m set on the rower in 8:40ish. Not a killer workout by any means, just enough to stay somewhat fit and burn some calories. I can get this done in 45 min or so. This is a workout easy enough to do daily when I can.
Lipids
After the season ended on 8/11, I binged a bit on stuff I normally don't eat. Toast and butter, a few pastries, pizza. After cleaning up my act for a few days and having the customary fast, I did a lipid profile blood test and it came back borderline high, thanks much to a family history of high cholesterol. My total was 218, LDL (bad cholesterol) 135, HDL (good cholesterol) 51, triglycerides 118. My LDL has always been too high for comfort... ranging from 99 to 140 in the past several yrs and my ratio of 4.27 is above the optimal although better than average.
I dislike these comparisons to 'average'. They are meaningless and because the 'average' in America is in such poor health, I don't want to be any part or close to average.
My doctor has given me an option to have a cardiac CT scan for a risk assessment. This will yield a 'calcium computed tomography score.' I'm surprised that a lot of health professionals I talked to about this test didn't even know what it was. It's not particularly reliable as it often gives false positives and negatives. Positives such as indicating 'severe' when it's not really severe - as in the case of my father's test where he received a sky high severe level score of 1800+ but a cardiac catheterization revealed only moderate blockage (50%). Any score over 400 is considered high risk. False negatives result when soft plaque goes undetected. Also, there is a cancer risk of just having the chest radiated ... and I've had a fair amount of xrays in the past 7 yrs.
I probably will go through with the the test just to see where I stand ... approximately. My doc is sort of pushing me to go on statin medication and I am NOT interested in doing that, as I have read it is not conducive to athletic training, may damage the liver, cause muscle soreness, susceptibility for muscle/ tendon damage, hurt recovery, impair aerobic conditioning, etc...! One physician friend told me that the long term benefits of life extension use of statin drugs was mixed and inconclusive. Plus, once you commit to using statins, just getting off them increases risk, so better to not start.
Partly due to aging, the risk factors increase. My risk assessment with the same numbers was significantly less if you were to make the same calculations for a 51 yr old instead of a 57 yr old.
Borderline high cholesterol is a risk factor, doesn't mean I am diseased, or at least not terribly. I have worked tremendously hard as an athlete, have excellent blood pressure for a 57 yr old (usually 116/60 in the mornings) and good resting pulse (in the 50s in the mornings). So, I think I can improve these lipid numbers with other means than drugs. I seriously detest the mentality that one can achieve license to indulge in a gluttonous lazy lifestyle by taking a pill. Also, that you can 'eat your way to perfect health' by being a vegan... or train as an athlete to impeccable health. I'm pretty certain there is more to it, especially heredity and genes, but the number one priority is to at least know where you stand with medical tests and assessments. Otherwise, you're living in self indulgent ignorance - risky behavior - especially if you know your parents, uncles, aunts, had/have heart disease or cancer. Nothing is for certain. I'm reminded that life is fragile as a few friends have recently had bouts of severe cancer when they seemed to be living very healthy lifestyles and seemed to be low risk. Risk is something that you shouldn't guess at. Your life depends on it.
All that said, I've been a near vegetarian for most of my adult life. Still haven't eaten beef or pork in 26 years. Been vegan, mostly vegan + fish, recently vegan + fish and occasional poultry.
Exercise:
When not training, spend off days doing stuff on the feet, home projects, walks, bike rides, etc..
Diet:
Eliminate -
- all dairy except low or non fat products
- off season binges
- fried foodAdd -
- oat bran cereal with ground flax
- niacin supplements
- plant sterol and stanol supplements
- replace butter with olive oil or Benecol
- pickled foods or apple cider vinegar
- maybe an occasional glass of wine
Next lipid test won't be until beginning of Feb. '18. CT scan this week unless I chicken out. We'll see how it goes. I'm always good for a challenge.
As frustrating as it is, you know you can't pick your genes (see signature). *Very curious* how similar your situation is to mine. I have only "slightly better" cholesterol/BP numbers despite year after year training/appropriate(?) dieting/etc., for my next marathon. Next time you're back in NY, we should chat. - cousin Steve
ReplyDeleteHey Steve, It's those Novavesky genes, I'm sure. Both my parents are on statins and have a 'average' amount of heart disease for their age. As I said, not particularly interested in being average. Blood lipid numbers are a risk factor, not an indication of disease. One can have high LDL but if it doesn't stick, no disease. The only way to know for certain I guess is an invasive cath scope. I'm going to try a calcium CT scan, but still won't show soft deposits. We just do the best we can.
ReplyDeleteBill -- I would recommend getting the NMR LipoProfile test. It provides much more detail
ReplyDeleteand insight into the LDL number. LDL particle size is very important; your LDL number may be OK if your particle size pattern is large. See this article for more details:
http://drjockers.com/nuclear-magnetic-resonance-test-risk-heart-disease/
I completely agree with you on the statin issue. Physicians just look at that total number (which is old science anyway) and immediately push for statins. The anti-statin crowd is actually focusing more on the triglyceride/HDL ratio (1.0is ideal for athletes) . Yours is OK but the triglyceride number is high for your active lifestyle. There are ways lower that without medication. Also, see this article about Tim Russert, ex- Meet The Press host. Had a prefect cholesterol number (105) and died of heart attack at 58. Triclycerides were off the chart though and low HDL number. I think he was on statins.
Check out Tim Russert’s lipid profile:
LDL–68
HDL–37 (up from the lower 20’s)
Total Cholesterol–105
http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/tim-russerts-fatal-heart-attack-was-preventable-he-followed-antiquated-advice/2403
I know when you were a 5K guy your cholesterol was much much lower, in the 180 range if I remember correctly. Assuming your other lifestyle parameters are the same, that suggests your current training is not optimized for cardiovascular health. Suggest to evaluate all other aspects of your lifestyle between then and now - were you more active, did you hike more, more physical projects, etc, for clues on how to reverse your concerning trend...joe p.
ReplyDeleteMy cholesterol was 180 3 yrs ago. I ran 5ks only for a very short time (4 months) 10 yrs ago. Cholesterol and risk increases with age. No doubt that training helped but it also started breaking my knees down.
DeleteUpdate: Calcium CT scan result is zero. Perfect result, no hard plaque.
ReplyDelete