Yesterday, felt cool around sunset, breezy, clear, going into the low 60ºs. I was going to attempt a 4x300m tempo but due to the wind and my substandard fitness, I decided to do less. Looking back 2 yrs ago, I did very few 4x300 tempo sets in the fall, maybe 2. But I did more turf running, mostly 4x150 tempo sets across the football field. So that's what I did today, and it reaffirmed how far I have to go. I've often thought, this is the best workout you can get in just over 3 min.
Hoka trainers on
stretches, drills, 2 x100m
4x150m w/ 30 sec rest ~ 23.5, 24, 25.8, 25.4
Adidas trainers on
2x150m w/ 30 sec rest - 22.4, 24
It was pretty hard, considering it wasn't real fast. Past week or 2 I haven't been lifting much or cross training and I feel it. Even at 141 lbs, feel a bit soft and flabby.
I may ease into a 3x a week track training schedule this weekend. Fri, Sun, Tues. Weather sure is perfect. 70º day, 40ºs night, dry and sunny. Swimming season is over but that won't stop me from a quick plunge in next time I have my boat out.
Yearly physical/bloods
I qualified for the $250 award my health insurance gives away for health screenings. My BMI was 22.2, blood pressure 114/70, triglycerides 102, and HDL 53. I missed the glucose parameter as mine was 103, needs to be under 100, but I only needed 3 of the 5, so I got 4. Total cholesterol 192 but my LDL was a bit high at 132. My testosterone tested right in the center of the normal range: total - 668, free - 67. These numbers are really meaningless, just a snap shot. These levels fluctuate greatly depending on time of day. My T has tested as low as 256 (late afternoon) when I was in much better shape. My Dr says I set a high bar for myself and he's right, but I don't get very much constructive feedback from him, as we're living in a very obese and unhealthy area and he sees me as comparatively among the top 1% of my age, no thanks to genetics which gives me the naturally high LDL.
Going to try and step it up a bit. It's October.
Did you fast for the blood work?
ReplyDeleteA fasting blood sugar level from 100 to 125 mg/dL (5.6 to 6.9 mmol/L) is considered prediabetes.
ReplyDelete"no help from genetics"..... I beg your pardon
ReplyDeleteYour LDL is not high; for those of us over 60, generally the higher the better. TC of 300 has a lower mortality than 120. Your Trig/HDL of almost 2:1 is poor though, indicating high inflammation. Reducing carbs and food oils will help reduce this, while upping saturated fats and protein from animal sources. This will help you stay lean year around was well. At 65 I am 8% bf 12 month/year.
ReplyDeleteLDL correlates to CV disease risk. Why is higher better for those over 60? Animal sources of saturated fat (except possibly cheese) also correlates to CV risk. Why then increase saturated fat?
DeleteAge-related mortality and total cholesterol:
Deletehttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-38461-y/figures/3
LDL does not cause CHD:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17512433.2018.1519391?fbclid=IwAR1tqCTQUDYoVvEr9Y2WAfaE1G5cRjasuGpuNEVc8tDrnVwueEtu2Wb76Z4
Correlation and causation are two different things. It is true that there are inconsistencies in the data. One reason is that the lipid profile is a broad distribution of particles, some easier to measure than others. And clearly there is another factor or factors that get them to stick on the inside or arteries. It has long been known that some people with very low cholesterol get heart disease and some with very high cholesterol do not. There are many difficulties with using broad population data to come to a conclusion. To establish causation the path is getting direction from population studies, developing hypothesis, running trials based on hypothesis, then testing the mechanisms in detailed lab studies. The more controlled the study the more you can trust the results. This is an example of a controlled study that has reasonable power. They identified patients with non clinical calcium deposits in arteries through ct scan then treated them with cholesterol lowering drugs. There is a large database of CAC scores and how it translates to CV events and 13 percent should have had a coronary event but non did. The statistics for this study are pretty good and it is a strong indicator that controlling ldl matters. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=10&q=ldl+heart+disease&hl=en&as_sdt=0,13&as_ylo=2021#d=gs_qabs&t=1665229836881&u=%23p%3DmjbhNsnSFt0J
Delete