Is there any cardiac risk for older rowers?

[robhely]

I'm 53, 72kg/179cm and don't have any family history of heart disease or cardiac arrest. I'm quite fit, but I'm finding that the erg pushes me harder than any previous forms of exercise - even competitive road cycling. In a recent 2k test, my heart rate got up to 184, which I didn't even know was possible. I'd previously thought that my HRmax was 180. It aways drops down again quickly when I stop pushing.

I've recently heard about a "calcium test", which measures calcium buildup in the major heart vessels, which is apparently am excellent measure of overall heart health. The test is quite expensive in Australia, so I'm wondering if it's necessary.

Is the best (and crudest) test of heart health to just push as hard as we can and see if we fall over? Or, once in our 50s and older, is it sensible to get some tests done before going full pelt on the erg?

[MPx]

Dangerous game asking a bunch of unqualified ergers about a medical matter - if you're really bothered about it then seek a medical opinion or two.

Having said that I'm firmly in the gung-ho camp. There are a few well known cases of unfit people with a competitive mindset getting off their couch, going full beans on day 1 and having a heart attack (Andrew Marr being a UK example). On the other hand, taken as part of your fitness training regime we all know that we need to stress the body a bit and then allow it to adapt to be able to handle the load - which makes us better. I've been doing this stuff since 1997 (and played other sport before that). I'm used to it and at 66 still do two hard sessions a week that raises my HR above 95%. My 10k for the CTC on Monday saw me clock my 170 MHR during the final sprint. Of course I may (obviously will!) keel over one day, but until that happens I'll keep trying as hard as poss to stay as fit and strong as poss.

[Ombrax]

If it bothers you enough to ask about it here, then certainly it's worth asking your primary care physician (or whatever that sort of doctor is called in Australia) what he or she thinks. I think it comes down to this: what will it take to reassure you that to a reasonable degree of confidence you're fine? The doc saying "Don't worry about it," or do you need a "Numbers OK" result from a test? Or would you still worry, even if the test came back saying that all was normal?

For the record (one data point) I'm 61 yrs old (with no family history of heart disease) and don't worry much about heart-related issues while on the erg. I've been up near 100% HR enough times without issues, so I assume that I'll be fine. That may be incorrect, but so far nothing bad has happened (yet)...

[Joebasscat]

I’ve had the calcium test and think it’s a good one. I’m not a doc, so just my opinion, which isn’t worth much. As you probably know that test measures actual calcium buildup in your arteries, versus some blood work that measures cholesterol and the results of that are somewhat dubious, but a great way to sell statin drugs. Last time blood work for me showed cholesterol levels slightly elevated. But I had the calcium test results that showed marginal calcium buildup. The protocol would have been putting me on the statins, without the calcium test. As was stated, we are all going sometime.

I chase the hard stuff no more than twice a week and never back to back. I can sit in zone 5 for extended periods and I enjoy those type workouts,(Think 30r20) but I worry a little about how intelligent that is. Running it up on short intervals, not so much. As most will say, check with your doc if overly concerned.

[Carl Watts]

Statistically the risk starts to increase rapidly after the age of 45.

Pays to use a heartrate monitor and get to know your limits and training bands and watch for anything unusual during exercise.

I still think you can push it to the edge of your ability, its just about knowing the limits and just train regularly.

Any exercise is better than sitting on the couch, just don't over do it and have plenty of recovery days.

[Sakly]

Statistically the risk starts to increase rapidly after the age of 45.

But what people are covered by that statistics? Mostly average people with bad diet for the last 45 years? Or active people, who probably were aware of the need to get a well balanced diet of real food?
I think the biggest factors for cardio vascular risks come from diet and inactivity. Don't know about the statistic, but I am convinced that risk of cv diseases is hardly linked to age itself (means degradation of the body regardless what you do), more to cumulative bad effects through the years of life due to bad habits.

[JaapvanE]

I'm no medical professional, but this guy is: https://youtu.be/Y6U728AZnV0

I took his advice, as many books on longevity also are in line with his proposed approach.

[jamesg]

No. If there's risk, it comes with NOT exercising. And if we don't smoke, don't drink and don't over-eat, there'll be plenty of time for exercise.

Exercise on ergs also helps to prevent accidents by maintaining a little strength and agility; and by reducing the need for more risky forms of exercise. Naturally better blood flow can't damage brain and other functions either.

I don't use a HR belt now, but keep Watts down to 120 most of the time, since I've seen that aerobic HR range-in-use is linear with Watts, as to Conconi HR training theory.

Calcium hardens the arteries so increases systolic (max) pressure. We see this using an armband monitor.

[Citroen]

The discussion of this type of medical issue is banned on here.
This thread will be deleted in a week's time.