|
A
|
09-02-21 01:20 PM - Post#913021
I suspect, but cannot prove, that if you can walk (actually walk, not jog or run) 3 miles in 45 minutes you're probably as cardio vascularly fit as you'd ever need to be.
I suspect the same. None of my Sardinian relatives in their 90s has ever been for a jog just to log some miles, but they walk everywhere.
To me, the two cardio numbers that matter for health (not performance) are BP and resting heart rate. Something like Vo2 max that would unquestionably be improved for a non-runner by adding running is more of a performance measure to me, and not a health one. My BP at last check in January was well within normal range and my RHR was 49 BPM, and I've lost approximately 20 pounds since then, so I assume the BP number, at least, is probably a bit "better" now. Not sure how much those numbers could be improved *for me* by running.
But having said everything I've said in this thread, I still come back to people need to experiment and find what works for them and mostly let go of the idea of trying to hit arbitrary numbers, no matter what those numbers are. I concentrate on things that work for me, but those same things might not work or might not work the same for someone else. Taking it a step further, the things that "work" for me for where I am in life now at 44 are not the same things that "worked" for me when I was 34, or 27.
I know running is great for a lot of people, whether just mentally because they enjoy it, or because it helps them in some way with their health (controlling weight, BP, etc), and I'm not slagging off running, it's just not something that works for me at this time.
Edited by BrianBinVA on 09-02-21 01:24 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
