yes, my grandmother as well. All the women on my mom’s side of the family have had very long lives. I can’t help but think that might be a part of it.
As far as I am aware that is a benign condition. Should not affect your long term health.
Yeah I didn’t mean to imply that. Mostly I was wondering about bilirubin and cardiovascular capabilities and fatigue resistance. It’s meant as a joke about everything the_cog says leads me to read a bunch of scientific papers for hours on end.
Coaching perspective here, and forgive me if anything’s repeated info since I didn’t catch up on the thread. During the “noob gainz” period which includes coming back from an off season break, you gradually need higher intensities to continue improving vo2max when one stops working for you. So early on, all intensities are relevant but at a certain point they stop working and the intensity needs to be increased. If you want to work higher intensities early on that’s fine but for the effect you’re looking for they’re redundant. Personally if someone’s super tired from a long season of training and racing, I want to kick that can down the road a bit. Do you need to do this approach? Of course not, but knowing nothing else about your particular case, most empathetic coaches are not going to recommend working harder when you’re potentially very tired. In most people I’ve worked with–and there are exceptions–just easy volume and middle intensities (tempo/sst/ftp) aren’t enough to improve vo2max once it’s gotten up to the body’s previous normal. That’s where vo2max training has a huge benefit… given sufficient volume which hugely influences the body’s capacity to store blood volume and the potential to maintain or improve SV.
Now, the question of how you maintain it is quite different, which maybe a source of the confusion here. It takes less to maintain improvements than it does to elicit them initially. In training and racing normally, I give zero consideration to “touching up” vo2max as acute fatigue is much larger factor, and as long as we’re not pushing so hard that recovery is impeded (usually easy volume and a smattering of fartlek tempo and threshold) it’s more than enough to maintain. In fact, a lot of people see performance decrease when fatigued and the decision is to train harder for “fitness loss” but in reality, the fitness is there but there’s too much fatigue, so a combination of rest and lower intensity training is the better decision.
Side note, the exact advice you got from that coach (who is aware of everything I just said) was “I’m not saying don’t do it, just consider whether it’s actually doing what you think it will” which is quite different from your representation of the advice being “don’t do them during base training.” He was trying to lay out what I just did.
In trained individuals SV plateaus at max HR. Endurance athletes' stroke volume does not plateau: major advantage is diastolic function - PubMed
This is a very weird (maybe misguided) study….matching to HR seems like a complete flop. I mean, it goes against everything we know about individual differences. I’m I reading the study design wrong?
You are.
First, despite individual differences in maximal HR, using absolute HR targets still helps to account for absolute differences in cardiovascular fitness (VO2max).
Second, and more importantly, since SV may plateau or even decline at higher exercise intensities due to diminished diastolic filling time, making comparisons at the same absolute HR arguably makes more sense than making comparisons at the same percentage of VO2max (the classic approach).
Note that the latter logic has been used in other studies, e.g.:
That said, there is no real connection between the pattern of change in SV and the optimal intensity for “base” training (whatever that is).