Originally Posted by
Carbonfiberboy
It's really more interesting that that. It shows that those who had the highest VO2max values at 48 lived longer. No followup except for death dates. I was running with the ball after the buzzer there, just for fun. You must not have clicked. Replying to studies you haven't read isn't always the best idea. They authors' opinion seems to be that by 48 the genetic component falls off and VO2max numbers better reflect those who've continued working hard in their sport and less those who were just born with it. Or not? Is longevity more inherited or worked for? The study does not pretend to answer that question. Nature/nurture. Personal experience of many readers seems to indicate a belief that it becomes more nurture. Perhaps that is true. Certainly TdF GC winners and high placers are long lived, We don't really know. My doctor seems to think that by my age it's more nurture, as do I, being one who wasn't born with a high VO2max and at 48 had not been aerobically active for a couple decades.
In any case, it's good to be among the few who grasp the painfully obvious. Little people come out of my ears and wave flags. I'm just glad I'm no younger.
Middle-aged athletes seem to be a new phenomenon, when I was a kid, no one exercised past 30. So our generation is really breaking some new ground. Does working out increase lifespan? I guess we'll find out as the years go by. I would not be surprised to find out that each of us are born with a genetic age limit, which no amount of good food or exercise will ever be able to increase.
It's undeniable though that exercise improves the
quality of life. Whether it increases the quantity beyond maybe an extra 3-5 years on average, who knows? But to a dying man, ask what he'd pay to live one more day, much less 3-5 years. Probably everything he had, so I think it's worth the effort to try to get those extra years, even though they may not seem like a lot right now.