Slashdot Mirror
Treadmill Performance Predicts Mortality
An anonymous reader writes: Cardiologists from Johns Hopkins have published an analysis of exercise data that strongly links a patient's performance on a treadmill to their risk of dying. Using data from stress tests of over 58,000 people, they report: "[A]mong people of the same age and gender, fitness level as measured by METs and peak heart rate reached during exercise were the greatest indicators of death risk. Fitness level was the single most powerful predictor of death and survival, even after researchers accounted for other important variables such as diabetes and family history of premature death — a finding that underscores the profound importance of heart and lung fitness, the investigators say." The scoring system is from -200 to +200. People scoring between -100 and 0 face an 11% risk of dying in the next decade. People scoring between -200 and -100 face a 38% risk of death within the next decade. People scoring above zero face only a 3% chance or less.
Oh, you are free to not do it, but unless you do the bank, the insurance company won't accept you as a customer. Also, since the HR department doesn't have good data on your health you are sketchy and you won't get a job.
Just click on the link:
The FIT Treadmill Score, calculated as [percentage of maximum predicted heart rate + 12(metabolic equivalents of task) – 4(age) + 43 if female]
Does the daily treadmill at the office also count?
bickerdyke
strongly links a patient's performance on a treadmill to their risk of dying.
Sounds like the best way to prolong your life is to avoid treadmills
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
No, you have good genes, which is far more important than any exercise, diet, or lifestyle choice you make.
The longest living person on earth was a French woman who died in 1994 or 1996 at age 126. She drank wine and smoked until the last day of her life.
I know a lot of seniors who are pretty healthy on a diet of french fries and diet coke.
Genes are everything as far as health and longevity goes, but nobody can sell you those (yet..). Thus you don't see any ads or research that puts a positive spin on genes like you see for gym memberships, food supplements, and the latest fad diets.
Unless you were doing the treadmill dance of OK, GO.
Then it's 100% risk of death in the next 10 seconds.
But why a threadmill?
It's a lot easier to get an accurate number from a treadmill than from a persons ability to catch small horses. A lot less poop to clean up, too.
I presume you mean 183.
The paper is paywalled but assuming they are using 220-age as MHR:
183 is 105% of MHR at 45.
Running on a treadmill has MET of 7-8 (Wikipedia)
105+8*12-4*45=21. i.e. your score is positive which puts you in the 3% chance of dying in the next decade group.
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
Communism only relates to the way you organize your economy.
The point of this research is probably to allow doctors to make better estimates as to when a patient might die.
Capitalism can be just as bad as communism if you don't regulate the economy. You need some of both.
Thank you, Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and so many others, for courageously defending humanity, my freedom and more!
So this study only shows health and fitness are related.
Actually they say that "titness level was the single most powerful predictor of death and survival", so it's a bit stronger.
Spriometry is used by respirologists to basically measure how much air you can suck in and then blow out (among other parameters like lung inflation, exhale velocity, etc.). It was essentially invented around 1846 by John Hutchinson who believed its best use would be by the insurance industry as this volume was strongly correlated to premature death -- the less air you can blow out, the less time you have left! Hence the name for this quantity that we still use in medicine today: vital capacity.
"1846 The water spirometer measuring vital capacity was developed by a surgeon named John Hutchinson. He invented a calibrated bell, inverted in water, which was used to capture the volume of air exhaled by a person. John published his paper about his water spirometer and the measurements he had taken from over 4,000 subjects,[2] describing the direct relationship between vital capacity and height and inverse relationship between vital capacity with age. He also showed that vital capacity does not relate to weight at any given height. He also used his machine for the prediction of premature mortality. He coined the term vital capacity, which was claimed as a powerful prognosis for heart disease by Framingham study. He believed that his machine should be used as an acturial predictions for companies selling life insurances"
Hey mate, spare a sig?
As long as you can do better than a police officer, you're okay.
So 1/5 of their scale is already offset-ted depending on gender. That makes me rise an eyebrow : it should be a factor, not an offset...
You don't understand statistics
Fit people live longer? Wow, what a surprise.
That we knew already. The study says, however, it is the single most important predictor of your mortality. More important than, say, a genetic defect like diabetes.
And that IS new.
Or does the Heisenberg principle not apply on treadmills?
Place something witty here
There is an old test known as the Schneider Index which was used by the US Navy for divers and pilots in the 1940s. An old movie called "Dive Bomber" shows details of how the test was done at the time. The test ended the flying careers for many pilots at the time if their score decreased much. It turns out that the guys who did best in the test were the ones most likely to pass out on dive bombing runs. The Schneider Index uses reclining heart rate, blood pressure with standing and then rapid activity for about 30 seconds and then factoring in increase in pulse, BP and the time to return to normal.
I really hate it when people don't use percentage as a decimal, but it still beets the IRS "Combine" algebraic operator.
I get 73 from a recent stress test. Who hoo, Still Alive! Wife still kicks my ass with a 130 though.
For a guy who hates mistakes in number formats, you seem to have a very relaxed attitude towards spelling homonyms correctly.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Genes are a factor but not as great as you like them to be. The I have bad Genes argument is a copout towards working towards a better life. Your environment, has a major effect as well, and you have luck too. Changing your environment helps your odds.
Lets say everytime you smoke a cigarette you have a 1 in 500,000 chance of getting lung cancer. Lets say your genes make you more resistant so you may have 1 in 600,000 chance instead. So if you have good genes and you smoke a packs of cigarettes a day that is 20 chances in that 1 in 600,000 a day. If you have the average genes, and you don't smoke then you may get 1 chance every week from second hand smoke.
The evidence of the person who lived a long life despite having a risk factors may be due to just dumb luck, combined with other positive lifestyle choices not mentioned to get the overall odds up.
Also what you may call a bad Gene isn't necessarily a bad gene, but they are designed for a life style that we are not living.
There are people who keep on eating junk food and stay skinny, their body has a high metabolism. With our culture that seems like a good thing, however for these people if they are late for their meal or cannot eat, they merely go into a panic, their body had used up more energy then they took in, and they just used that energy for silly things, such as shaking their leg while sitting, or creating more body heat. Then you have someone with a slower metabolism, that means they will be tend to be heavier, and store extra fat, this extra fat can cause health issues. However if they are unable to eat for a while they are not in such a shock. Now if you have a slow metabolism, and you need to manage the risks of being fat, then you need to exercise, to force your metabolism to go up for while and burn fat, and/or adjust your diet to insure you are just taking in the amount your body needs.
That Gym membership doesn't change your Genes, but if you use that Gym membership, it will help you work with what your genes had evolved you to do.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Peer-reviews on everything I write below are greatly appreciated. I want to make sure I understand this equation.
io9 has a pretty down-to-earth explanation of the equation:
FIT Treadmill Score = %MPHR + 12(METS) - 4(age) + 43(if female)
You can get your MPHR for your age here. I found a chart of METS here for various exercises.
So, if I'm understanding this correctly. If I reach a 160 heart rate out of 179.0 MPHR predicted for my 41 years of age while running 12 minute miles worth 8.5 METS. My score would be:
83.7 + 12(8.5) - 4(41) = 21.7
The same heart rate for my age running 8 minute miles:
83.7 + 12(8.5) - 4(41) = 69.7
If I am understanding this correctly, it really looks like you could easily improve your score with a few lifestyle choices (push yourself harder when you work out, eat healthier). This equation could be a great metric for people concerned about their health
i ~ Celebrating Science, Cyberspace, Speculation
Right, because capitalist insurance companies would never abuse this kind of info to deny coverage.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
This would be true if everyone died by getting T-boned. A lot of people die due to things like heart disease. In fact, a lot more people die of heart disease than traffic accidents.
So no, it's not futile at all.
Have we got numbers on how many people got injured/killed by treadmills on a yearly basis? I guess those are for the 3% for people scoring above 0.
Fitness level was the single most powerful predictor of death
Who'd a thunk?
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
I lost about 95 lbs (in 4 months)
That's not remotely healthy and barely even possible. To lose 95 pounds of fat in 120 days, you would need to generate a daily caloric deficit of over 2700 calories, which is beyond a starvation diet. If your RMR was 2000 calories per day, you ran 5 miles per day and you ate a holodomor diet, for four months, you could maybe approach that assuming your organs didn't shut down in the meantime, but you would be shedding as much (or more) muscle as fat in that case, which is hardly ideal.
The FIT Treadmill Score, calculated as [percentage of maximum predicted heart rate + 12(metabolic equivalents of task) – 4(age) + 43 if female], ranged from 200 to 200 across the cohort, was near normally distributed, and was found to be highly predictive of 10-year survival
I demand equal life expectancy for equal fitness!
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
So it wasn't a random sample. It was people who had visited the doctor/hospital with complaints of chest pain, shortness of breath, fainting or dizziness. Well right there, you'd think the ones who were further along in a disease causing those symptoms when they first visited a doctor would score worse at the treadmill test. And they'd have a greater risk of death in the next few years since they were further along the illness.
I assure you, in my line of work not only does HR not want care about your long term viability, it sure as hell doesn't want you taking time off work* to be at the gym. They'll happily juice your husk until it can no longer serve the shareholder and toss it out in the new Environmentally Friendly (TM) Compost Heap. Given the endless legions of unemployed and the opportunity to tap the limitless H1-B market, they're guaranteed to have employees!
*By time off work I mean any point in a 24 hour day.
Luckily, the one-two punch of HIPAA and ACA ("Obamacare") made what you describe illegal in the US, so that's only an option in other countries unless one or both of those laws change. And HIPAA isn't under attack by butthurt Republicans.
HIPAA made it illegal. The ACA made it mandatory.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Don't we already know that female's are more likely to live longer with no clear identifiable cause beyond they are female?
This is unfair discrimination against males. If women can demand equal salaries, we should be able to demand equal lifespan.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.