Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 21 Jan 2000 09:18:34 -0500 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000, S.B. Feldman wrote:
> however. The slower heartbeat is a
> consequence of the heart having become enlarged from much aerobic
> work.
>
> ..2..The enlargement is not a cosequence of aerobics; the slower heartbeat or
> pulse rate reflects greater efficiency
Yes, but what makes the heart more efficient? It has been a long
time since I read about this stuff, but what I recall is that the
increased efficiency is mainly the result of greater stroke
volume. This is the result of enlargement, in highly aerobically
trained individuals.
> But the size of a heart is not an indicator of its health. >>
>
> .3...an enlarged heart is not a sign of health but a sign of disease.
Is that categorically true? I'll have to do some digging, but
I'm pretty sure that enlargement is not unusual in people who do
a lot of aerobics, and not pathological either. When it occurs
in untrained people, that's something else again.
Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|