Risk of death?!?

13

Comments

  • We must stop all activities because there is a risk. We must stop driving cars because there is a risk. We must stop walking down the street because of the risk. We must stop sitting on the couch in case the ceiling collapses.

    2308 - tell us what happened that gives you this view?

    Exercise is good for people and with anything you, unfortunately with life, there is a risk and tragedy may arise. 

    Reality is if you have a cardiac arrest outside of hospital the odds aren’t good. If you have one in hospital they are not great either. 
  • And life is gambling on the basis of unknowns. Every time I leave the house In the morning is an unknown. Ask the fellar who was driving down the M40 and gets hit by a car coming at him. 
  • > @2308 said:
    >
    > Were you off sick when they did the "probability" and "logic" modules at your place of education?
    >
    > The risk of dying of a heart attack isn't "1:259,000 for each race", it's whatever it happens to be for the individual person, in an individual case, on a case by case basis, which is probably an unknown for any given person.
    >
    > Andrew may have eaten a healthy low saturated fat diet all his life; have no history of heart disease in his family; have a healthy heart; be well trained; well exercised; never have been a smoker or much of a drinker; be an experienced runner; have run many half marathons and many marathons in the past; have done his full complete advised training for the upcoming event; have been to see his GP recently and been told all appears to be well on the heart front - hopefully Andrew has no likelihood at all of a heart attack in the foreseeable future, or in the event he is about to run. In his individual case, he has a virtually non-existent chance of a heart attack.
    >
    > Brian, on the other hand, may eat high saturated fat most days and own messed-up arteries; have a history of heart disease in his family; possess, although he is unaware of it, an unhealthy heart; not be well trained (he couldn't be bothered to do all that training - Brian plays football every other Sunday and figures that is enough "running about"!); not be well exercised (he takes the bus everywhere, spends his days in front of a computer screen, never walks much); have been a smoker until recently; drinks a lot; be an inexperienced runner (he only took it up when someone suggested he do a marathon); have run no half marathon or marathons as yet; such training as he has done for his upcoming marathon has been "long slow distance" (so he hasn't actually pushed his heart especially hard for a few hours as yet!); have been told by friends down the pub it would be a good idea to see his GP for a health check but really Brian can't be bothered, so he hasn't actually undergone any tests or examination. (Brian's complacent about everything.) Actually, although neither Brian or anyone else knows it as yet, Brian (in his individual case) happens to have about (we will say) a one in forty chance of having a heart attack in his present state of health, were he to be foolish enough to push his heart at an average of 150 beats per minute for nearly five hours solid. (He's an "accident waiting to happen".)
    >
    > Brian's one in forty chance of having a heart attack (in his individual case) isn't going to magically drop to 1:259,000 if he pushes his heart for five hours at 150 bpm in a marathon rather than doing it somewhere else. If he has a one in forty chance of a heart attack it stays a one in forty chance if he does it in a marathon.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > -----------

    Well, yeah obviously different people have a different individual risk profile. In my first post I said that the 1 in 259,000 chance is averaged across the entire population of runners. Seems you missed that bit. On average, the risk of death is 1 in 259,000. On average.

    I thought this thread was about the general cardiac risks of running. The OP wasn’t pondering whether someone like your example of “Brian” has a risk of heart attack while running but rather if “Andrew” was putting himself in danger by running races whilst appearing to be well prepared and experienced, trained etc. It seems that a lot of the (rare) tragic deaths that have occurred are in this latter category.
  • 2308 said:

    Something you, and others, should reflect on: When someone dies of a heart attack in a running event, do you ever hear it said that the cause of death was actually the fact that help didn't arrive in time?

    No, because that would be stupid.  The cause is the heart attack.  No coroner would ever attribute lack of medical care as a cause of death in those circumstances, because there's no way of knowing whether they would have survived even if a team of trained cardiologists with all their gear happened to be passing that exact spot at the time.  Better chance of survival perhaps, but there's no guarantee.

    We established during your diatribe on road running that you really don't understand risk, there was really no need for that extremely long post that merely served to demonstrate that further.
  • > @2308 said:

    > -----------
    >
    > As to your second paragraph:
    >
    > (a) "I think most people enter a race with the awareness that they are exposing >themselves to some low risk."  That's probably what they will think they are >exposing themselves to. Some will be correct. (They'll be people like Andrew.) >Others will be exposing themselves to a lot higher risk without knowing it. (>People like Brian.) And some - such as yourself - don't even understand risk.
    > --

    ******************************************************************************

    2308, I think you are the one that is struggling to grasp risk and probability.

    Here's how I personally look at it:

    I didn't used to run and was largely sedentary for quite a few years, slightly overweight, poor stress management and borderline hypertension.

    I then started running and lost shed loads of weight (more than needed to just stop being overweight on the BMI), have better control on my mental health and normal blood pressure.

    As a runner I now have a higher risk of dying while running as I now spend hours each week running. When I didn't run there was zero chance of dying when running (as I didn't run!) but I had a much higher (and growing each year) chance of dying sat on the sofa eating crisps. I know which I think is the preferable set of dice to be rolling.

    To worry about things beyond this just gets in the way of life.
  • YnnecYnnec ✭✭✭
    And you wonder why I called you a ridiculous individual.
  • senidMsenidM ✭✭✭
    Jeeeeez 2308, TL:DR

     Its a marathon, people will die, started with Pheidippides, won't end there.


  • JT141JT141 ✭✭✭
    edited October 2018
    2308 said:
    It wouldn't be stupid, it is essential for coroners to look at the possibility of dual causes of death.

    But the problem is one of evidence. Any "passer-by" witnesses at the scene of a runner in trouble have gone away, their names aren't known; the people who will present evidence (or so called evidence) at the inquest will all tend to be "authority" figures - e.g. whoever does an autopsy (who conveniently finds something wrong with the heart or CV system); someone who analyses a water bottle and finds some chemical there; the ambulance people (who probably won't mention how long it took to get to the scene, or may lie about this); the race organisers (who aren't going to say anything in the admin was flawed); maybe a St John Ambulance person who claims to have done their best - so you get a "fixed" inquest. Although the coroner might have found fault with the administration of the running event and how the runner in trouble was dealt with, he probably won't, and can't, for want of actual available evidence - because all the "evidence" comes from one side and not the other. The facts showing fault are concealed rather than being brought to light. 

    Maybe runners should run in groups of three. If one gets into trouble with his/her heart, the second can do the CPR, and the third could act as a witness to events as they unfold. Then truth wouldn't get buried.

    You left out the stuff about vaccines and the Bilderberg group. Colin you silly bugger.
  • 2308 said:

    the ambulance people (who probably won't mention how long it took to get to the scene, or may lie about this)

    Colin, I can write off most of what you write as ignorant stupidity, but characterising paramedics and the ambulance service as frauds and liars is beyond low.
  • JT141JT141 ✭✭✭
    So if there's a substantive risk of heart failure for a "racer" in organised events, exacerbated by uniformed complacent runners, the lack of timely medical assistance being made available, and corrupted authority overseers further concealing evidence of risk, what is the solution? Are organised racing events tenable in this narrative?
  • 2308 said:


    "...this sadly followed the trend (converse to triathlon) that shows the final 2km stretch of the [VLM] to be the most dangerous, accounting for at least 50% of sudden cardiac deaths."

    Where, with the race at its densest, runners are boxed in thickly (a) by one another, (b) by two lines of continuous metal fencing, and (c) by crowds of spectators three or four deep. Whether you find urgent medical help in those circumstances in time if you need it is going to be a  hit and miss thing. How are you going to get through the crowd of other runners, through the metal barrier, through the spectators? And if you collapse before you do so, what happens then?


    You've misquoted.  It's not referring specifically to VLM, the paper they took that from is simply pointing out that of sudden cardiac deaths in marathons generally, over 50% occur in the final 2km.  That's hardly surprising.  My risk of that happening is a lot lower, and the chances of medical intervention a lot higher, than when I'm doing a mid-week interval session, with HR a lot higher than I ever get in a marathon.  That's what the author of the blog you've quoted told me, anyway, so I will continue to enter races in the knowledge that I'm not putting myself at any more risk than I am otherwise. 

  • 2308 said:

    No paramedic or ambulance person is capable of a cover-up, no?

    No NHS worker?

    No policeman?

    No autopsy person?

    No race organiser?

    No coroner?

    No scientific expert?

    No other public "authority figure" you might care to name?

    Everyone in the world is whiter than white, yes? Truth always comes out, does it? No one tells porkies, exaggerates, is selective as to the facts, when there aren't any witnesses the other way?

    Incompetence in administration is often followed by a cover-up to conceal it. It's the way of the world.


    Tell me Colin, what's your view on the moon landings?
  • YnnecYnnec ✭✭✭
    Colin, any chance you can post a pic of you wearing your tin foil hat?
  • I already have his email address thanks Colin - he's my cardiologist.  And I'll take his advice over yours any day of the week.
  • senidMsenidM ✭✭✭
    ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXJoexZBMcA

    "Not everybody can be Freddy Mercury" - Thank fuck for that, one prancing,  preening overblown showoff in the world was quite enough!!!!!!

    ps, not everyone was a Queen fan, or actually likes any form of royalty, come the revolution they can all go up against the wall!

    pps. sorry bit off thread here, but we seemed to have become divorced from reality some time ago.
  • Sudden cardiac arrest is not something the overwhelming majority of people need to worry about. While there are many causes, it is rare in terms of causes of death, especially in healthy, active, individuals.
    However, even being athletic and reducing risk factors for disease will never produce a 0% risk.

    Sudden cardiac arrest is usually due to coronary abnormalities, many of which go undiagnosed as they produce no symptoms, or only generalise symptoms people do not recognise as signifying something more serious. There are is course several other reasons than undiagnosed heart problems, although these are much less common.

    My advice would be to have a general check up (including routine bloods and ecg) for those in at risk groups, although anyone can pester their GP for those,  and ensuring adequate intake of micronutrients in the diet (using a supplement if necessary).
  • YnnecYnnec ✭✭✭
    Is there a hematologist in the house?

    p.s. Colin, are you trying to deflect attention away from your (current) conspiracy theory? 
Sign In or Register to comment.