2 women miss being struck by train on bridge:
https://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv1-msgr&p=women%20tracks%20train%20bridge&type=
Posted on 07/30/2014 6:59:20 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
Running for even 5 to 10 minutes a day, once or twice a week, or at slow speeds was associated with substantial mortality benefits over 15 years, a prospective study showed.
Runners overall had 30% and 45% lower adjusted risks of all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality, respectively, over that period and had 3 years longer life expectancy compared with nonrunners, Duck-chul Lee, PhD, of Iowa State University in Ames, and colleagues found.
Running for less than 60 minutes a week -- averaging out to about 8 minutes a day -- was associated with an odds ratios of 0.73 for death from any cause (95% CI 0.61-0.86) and 0.46 for cardiovascular mortality (95% CI 0.33-0.65) compared with nonrunners after adjustment for other factors, including total physical activity from other leisure-time activities.
The associations were also significant at the lowest quintiles of weekly running distance (less than 6 miles), frequency (one to two times), amount (under 506 metabolic equivalent of task or MET-minutes), and speed (less than 6 miles/hour), the group reported in the August 5 issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
"This study may motivate healthy but sedentary individuals to begin and continue running for substantial and attainable mortality benefits," Lee and colleagues suggested.
(Excerpt) Read more at medpagetoday.com ...
Which means I'll get hit by a bus...
2 women miss being struck by train on bridge:
https://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv1-msgr&p=women%20tracks%20train%20bridge&type=
Or a train!
See my last post.
That’s called intense motivation. You can bet the blaring air horn added encouragement.
Runners Shown To Have 100% Mortality Rate
pictures at eleven
Don’t you just love these studies that state things like this: “...over that period and had 3 years longer life expectancy compared with nonrunners....”
So, this study actually came up with this totally fictitious and imagined lifespan study? Even an idiot could see the irony and false claim.
Did these career students and make-believe artists actually perform this study over a period of 60 to 80 years? Hell no!
Basic common sense would tell that to make a factual study of a controlled group would actually take a lifetime...and this sure as hell didn’t.
I’ve become tired of these claims based upon assumptions and falsified computer models by people who think they can make gold from lead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.