Maybe a lot of male runners are worried about a heart attack and taking baby aspirin. Aspirin is known to reduce blood coagulation (my mother has it), including in the eye, leading to more bleeding in the eye, leading to macular degeneration.
Besides if you take aspirin you won't experience the full body adaptation to running.
Thanks for writing that. This is why I often refer to "medical journalism" as an oxymoron. The majority of readers are usually terribly misled
Correlation or causation? Nobody knows.
Au Contraire!
The Shadow knows,
- but he ain't sayin'.
And that, my friend, is no coincidence.
For as you confidently correlate your causations,
as you seek the comfort of your certainties,
as you calculate and cringe at the sum of your fears,
the swirling wisps of truth evaporate,
to be lost forever in the mists of time.
It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.
The reaction to the sedentary ways we work and live has been to drive people to exercise more. We exercise in order to outrun diabetes, heart disease and senility. Then there's the ineluctable something that makes vigorous exercisers Better People. Now, it seems, we've run right off the edge of the map and into the gaping maw of macular degeneration.
With this study, the class that makes its living dispensing lifestyle advice has a new full-employment bill.
We can expect a flood of columns and YouTubes and Tweets that earnestly seek to reconcile the conflicting studies. You'll know them because the authors' bios and photo take up more space than the text.
And don't forget the mountain of anecdata this will produce. Individuals will get their 15 seconds of fame in look-at-me pieces. We'll hear from fitness warriors who have been running daily marathons for 20 years and have 20/20 vision, while others will blame their macular degeneration on a lack of phytonutrients.
So a 54% increase could be a big deal but its so hard to tell from the write up. The prevalence of AMD increases dramatically with age with about 1.5% of the population having it at age 40 and 20% having it by the time they reach age 90. It also may be more common in women than men but this observation may be related to differences in mortality by gender ( women who live to be 50 have a dramatically longer life expectancy than men who do the same.). If (1) it turn out that that vigorously active men live longer than men in general and (2) if the study does not adequately take aging into account the results could be driven entirely by longevity differences.
This is what is maddening in the way these studies are reported. You read the number 54% increase and it sounds dreadful. And yet if you look at the study, it surveyed 211, 960 people and the number of physically active people who got macular degeneration was 250 while it was 198 in those who were not active. So you get a percentage of 0.24% versus 0.19%. Compare 0.24% to 0.19% and you come up with the 54% increase. And yet, if you look at the total number of people studied, you are taking about a 0.05% difference and is that really significant? So many of these studies that talk about large ratio differences between a and b, well, when you look at the actual numbers, the studies are quibbling over tiny fractions of the population.
9
This is unfortunately typical of "medical journalism" (an oxymoron!).
The article as written is likely to mislead most readers. Not only is the numerical (not %) difference between the two groups very small (@ a 0.05% difference or so), but also the study cannot be used to draw any conclusions other than the need for more studies. Of course, there is no randomization and so the groups may not be comparable in a host of variables which would matter. Shoddy.
The NYT should have all such articles proofread by a scientist or other expert at interpreting studies and statistics, such as physicians or epidemiologists. How much would the consultant fee be for an article? not much
2
Well now reports on a study showing a negative outcome correlated with exercise, and clearly states that it "does not prove cause and effect." Where was this proviso when past-reported studies in Well showed a correlation between exercise and positive outcomes?
1
Thank you for the invitation to comment, but I have nothing to add. I am grateful to the real people who are smarter, more knowlegable, and experienced than myself and just want to read or scan or sample their material for the occasional gold nugget.
1
Well, that explains my detached retina!
I'm wondering if this finding has anything to do w/ vitamin A being a fat soluble vitamin?
1
what kind of activity did the consider? for example, if they ended up with a lot of runners, they might have high nerd factor. All that reading and detailed examination of anime and frames of star wars movies and the like can strain eyes too.
The critical comments here are all good. We need to know what "vigorous exercise" is, obviously. We also need to know: why men and not women? This is the same strange result that came recently from the study that linked B-vitamins to lung cancer--but only in men. Is this just an interesting pattern in the numbers that come up in the study of surveys? is it "tied to" (in the language of the article) a physical feature that males do not share with females? Given all the benefits of exercise, it would be helpful to have some basic answers--before we all let this study send us to our couches.
As so many have said, we really do need better science reporting from the Times.
Curiously, based on comments accompanying any article about any health topic, researchers should just pack it up and news outlets should not cover it. Someone should research that.
3
If you keep doing that, you'll go blind, they said. Now science is behind them. Alas.
2
My 92-y-o neighbor was so proud of driving to the gym every morning at 6:00, until he could no longer see to drive.
1
This finding makes some sense. When you exercise your blood pressure goes up and your blood vessels dilate. The blood vessels in your eye are particularly sensitive and can be easily damaged to a greater extent than other arteries and veins in your circulatory system. Do that too often over too long a time and the incremental damage of each incident starts to accumulate.
2
What's the base risk for this conclusion? because if we're talking about an increase in the risk rate from 1% to 1.5% or lower numbers than this, then it's work clarifying. The article should have mentioned this as well.
I say this because I exercise 5-6 times per week for an hour on average (road running), so this is worth paying attention to.
2
Your question about the base risk is a good one. Quoting from the on-line text of the study:
Of the 211 960 participants (92 036 [43.4%] women; mean [SD] age, 55.1 [7.8] years), neovascular AMD was detected at follow-up in 250 (0.24%) individuals who engaged in past vigorous PA and in 198 (0.19%) of those who did not (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.49).
448 cases in a population of 211,060 participants is 0.21% overall.
So the incidence rate increased from 0.19% to 0.24% with vigorous exercise. Seems this small increase in cases has to be weighed against the many significant documented benefits of vigorous physical exercise for those of us who are aging. And who isn't? I'd say your knees might be more at long-term risk than your eyes. All the best to you!
The fact that they saw such a large relative increase in men, and none in women suggests the likelihood that there is a confounding variable that they were unable to account for.
3
Men start out with higher blood pressure than women. Not confounding at all, given that exercise raises the blood pressure and blood pressure affects delicate vessels in the eyes.
1
Maybe women were not tested?
Agree with many other posters here, that without a definition of vigorous exercise, or what percentage of people were exercising without sunglasses outdoors, etc. that this is not especially useful information.
The Times has a responsibility to be more professional in the scientific studies they report on. This will get a lot of clicks, but it will also annoy most of the readers who do.
5
The times reports. It rarely does the analysis. I prefer that they don't profess to be scientists.
2
I exercise 4 times a week. I am already feeling a problem with my eye...it is seeing a NYT article that reports on a 'scientific study' with very poor evidence or standards....can't be NYT, something must be wrong with my eye due to too much exercise...
16
Too much exercise isn’t all good; less is great. Too much red wine is bad; less is good. Practice moderation. Scientists keep discovering the same things that our grandmothers told us decades ago.
1
Genetic markers for predisposition for macular degeneration would certainly help the research for studying this condition. My husband, who has macular degeneration was subsequently tested for various genetic predispositions when he did 23 and Me. He found out that he has the genetic marker for macular degeneration. How many men in this study have this genetic marker? Do the women have the marker? These are interesting questions for future research.
4
C'mon guys, be objective.
This makes perfect sense.
Long-term stressing of ANY part of the body is not good for that body part.
Strenuous exercise does not help your health, it is simply indicative of health.
Strenuous exercise hurts, not helps.
Why would long-term stressing of ANY part of the body help it?
Just wishful thinking. Or propaganda from the exercise-industrial-complex...
(And why didn't Gretchen Reynolds pick this one up..?)
P.S. A 54% relative increase is huge...
3
My dad was in a rehab facility recently. Majority of the people in wheelchairs or on walkers, and some only in their 60s. People who exercise - both resistance and cardio- do not end up in wheelchairs unless they are unlucky with certain serious health issues. Strenuous exercise is fine, and saying otherwise reminds me of the people here in Florida who say you shouldn't wear a seatbelt in case you drive into a canal and can't unbuckle it...true, but the benefits kinda outweigh that.
1
I suspect that, like the majority of "scientific" studies, no one will be able to replicate these results. Also, if you look at enough correlations, statistically you will find at least one that seems significant.
1
It's an observational study, not a clinical trial. It does not get replicated.
1
Aint that the truth!
Some people overdose on exercise. It becomes an addiction. 75 minutes of the type of exercise that makes you break out in a sweat and makes you short of breath per week should be considered, more than enough. Moderate exercise is one that is done at a slower pace and 150 minutes of that per week should be good. Overdosing on vigorous exercise, like doing it 150 minutes a week, can be toxic to the heart and may lead to atrial fibrillation, a lethal rhythm of the heart, treatable, but if left undiscovered, could cause embolic strokes. The study about the eye says to me, that high impact exercise, may tear the delicate blood vessels of the eye and cause ischemia and loss of cells. High impact and vigorous exercise in adults, cause millions of injuries a year in the US. Torn tendons, displaced joints, broken bones are but a few. We are supposed to derive benefits from exercise, not drive our bodies nuts, tear our muscles and tendons and be laid up with hard to heal injuries, blindness and pain.
3
The finding looks both interesting and scary. But there is room for hope! It's common for a couple of seemingly amazing "findings" to emerge when you go through a huge data set with a fine-toothed comb, purely as a result of chance (yes, 1 analysis in 100 will be "highly significant" even if there's nothing there!). It's also possible that the vigorous exercisers were more keenly attuned to their vision loss & hence more likely to report it.
All those grumbling about what "vigorous exercise" means - well, it's a pretty broad category but certainly includes running, swimming, weightlifting, and martial arts.
Hey, do you suppose we ought to examine which types of exercise are more strongly linked with this stinky outcome? Like straining to life too much? Or getting hit in the head during kendo bouts?
It's not a creditworthy finding worth publishing in JAMA and NYTIMES. The article does not describe much about the health of such subjects and their dietary habits while doing exercise.
1
Or the type of exercise...jogging vs. bench pressing 100's of pounds with your blood vessels practically bursting.
There is the possibility that macular degeneration causes vigorous exercise. If your eyes are poor and you can't read or watch television then you might as well go out for a jog.
6
Great news for us indolent old men.
4
This article is effectively useless until 'vigorous exercise' is properly defined.
10
I think that most people have an idea of what "vigorous exercise" is or is not.
(Cognitive dissonance maybe..?)
A lifetime of lots of eyeball-jiggling eventually harms the eyeball compared to a lifetime of little eyeball-jiggling?
Sure seems logical to me...
(Or maybe it is that lifetime of intense ogling at those other hard bodies at the gym..?)
2
Your comment indicates that the current mantra that exercise is always good for you (exercise never properly defined either), is simply a wish that current dogma is correct and any side effects of pushing the body beyond its evolved range is good for you.
1
This article is only useless to people who see nothing more than jet black and brilliant white. The rest of us see a world with many shades of gray.
2
I am convinced if a researcher decides what he wants find he will find it. This loss of vision scenario is no different
why do you suppose that they wanted to find
this association??
BB, M. D.
6
To BB M.D.-- The researchers wanted to find this association because a negative result, while important scientifically, rarely results in getting an article into JAMA Ophthalmology. There is a career incentive in finding such positive associations. I'll make the comment I always make about such articles, the article should state in the first paragraph that the result has not yet been replicated, and more than half of studies fail when attempts are made at replication. See, for example, http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778 Printing articles like this without the disclaimer is a disservice to readers.
Vigorous exercise five days a week?
Worry not. I'd say most Americans are immune from that.
8
Let me guess: next week, there'll be a report that Korean Ginseng improves visual acuity in men over 45.
2
Unless the writer defines "vigorous exercise," this article says nothing.
9
Love how the “Experts” , “comentators” accuse the author or recommending something.
What it really is is eye candy. This article and study just attracts reads, factually pretty much nothing other than a totally anecdotal self report.
Some excellent thinking point comments.
Is it possibly UV exposure, outside excercise.
Physical shock?
Bottom line pure eys candy, catch the reader, really factually, at least as presented nada.
3
Note to self: Don't run in Korea.
6
The subjects selt-reported 'macular degeneration'?
Koreans are indeed very sophisticated in their understanding of the state of their health. Most Americans would be doing well to state that they were blind because their retina had degenerated, which would still leave in other causes of retinopathy, most notably (and numerically) diabetes.
1
The questionnaire is related to how often those surveyed exercised, not on whether they had macular degeneration, which was diagnosed.
6
Quote: They did not find the association in women.
Covariance is not causality.
No more need to be said.
1
Utter nonsense and stop calling people over 60 "elderly". Elderly is defined as old-fashioned or frail. This "young" 71 year old built and flies his own airplane, exercises 7 days per week plus 3 gym sessions per week, dances with his wife, trades complex derivatives, and much more. I challenge the author to step out on the racquetball court with me or my "elderly" friends. The label is demeaning. Oh, by the way, I see fine.
13
Hi young man. No rule without exception!!
1
i'm at the gym for 2-3hrs, 7 days/wk. i don't fly my own plane, but i just did 30 miles on the elliptical. when i play golf, i carry my own bag. i'm 71. i'm elderly, which is to say i'm old. so are you. quit playing the victim and get over it. and look up "elderly" in the dictionary.
4
I agree, Wally. Not only can the term 'elderly' be demeaning, it should be avoided because, like the terms 'poor' or 'educated' it is imprecise and has no place in scientific literature. In the sentence "Macular degeneration, the progressive deterioration of the central area of the retina, is the leading cause of vision loss in the elderly.", the word 'elderly' should have been replaced by the phrase, 'in people aged NN or above' OR 'in women aged XX and above and men aged YY and above'. That allows the sentence to convey useful information.
Nicholas, perhaps you could have spared us this scant report until you had some information on the subject that would have made it a worthwhile read?
5
Korean studies like these are often found to be specious at best. Note the last paragraph.
2
so.....there is a vigorous exercise that (reportedly) men do more frequently than women. The old wives tale said your eyesight would be affected. Don't laugh,maybe there is something to it.
Now.... about those hairy palms......
4
I have a macular tear in my right eye. It seems to improve when i m running regularly and to get worse when i do not. On the vigorous issue: i usually keep my heart rate under 80% of max. Life is full of enigmas.
A hypothesis: those (nerds?) sitting long hours behind a computer screen compensate with a lot of exercise.
Ok gang, let's go over it again, what history has taught us, what we pretty much have known since the Stone Age. Moderation in every aspect of life (except in rare cases) is the way to go to live longer and healthier.
6
Even moderation should be taken in moderation. Life would be pretty boring if one never does anything wholeheartedly.
3
Thank you for your reply Tundra....You are correct. You can be bad every now and then ie men can have wine, women and song, and women can have men and the jewelry channel as long as you don't do it 24/7.
2
This study, if it is being reported accurately, means nothing at all. A statistician would have designed the study as an analysis of variance, so that there would be several groups, plus control groups, so that various types of exercise are separated and analyzed, the data more than self-reported, and so forth. I'm surprised that this reportage would be on the front page of this newspaper.
6
Epidemiologists (and science writers) do a great disservice to the field when observational data are presented in this way. The caveat at the end of the article about observational data not proving causation should have moderated the title (or caused the article to not be written at all).
One could just as easily write a headline based on observational data along the lines of "Wearing flip-flops tied to ice cream sales"
4
"Vigorous" is what raises the question. Certainly, exercise itself cannot be harmful and indeed is necessary. Exercise to the point of exhaustion likewise, judiciously tempered by infrequency, has created beneficial results in myself and my friends. Such a complex mechanism as the human body cannot be encapsulated, restricted and headlined by a few questionable tests.
From the key points of the original article:
"Meaning These findings cautiously suggest that physical activity may be a predictive factor for neovascular age-related macular degeneration; however, because there is no strong biological rationale for this finding to date, further studies that replicate these findings would seem warranted to strengthen the likelihood of a cause and effect relationship."
Thus it might be a little early to push the panic button. Moreover how many men actually can engage in vigorous physical activity, ages 45-79 (or 45-64 in the link to the study)?
As I, a 65 year old male, take my "brisk" walk, I watch with envy as younger men and women, go running past me. I walk, they run. And when my jealousy (and good sense) gets the better of me I try to run too. Reality brings me back to the reality that 65 year men should stick to brisk walking.
I'll take my risks on eyes, whatever vigorous means; the benefits of the exercise are too great to ignore.
2
A correlation, but nothing substantial enough to change behavior. We will see if the result holds up in similar future survey studies.
This could also set the stage for determining a causal mechanism IF vigorous exercise does contribute to macular degeneration.
When the data about exercise and MD were collected, the investigators should have asked, "what type of exercise..." Had they done that, we might know more precisely how the disease and exercise correlate. For example, a much lower correlation for cyclists than for runners might suggest that shock, rather than cardio vascular stress, is causative. ----- My quick, cursory research reveals no link between MD and UV exposure. Therefore, I won't delude myself that protective eyewear reduces my risk for this disease.
3
As a cyclist I can testify that a lot of roads are bumpy.
1
What is "vigorous exercise" in the author's terms?
I do fitness exercise 5 or 6 days a week, of which half hour cardio and the rest light weights, yoga, stretching, ...
Wear good sunglasses before stepping out of the door, this is wooded NH.
Take lutein and zeazanthin, prominent constituents in the eye.
And yes there's a gradual progression of macular degeneration in my right eye, I'm 82.
6
All things in moderation may be a watchword phrase for human beings. Some exercise like brisk walking stimulates circulation to the heart and brain which can't hurt and may help offset calorie consumption. Perhaps the body and mind encourage that in older age by rebelling against pounding and overuse. We cannot dismiss the corollary of use it or lose it which is overuse it and lose it.
2
Regarding the difference between men and women in their rates of macular degeneration, I wonder if there was a control for a history of contact sports. It would make sense that blows to the head when the athletes were younger could actually be the cause and the current generation of older men are much more likely than women to have participated in football, boxing or other such jarring activities.
13
NIcholas, please take note of the comments. This is a woefully inadequate report on the study, from lack of definition of "vigorous" to the relative risk (and number of men who suffered from macular degeneration), and the statistic comparison with a control group (including how it was selected).
It's no wonder people complain about being told something is good for you one day and then not good for you the next. Of course, this study says nothing of the sort, but you wouldn't know that from the article.
5
I absolutely agree with Iaslaw. The failure to report how investigators defined "vigorous" is particularly egregious.
Yet another irritatingly vague study that will lead to ridiculous speculation. As people mention, the study's abstract doesn't say what "vigorous exercise" the men were doing, and we can't find out (even if they knew) because the actual study is locked behind a paywall.
Even more important, the journal gives a preview of the first page of the actual article, not mentioned in the Times article, and it says the study didn't control for smoking, "which was more prevalent among the active than the inactive participants."
I think Koreans tend to smoke more than we do here. At any rate, an American who's exercising for the sake of his health almost certainly doesn't smoke. So it was sloppy for the study not to control for that, and sloppy for the Times not to mention it.
8
Yes it is a vague study, but a possible interesting correlation if it holds up in future big data surveys.
Big data has allowed us to recognize patterns we would have been blind to in the past. There will be many more big data studies that will lead to wild goose chases and important new discoveries. I don’t think you believe we should dismiss computationally intense studies, even if there are lots of spurious correlations.
This study will be the beginning of research to discover first, if there really is an association between vigorous exercise and macular degeneration. If that conclusion holds up, then scientists can start experimentally testing possible causes.
The problem with this study is that it was reported in the New York Times and any other secondary source of dicovery. This study was first published in a respected scientific journal. Beyond the association there was nothing more to report. Rearchers will now try to disprove the conclusion before determining what might be causing it.
Finally, you should be ashamed of your racism towards Koreans and Korean scientists. Koreans are doing modern science with reproducible results. If you want to complain, then complain about the underfunding of science in the United States. I imagine the South Koreans are spending proportionally more resources per capital than the US.
The sex difference in macular degeneration raises a question. Maybe it's not about whether you do vigorous exercise or not, but how you do it. Men are more likely to overly aggressive, competitive, and behave in other ways that are too intense for their health.
Also, as the article reports, self-report studies are often quite problematic because it is difficult to assess the validity of the subjects' responses.
What is concerning is how often studies with very ambiguous findings like this are reported in the news. They are reported because they sound controversial are expected to elicit some emotional response from the readers. Yet, news organizations should stick to reporting more solid and meaningful research to educate the public. Otherwise, stories like this just water down the understanding of scientific research and knowledge in general.
20
I have to wonder if they did further digging on the various types of 'vigorous exercise' being undertaken. Could it be that lifting weights....more than you reasonably can or should...would put undue pressure on the retina?
12
wear sunglasses, run slower...
7
Then the next observational study will be sitting on your are with great sight! How your Netflix binge is saving your eyes. Obviously, this study was not done scientificly, in that, they relied on the surveyed not to lie, AND, no bloodwork was done. I'd like a controlled study with complete data done before I forego vigorous exercise, which benefits total health. #FakeNews #FactsNotSurveysPlease
2
Someone define "vigorous", please.
22
vigorous is more than moderate and a LOT more than mild mike. it's a lorra lorra exercise.
1
I always thought running was a dumb exercise, stick with calisthenics and gymnastics. Safer, sort of?
Running is the original "exercise:" it's how we caught our dinner. If you're concerned with safe, go with swimming. It's also an activity our former selves (pre-human) engaged in.
Calisthenics and gymnastics are fine for younger folks; neither, however, are "natural" body uses, are they? You want "dumb?" Look at someone doing jumping jacks or deep-knee bends...
8
Of course, back when we had to run down hoofed ungulates on the African plains, humans didn't generally live as long as we do now. (Also, a pulled hamstring or injured foot could basically terminate a person's utility for that purpose.) I don't believe that early man intended to push constant, even daily, running throughout forty or more years. The running down of a single animal gave the runners a breather, as well. So the long-term consequences of constant, vigorous running remain to be seen.
1
This is getting ridiculous. Every day, we find out something is good for us. Then next day, we find that very same thing is going to blind us, or cripple us, or give us cancer.
Seriously, just use common sense. Exercise often. Eat vegetables. Don't smoke or drink in excess. Then, when your time comes, you'll know youv'e done all you can.
4
Also, eat three square meals a days. The body functions best with food in the stomach and breakfast is especially important as it helps us recover from sleep and gets our metabolic "food breakdown" machinery going.
The accompanying picture implies vigorous cardio...what did the study's author's mean by vigorous...or "excessive exercise"?
Stupid "study". Association at best, not causation. Uses surveys which are notoriously inaccurate. Come on folks, really.
5
And they used to say that vigorous exercise of the nether regions would cause blindness!
1
That must be a 54% increased RELATIVE risk, not absolute risk. So what is the absolute risk? If it's already pretty low, then a 54% increase isn't as horrifying as it sounds. The Times owes it to readers to clarify points like that.
33
Yes, so even assuming the risk is caused by all exercise rather than only bouncy ones..... Maybe a 54% increase means increase from 2 persons having this problem changing to 3 persons having it. Meanwhile, the overall benefit from exercising could change quality of life by 50% from 50 persons having good quality to 75 having it. This is a much greater overall benefit than the eye risk. Of course, my analysis is solely hypothetical. I guess exercisers also have a 100% increase in odds of stubbed toes.
2
Exactly...if 2% of men get Mac. deg. and 3% of vig. exercise guys get it, that's nothing..
If 50% got it on average and 75% of vig. exer. guys got it, that is different.
1
The linked article suggests the baseline is 0.19%, so that would imply an absolute increase of 0.1%, which seems worth the trade-off for the known health benefits of vigorous exercise.
How many cases of Macular Degeneration emerged in the pool of 211,000 individuals?
4
Good excuse to skip the gym along with the fact that it's 17 degrees out :-)
1
Self-reports. Correlational data. South Korea. And the accompanying editorial's main point seems to be to discuss possible sources of bias in the data - including increased smoking among the "excessive exercise" group.
I really wish that the NYT would stop trying to interpret single studies without having a solid understanding of statistics and research methods.
26
no doubt.. a misuse of statistics.
My Dad:
89 years old
full on macular degeneration both eyes
tennis player and golf and walker 3-4 miles a day for 30 plus years
Worked as aero space subcontractor in hot climes specializing in certain flying ships and stuff so outdoors a lot
No sunscreen not concerned about his sun glasses
His mother had macular degeneration as well though none of the traits above
Devout Catholic walked to 5 am mass and home then cooked, cleaned and laundry for 13 children and husband then grandchildren Irish/German heritage live till mid 80’s I think.
So now what?
3
My aunt, at age 90, who rarely went outdoors without a specific destination and didn't exercise at all, now has macular degeneration. Various treatments have preserved her ability to see, but not read :(
Her brother, my uncle, who was an internist and led a sedentary life, had near-total blindness from macular degeneration by age 80. The other two brothers in that family (my father being one of them) passed away before they reached old age. My mother, age 93 at death, had acute eyesight, as did a sister and a brother, who were 95. None of them engaged in strenuous outdoor activities. So it happens to indoor, sedentary people too but probably genetic.
I don't think that UV exposure is linked to mac degen;
cataracts, yes./
BB, M. D.
Aha. I knew that being a couch potato had its advantages! I can see that.
2
I've found a moderate amount of exercise to be adequate to maintain the strength required to do activities of daily living. So why go beyond that? You're just going to hurt yourself.
1
One-quarter of one percent v. one-fifth of one percent. These are still tiny numbers. Like Fox News ratings, they're good for a headline, but beyond that?
5
.
I'm still waiting for the study that shows cigarettes, beer, and donuts are good for you
.
1
Ice cream must be a health food. They give it to you in the hospital.
Follow up vigorous exercise with fruits and vegetables that support good eye health, supporting overall health as well.
FYI, the accompanying drawing of a runner is awesome!
1
I had retinal detachment at 49 after a cataract, and while not an intense athlete, I remember exercising more than normal at the time. I am otherwise pretty healthy.
There could be something here, atleast I think so. Or it could be the cataract surgeon messed up which is what my retinal detachment surgeon seemed to hint at.
1
retinal detachment and mac degen--two different things.
BB, M. D.
So many things could be intervening variables in this association--outdoor exercise would increase UV exposure; violent up and down shaking (pounding the pavement), activities on the water, snow (more UV), dehydration---and more. So, it's surprising, and a start, but let's look at what these men were actually doing, and where they were doing it.
1
When it rains in Ulan Bator Mongolia, anyone in the U.S. who exercises within 24 hours of that event experiences dizziness while purchasing artichokes.
41
funny==but are you anti-science?
BB, M. D.
I have had chronic serous retinopathy for 9 years (but not macular degeneration). Usually associated with younger men who take steroids, it is usually self-limiting and temporary. However, in the last year it has improved, and only two things are different: (a) I lost some weight and (b) I had to stop running due to a meniscus tear. My opthamologist scoffs at the idea that weight loss made any difference. This study leaves me wondering even more about the running for me personally. Mine is a condition different from macualr degeneration, and rare, so I would not over-generalize to other people.
1
The one factor they seem not to have looked at is exercise conditions--I'll wager that the whole problem comes down to men jogging outdoors in daytime sunlight 5 days a week without sunglasses to protect their eyes from uv damage...
2
Isn't UV exposure one of the risk factors for macular degeneration? UV light and oxygen, I believe? Runners may have more UV exposure.
Why did the researchers think there might be a correlation between exercise and macular degeneration in the first place? Sometimes in assessing a study like this it can be helpful to know what prompted it.
2
Smoking? Tobacco use is associated with an increased incidence of Macular Degeneration. One thing I noticed during my Kimpo stopovers is how so many middle age Korean men smoked like chimneys. Smoking-related cardiovascular damage is known to be a causative factor.
9
What exactly is "vigorous" exercise. Is it one that involves heavy breathing or only exercise that is jarring to the body? This is the kind of article that frightens folks from healthful action like vaccinations and supplements because it is so incomplete.
3
Tennis player, joggers, and others often damage their joints. So is the eye immune to the shocks of exercise? Better to ride a bike or swim.
2
"The study...controlled for more than 40 variables..."
"The authors acknowledge that the study depends partly on self-reports, which are not always reliable..."
"They did not find the association in women."
smoking was almost surely one of the controlled variables. (if not, the study should not have been published because smoking has been found to increase the risk of macular degeneration.) nonetheless, self-reports of smoking behavior are notoriously unreliable to exposure, in part because many of today's non-smokers are former smokers. in addition, exposure to second hand smoke could increase the risk for macular degeneration. in korea, men smoke more and are exposed to more second hand smoke than women.
so, avoid tobacco but maybe not physical activity.
1
Think there are many more smokers in Asian than the west.
As a long time professional dancer, I've noticed that some of my now elderly dance teachers suffer from legal blindness, parkinson's, and dementia of some sort. These were otherwise incredibly healthy men who continued to dance and teach into their senior years. Thinking about the new research on brain injuries suffered by football players due to excessive impact, I've wondered about how dance movements can affect the integrity of the brain, and now with this article, even the eyes. The act of "spotting" while performing pirouettes, which means to hold the eye focus while the body begins a turn/spin, and then to snap the head sharply in a full circle only to stop again at the completion of each turn/spin to reestablish the eye focus, must in the long term be traumatic to the brain. Its typical for a dancer to execute a triple pirouette ( 3 turns and therefore 3 "spots") repeatedly in one day, not to mention how many thousands of times over a career of a full lifetime. The head itself is snapped in a fast spin, then stopped, then snapped again. The brain, which basically floats inside of the skull, must be suffering some level of distress.
So yes, I agree with the possibility of what this article is stating, and hope that dancers will receive the same level of research into brain/eye disorders that football and sports players are currently receiving.
36
There is a relation of being blond and more AMD. Could that relate to your anecdotal observation?
Makes me glad I can't dance.
BB
You mean: "Vigorous Exercise Tied to Macular Degeneration in OLDER Men." When you understand the content rather than the headline, then it makes sense. We Babyboomers are notoriously self-centered, incessantly wanting to relive our youth. The young need us to be the older men, the sages imparting the wisdom of having lived life to the leaders who come behind us. Problem is, we're too into ourselves to care about the challenges our children are now facing. We can blame GenXers for being the grown-up, ignored, latch-key children and the tech-savy Millennials for their own problems, but their chief problem is us not being the wise older men they need.
2
211k sample size is a reasonable sample size. It doesnt surprise me that the fine network of blood vessels of the retina might be damaged by daily intense sustained cardio for those over 50. Still there is nothing conclusive here until more research is done.
Once again my lifestyle has been vindicated.
76
Mine too.
1
Correlation. Not causation. I would think sensing your vision slip might make your mortality present in your mind and induce you to exercise vigorously in a vain attempt to drive it back. It did for me! lol.
9
Yes, otherwise this would be a depressing piece of data for older runners and everyone else trying to stay fit. And what exactly is "vigorous exercise?"
15
As an alternative try using a rowing machine - one that stows away under the bed.
I tried. I had the best rower money could buy, from the top CA brand. After a while, the whole thing becomes boring, boring. Pulling out the machine from under the bed, setting it up, starting your rowing without any variation of scenery, becomes unbearably boring.
The most boring one was a phase of Norditrack. Both were eventually abandoned, with no intention to return to them.
A nice jog in the park or the beach, with great earphones and your favorite music is infinitely more rewarding and self-sustaining.
1
it's because of the shaking of the eyeball during running and other exercises that cause extreme pounding motion and sudden starts/stops.
back in the late 70's when punk rock was popular, there was a popular dance in punk clubs called the "pogo".
the pogo consisted of nothing more than bouncing up and down on the front of your feet, like you're on a trampoline, but doing it on a dance floor.
a number of punk fans wound up in the eye doctor's office with ruptured blood vessels in their eyes.
47
I wondered about that myself. So, a working hypothesis might be that this affects runners and football players more than swimmers.
3
I wondered about that.
Everything in moderation. A good brisk walk gives you exercise and also allows you to look at what's around you. Doesn't hurt to observe tree branches, rock formations or, if you're in the city, windows, doors, wrought-iron gates . . . .
Just as cross-country skiing gives you a real sense of being in the country. (Or in Prospect Park.) Not that downhill isn't fun.
1
I'm thinking about jogging, as well. My elderly friend has a macular hole in one eye, resulting in only peripheral vision in that eye. He was never a jogger, but in his youth, he was a pole vaulter and an industrial league basketball player. Gladiator thighs, lots of jumping.
2
Yes!!!!!! Another excellent reason not to exercise. Imagine, I almost went to the gym tonight.
41
Whew! Dodged another bullet.
5
It seems important to know whether the exercising cohort was pursuing outdoor activities without benefit of UV and blue blocking sunglasses.
71
Except there is no strong evidence that sunlight/UV/blue light contributes to macular degeneration. Genetics seem to be the top factor.
3
...and another factor may be air quality. Korea has chronicly nasty air. Systemic vascular inflamatory response to PM 2.5 exposure could be a factor.
Of course heredity is important, but epigenetics (what turns on the genetic defect) include exposure to retina-damaging rays in the UV and blue light lengths, smoking, and lack of various nutritional factors. I taught visually impaired individuals for over three decades and know whereof I speak.