Studies in exercise and PD: youtube.com... - Cure Parkinson's

Cure Parkinson's

21,900 members23,411 posts

Studies in exercise and PD

kaypeeoh profile image
21 Replies

youtube.com/results?search_...

I don't know whether I'm copying this correctly. It's a study done here in Connecticut. It's looking at exercise and Parkinson's Disease. Specifically exercise at 85% of maximum heart rate. At the end she mentions visual imagery which athletes know a lot about. If you want to beat Mike Tyson in a fight you need to practice imagine punching Mike Tyson in the face. I'm not sure how that pertains to PD but it's interesting nonetheless.

21 Replies
sharoncrayn profile image
sharoncrayn

Sule Tinaz of Yale is doing a MRI/PET scan study to examine the effect of daily mental imaging 15 minutes/day. Based on her previous studies (2016, 2018) where she theorizes ...

"that the functional connectivity of the insula-dorsomedial frontal cortex circuit can be enhanced with neurofeedback-guided kinesthetic motor imagery using functional magnetic resonance imaging in subjects with PD." Ongoing enrollment.

Her other study is the "Beat PD" study with high intensity (3x/wk@ 85% HR) using MRI/PET scans to validate efficacy.

Unusually rigorous approach (i.e. the use of scans which is rarely done in any PD study including DBS and FUS.)

sharon

kaypeeoh profile image
kaypeeoh in reply to sharoncrayn

Wow, this is an on-going study going on down the road at Yale. They use DAT-PET scans that look at the size of the substantia nigra. The hope is that exercise shows less loss or might even reverse the loss of tissue in the brain. It's a 6-month study going on now, published on YouTube two months ago.

I had been exercising at 85% and higher for the past several months. But I might have another obstructed coronary vessel. I had 100% obstruction of the LAD artery last year. Nurses told me they call it the widowmaker. Endoscopy cleared the obstruction and a stent was put it to keep it open. Recently I've been having similar pain in the same place as the obstruction last year.

In three weeks I go back for another heart scan to see whether a new stent is needed. The doc said to stop running until they figure the problem out. So I've been walking on my treadmill, playing with different inclines with the goal of burning 1000 calories each day. But no running. He didn't say anything about walking. There's no pain when walking, only if I speed up enough to sprint. So I don't. I tried it a few times just to be sure there's still a problem. And I slow down to a walk as soon as there's pain.

The original obstruction caused me to vomit while running. I even barfed on the treadmill while having the cardiac stress test. But no vomiting from this new problem. I hope that means it's nothing worse than a second stent. The first stent cured the problem. I was back running with no vomiting the day after the procedure. The plan is to look for an obstruction clear it out and place another stent, then I spend the night in the hospital and go home the next day.

That's the plan, anyway.

kaypeeoh

sharoncrayn profile image
sharoncrayn in reply to kaypeeoh

Both studies (scans) are done at Yale's MRI Center. I believe both studies are open to enrollment.

"And I slow down to a walk as soon as there's pain."

does your cardiologist agree with your 85% HR routine BEFORE YOUR UPCOMING CARDIO SCAN RESULTS? If he does, I am shocked and surprised.

Vincent Aengevaeren (Radboud University, the Netherlands) and colleagues studied 284 men with a wide range of lifelong exercise volumes. Overall, 53% of the men had an abnormal calcium score (greater than zero). 68% of men at the highest activity level (greater than 2,000 MET-minutes per week) had an abnormal calcium score, compared with 43% in the lowest activity level group (less than 1,000 MET-minutes per week).

As in A SIMILAR STUDY study, plaque type differed among the activity levels. 38% of men in the most active group had calcified plaques compared with 16% in the least active group.

Good luck.

SHARON

rebtar profile image
rebtar in reply to sharoncrayn

How would you explain that?

kaypeeoh profile image
kaypeeoh in reply to rebtar

The body is trying to heal broken bones. Fractures leak bone marrow which turns into soft scar tissue which ultimately matures into calcified plaque. Calcium deposition is the final stage of maturity. These plaques are stable and cause no harm. Unlike soft plaque (immature) which can lead to emboli.

rebtar profile image
rebtar in reply to kaypeeoh

So calcified plaques are not a problem and immature for laque is?

kaypeeoh profile image
kaypeeoh in reply to rebtar

Yes it's the progression of inflammation. To the body Inflammation can be anything from a bee sting to a broken leg. Repair follows the same path regardless. I thought it was common knowledge that mature plaques were safe. Immature plaques were not.

rebtar profile image
rebtar in reply to kaypeeoh

I never heard that, but I never have had to deal with heart issues...

sharoncrayn profile image
sharoncrayn in reply to rebtar

I hesitate to disagree with our resident vet, but almost any level of CAC is a negative. He is confusing the theory of stable mature plaque/immature soft plaque (taken no less from a comment in Mayo Clinic connect!) with the over riding importance of CAC and its risk.

" In this cohort study (Association of Coronary Artery Calcium With Long-term, Cause-Specific Mortality Among Young Adults) of 22 346 individuals from the CAC Consortium with clinical indications for CAC, 34.4% had prevalent CAC. The risk of death from coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, or all-cause mortality was significantly higher for those with elevated CAC scores, even after multivariable adjustment."

Frrom Dr. Budoff's CAC scores study (UCLA) ...."Over an average of 10.4 years of follow-up, 168 participants died from any cause. After adjusting for age, gender, traditional heart disease risk factors and race, it was found that higher CAC scores were clearly associated with higher mortality. Compared with people with a score of zero who died, a CAC score of 1 to 99 (mild heart disease) was associated with an 88% higher risk of death…a score of 100 to 399 (moderate heart disease) was associated with a more than doubled risk of death…and a score of 400 or more (severe heart disease), with a nearly tripled risk of death."

these results don't mean everyone will die in 10.4 years with a high CAC score, but they like our past and PRESENT over exercising vet are at significant risk.

" the researchers found that the participants who had the highest levels of physical activity (trajectory three: people who exceeded the national physical activity guidelines by exercising for more than 450 minutes (7.5 hours) each week) were 27 percent more likely to develop CAC by middle age compared with people who exercised for under 2.5 hours per week."

therefore, I would avoid chronic extreme continual stress of any kind.

sharon

kaypeeoh profile image
kaypeeoh in reply to sharoncrayn

Medical Definition of hormesis

: a theoretical phenomenon of dose-response relationships in which something (as a heavy metal or ionizing radiation) that produces harmful biological effects at moderate to high doses may produce beneficial effects at low doses

Others argue that tiny doses of radiation are not harmful. Some scientists even claim that low doses, by stimulating DNA repair, make you healthier—an effect known as hormesis.

sharoncrayn profile image
sharoncrayn in reply to kaypeeoh

low doses; not high doses. low level of exercise; not high levels.

rebtar profile image
rebtar in reply to sharoncrayn

Soo --- the idea that a lot of exercise is beneficial for PD is relative? We're talking high intensity exercise here, not just exercise, right?

sharoncrayn profile image
sharoncrayn in reply to rebtar

"

Soo --- the idea that a lot of exercise is beneficial for PD is relative?" Who said that? Relative to doing nothing? QOL?

'We're talking high intensity exercise here, not just exercise, right?" wrong. it all depends on the study. read the studies.

rebtar profile image
rebtar in reply to sharoncrayn

According to Laurie Mischley's study, each additional day of exercise per week, after the first three, is associated with slower PD progression. The type of exercise associated with the slowest rate of progression is running, which is high intensity. I certainly feel better if I exercise daily, and include some mid to high intensity exercise -- helps my mood and my PD symptoms. I alternate 50 minutes on an elliptical (trying for 30 minutes of heart rate over 80% of max) with hiking that always includes 30 minutes climb and can be anywhere from 1-3 hours. And I may go back to the gym, usually 50 minutes elliptical, 30 minutes strength and 20 minutes stretching.

Laurie's study:

img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/2e...

So, "low doses; not high doses. low level of exercise; not high levels" is good for your heart, but maybe not so good for PD? Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you're saying that low doses and levels of exercise are better than more than 7.5 hours of exercise per week? You're not specifying what kind of exercise you're talking about, which is why I asked if you were specifically referring to high intensity exercise.

centerofrestorativeexercise...

"New information published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reports that those who engage in continuous strenuous exercise, such as training for marathons, show an increased level of coronary artery calcification (CAC). While such strenuous activity does produce more calcium in the artery, no significant increase was shown in mortality."

"New cholesterol guidelines released in 2018 recommend CAC testing for people ages 40 to 75 when determining proper cardiovascular programs and treatment. Now, with the results of the study drawing a connection between those involved in heavy workouts and calcification, it is also recommended for them. Once risk level is assessed, treatment and physical activity levels can be more accurately prescribed and recommended."

vascularhealthclinics.org/t....

The Budoff research you cite is from 2010.

This from 2020:

The risk refers to athletes, according to this study.

"Inflammation has a major role in the development of coronary atherosclerosis and exercise modulates inflammation.65 Chronic exercise lowers inflammation,66 but acute exercise can increase inflammation.67 Although there is far more evidence supporting a suppression of inflammation in athletes, high-intensity, frequent, and prolonged exercise could potentially produce an inflammatory effect, thereby accelerating coronary atherosclerosis.

Other potential explanations for increased coronary atherosclerosis that have not been sufficiently adjusted for in previous studies include dietary intake, psychological stress, and genetics. It is also possible that performance enhancing drugs or immune-modulating medication could contribute to the higher prevalence of CAC and plaque among athletes."

68ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl...

I do have to say that my functional medicine doc agrees with you. She encourages me to mostly stay in Zone 2 exercise, and keep any intense exercise short and only a couple of times per week. I have low HRV (Heart Rate Variability health.harvard.edu/blog/hea...

which apparently is common in PD.

I found, however, that I didn't feel good doing that, and my PD symptoms got worse, had to increase my meds, more leg pain, etc. So I'm trying to get back to the higher level of exercise I was at a year ago, hoping to reverse that trend.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think the picture for people with PD is more complicated, and that "low doses; not high doses. low level of exercise; not high levels", isn't necessarily the best for everyone.

sharoncrayn profile image
sharoncrayn in reply to rebtar

Your choice entirely. controversial topic to say the least.

Mischley never published anything but some charts. she did a "survey". vapor trail stuff.

Dr. Budoff controlled for extraneous, confounding variables. read his study.

I didn't specify because I didn't do the studies. they vary.

Your low HRV score (not specified) = higher risk of CVD and mortality, less resilient to "stress" (extreme fitness protocols). 2+2 does not equal 5 for obvious reasons (it should be obvious, but isn't)

""low doses; not high doses. low level of exercise; not high levels", isn't necessarily the best for everyone." Never said it was, I responded to KP and his hormesis comment. Don't take it out of context.

good luck.

sharon

rebtar profile image
rebtar in reply to sharoncrayn

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?te...

sharoncrayn profile image
sharoncrayn in reply to rebtar

what has this list have to do with what we were discussing? Her exercise study is not listed in Pubmed. Not sure you understand what that means.

Her PRO-PD scale (used by Mischley in the exercise study you cite) is a self-rating scale, which when used is inherently weak.

Smittybear7 profile image
Smittybear7 in reply to kaypeeoh

Good luck!

kaypeeoh profile image
kaypeeoh

I ran my first marathon in 1986 and lost count of how many since. But my favorite three races times 35 years...

Runners talk about the 'runner's high' which I assume is dopamine. I know whenever I was injured and not able to run I felt like crap. It's logical a hard run produces more dopamine than a slow run or walk.

sharoncrayn profile image
sharoncrayn in reply to kaypeeoh

endorphin release is causing is the "high"

laglag profile image
laglag

Endorphins and dopamine are often confused because each one is a chemical that makes you happy in the broad sense of the term. However, they are in some ways related because, when endorphins bind to receptors of the central nervous system, dopamine (the pleasure hormone) is released.

You may also like...