| |
Main
Date: 20 Mar 2006 06:48:23
From: rick++
Subject: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
Two middle age (53, 60) men died of heart attacks during
last week's L.A. marathon. 28,000 thousand competed
in comfortable weather. A third guy (70) had a serious heart attack.
I presume this is just a statistical quirk. The marathon death
overall is somewhat low- about one per 150-200,000 starters,
or a handful a year in the US. This is only the third fatality in
the 21 year history of the L.A. marathon.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-marathon20mar20,1,1486717.story?coll=la-headlines-california
|
|
| |
Date: 20 Mar 2006 09:15:34
From: octogenarian
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
They over-weight? The 2nd guy was near finishing. What's his time?
Scary!
|
| |
Date: 20 Mar 2006 16:53:56
From: ActionBill@gmail.com
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
>From the LA Times Marathon story:
"Among the runners was their diminutive 64-year-old priest, Father
Francisco Vitela, participating in his sixth marathon. Each year, the
church's runners line their sneakers up along the altar and Vitela
blesses them with holy water."
My kind of priest.
|
| |
Date: 20 Mar 2006 16:36:53
From: noncohort
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
Actually a 53 and 28 year-old died. The 60 year-old just collapsed and
was hospitalized. Both that died were in law enforcement. It wouldn't
surprise me that the cause of the young officer's death was the taking
of anabolic steriods which damages the heart. It is known that
significant numbers of law enforcement officers take anabolic steriods
because they think it makes their job easier.
|
| | |
Date: 20 Mar 2006 20:56:20
From:
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
On 20 Mar 2006 16:36:53 -0800, "noncohort" <noncohort-shop@yahoo.com >
wrote:
>Both that died were in law enforcement. It wouldn't
>surprise me that the cause of the young officer's death was ...
,,,they were fat pigs?
|
| | |
Date: 21 Mar 2006 10:56:02
From: Don Kirkman
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
It seems to me I heard somewhere that noncohort wrote in article
<1142901413.627621.66110@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com >:
>Actually a 53 and 28 year-old died. The 60 year-old just collapsed and
>was hospitalized. Both that died were in law enforcement. It wouldn't
>surprise me that the cause of the young officer's death was the taking
>of anabolic steriods which damages the heart. It is known that
>significant numbers of law enforcement officers take anabolic steriods
>because they think it makes their job easier.
Based on the LA Times report for March 21, the 60 year old retired LA
County Sheriff's deputy, died three miles into the race. He may have
had cardiovascular disease; one acquaintance said he never knew the man
was a runner because he didn't look fit.
The 53 year old, a retired LAPD detective, died two miles from the
finish. He had been training for the marathon, and acquaintances
noticed his improved fitness.
According to the March 20 Times, a third runner, 70 years old, was
hospitalized in critical but stable condition after a heart attack
several miles into the race. He was not identified by name.
Neither article mentions any other heart attacks or any younger runners
being in trouble.
The only other fatality in an LA Marathon was in 1990, when a 59 year
old man, who was under a dor's care for hypertension, had a heart
attack.
IMO facts should always come ahead of speculation and rumors.
--
Don Kirkman
|
| | |
Date: 23 Mar 2006 15:25:48
From:
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
On 20 Mar 2006 16:36:53 -0800, "noncohort" <noncohort-shop@yahoo.com >
wrote:
>surprise me that the cause of the young officer's death was the taking
>of anabolic steriods which damages the heart.
You are an idiot talking out of your ass.
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Mar 2006 15:05:35
From:
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:25:48 GMT, RogersBill@running.com wrote:
>You are an idiot talking out of your ass.
Now that it's been proven true, how do you feel?
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Mar 2006 23:14:24
From: Don Kirkman
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Roids4u@annabolic.org wrote in
article <brv522t0ne0qnmhs7lkfk7bcoglmd0ptrg@4ax.com >:
>On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:25:48 GMT, RogersBill@running.com wrote:
>>You are an idiot talking out of your ass.
>Now that it's been proven true, how do you feel?
Since there was no young officer involved, unless you count the younger
of the two who was only 57, I fail to see your point. The other officer
was 60; the nonfatal victim, IIRC, was in his 70s.
--
Don Kirkman
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Mar 2006 07:18:51
From:
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 23:14:24 -0800, Don Kirkman <donkirk@covad.net >
wrote:
>It seems to me I heard somewhere that Roids4u@annabolic.org wrote in
>article <brv522t0ne0qnmhs7lkfk7bcoglmd0ptrg@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:25:48 GMT, RogersBill@running.com wrote:
>
>>>You are an idiot talking out of your ass.
>
>>Now that it's been proven true, how do you feel?
>
>Since there was no young officer involved, unless you count the younger
>of the two who was only 57, I fail to see your point. The other officer
>was 60; the nonfatal victim, IIRC, was in his 70s.
Go read it again stupidass.
|
| |
Date: 26 Mar 2006 12:03:37
From: rick++
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
Another interesting followup article:
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-marathon27mar27,0,1588032.story?coll=la-home-health
It contains the factoid that a trained runner has 1/20th the fatality
rate
during exertion than sedentary people. (But as the marathon deaths
show, its still not zero.)
|
| |
Date: 27 Mar 2006 10:35:38
From: Miss Anne Thrope
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
2 out of 28,000? Sounds more like 1 in 14,000 to me.
At that rate, I'll be the only one here in a few years.
|
| | |
Date: 27 Mar 2006 11:40:19
From: Don Kirkman
Subject: Re: two L.A. Marathon deaths
|
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Miss Anne Thrope wrote in article
<22328-4428064A-500@storefull-3157.bay.webtv.net >:
>2 out of 28,000? Sounds more like 1 in 14,000 to me.
>At that rate, I'll be the only one here in a few years.
Ah, Annie, you're too smart to make that kind of mistake by accident.
Assuming 20,000 runners annually and 21 marathons and 3 deaths (one in
199x, two in 2006), it looks to be more like one in 140,000. :-)
--
Don Kirkman
|
|
