- 23 Maj 2010, 18:45
#224732
številka je bila povprečen začetek treniranja ali konkretno pretečenega (kako že??)... nekako se nimam volje spet prebijat skozi vse, ampak na hitro o rezultatih, kar priznavajo tudi avtorji sami:
in tako dalje in tako naprej...
če ne razumeš mehanizma statistike, je težko pravilno interpretirati rezultate. statistike so namreč zelo hvaležne za prikaz rezultatov, ki odstopa od dejanskega stanja. kot da bi samo kadilce spraševal, če jih moti dim - kaj bo odgovorila večina (ne pa vsi), je jasno.
With respect to the mismatch between FRS and the extent of CAC in marathon runners, many of the runners have commenced marathon running in middle-age. Consequently, their cardiovascular risk factors could have been reduced by exercise training and may not reflect their life-long risk exposure. In fact, more than half of our runners were previous smokers and 5% of runners reported active smoking. This would also explain the comparatively low CAC scores in controls matched for age and FRS, which may have had life-long protection from the atherogenic effect of cardiovascular risk factor exposure...
This may in part explain why all runners in our study were asymptomatic at rest and during running despite considerable atherosclerosis in so many...
The possibility that marathon running and the required training aggravates pre-existing non-calcified atherosclerosis and has a role in LGE development is clearly speculative based on our cross-sectional data.
in tako dalje in tako naprej...
če ne razumeš mehanizma statistike, je težko pravilno interpretirati rezultate. statistike so namreč zelo hvaležne za prikaz rezultatov, ki odstopa od dejanskega stanja. kot da bi samo kadilce spraševal, če jih moti dim - kaj bo odgovorila večina (ne pa vsi), je jasno.