all posts post new thread

Old Forum Ultimate Warrior Dies of Heart disease

Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)


Level 5 Valued Member
Strong is good but bigger is not better.
Perhaps we could refine that to "Strong is good, big can be good, but not with the help of anabolic steroids." I don't think anyone here looking to add some muscle is hoping to juice themselves up to 275 lbs.

Timely comments and the more I learn the more I agree with you.  People were not meant to be that big.  Clearly on steroids most of his career-Many of the top crossfit guys are also taking steroids.  No one knows who will bite the dust and when, but I think it's a good idea to stay leaner.
Lean muscle mass is probably never bad. Steroids however does no wonder for the health.
Yes, 275 is light fo many powerlifters.  I don't think powerlifters that carry that much bodyweight-even if all muscle are doing good for there body or longevity.
Brian D, it is a choice that I respect - to make one's body adapt to the demands of one's sport is a fine thing, particularly if one is a professional at one's chosen sport.

A number of people have tried to convince me that me adding some muscle - not much in my case, just moving up a weight class - would be beneficial to the health of my aging joints.  My gut tells me that this isn't true.  I have gotten leaner and more muscular, both in small amounts, since I started lifting, and I'm content with that.  If I put on more muscle, I'm OK with it as long as I stay in my current weight class, which means I have to lose a little bodyfat, and up to a point, I'm OK with that, too.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.  Everyone should add muscle, even a lot of muscle, if it helps them achieve their goals, and those goals are matters of personal choice.


It is not steroids but the extra body weight that puts a strain on the heart. The heavier one is, whether it is fat or muscle, the harder the heart has to work. How many men in their 70's or 80's that weigh 250+ does one see walking around?
It is interesting to say that adding lean muscle mass adds extra stress on the heart.  It seems like the heart would increase in capacity as the body grows stronger.  It is technically true that the heart would be doing more work.  A larger body would have a greater volume of blood, and the heart would do more work pumping it.  But on a moment by moment, day by day basis, is the heart truly stressed?  can it be objectively stated that the heart will wear out sooner as a result of gaining what would otherwise appear to be healthy weight?  Does the heart have the ability to recover from the extra load because it has greater capacity, and greater recovery ability?  unlike other muscles, the heart has to work all the time, although it gets to rest between beats.  Are there measurable indicators to say that the heart is more stressed, or is this somewhat of a subjective opinion?
There is currently an active thread about max heart rate.  Wouldn't operating at max heart rate be the definition of stressing the heart, even for a smaller lighter person.  Would a larger person that trains at a more moderate pace be more at risk of stressing the heart and dieing prematurely than a smaller person training at or near max heart rate?
Nick, I don't think one can maintain very high level of muscles into the 80s without steriods. So the reason of us not seeing older heavier, as in muscular, persons might have other reasons then heart problems due to weight.
"It is not steroids but the extra body weight that puts a strain on the heart. The heavier one is, whether it is fat or muscle, the harder the heart has to work. How many men in their 70′s or 80′s that weigh 250+ does one see walking around?"

Nick, you seem to have a habit of forming definitive conclusions without any real evidence to support them. Please provide actual evidence (not just your own supposed logic) to support the claim that increases in muscle mass in the absence of steroid use increase the risk of heart disease. I know that you will not provide any, because it does not exist. In fact, muscle mass has been shown repeatedly to be an positively associated with longevity and quality of life.

Additionally, is has been clearly shown that, in the absence of obesity, the limit for most men seeking to add muscle is an FFMI of about 24-25. For an average height man at a BF% of 10-15, this means a maximum weight in the 190-210 range. Are you really arguing that a 6' tall man being a lean 200 lbs will produce cardiovascular stress to the point of increasing mortality?

It seems like you have a personal agenda here. I have no problem with someone not wanting to be large. I'm not saying that adding lots of muscle tissue to your body is essential for health. However, the claims that you are making as they apply to people on this board are simply not true.
Are we really using the occasion of a man's death to argue fitness statistics? We don't even know from that article if there was family health history of heart disease, or what the actual cause was. My condolences to his wife and family. I was never much a pro-wrestling fan, but he entertained and inspired a lot of people over the years. RIP.
Where would the world be if discussion was impeded just because someone died? I'm not happy that the man is dead, but I am certainly not going to avoid an important question because of it. Also, I disagree that any entertaining or inspiring that occurs as a result of "professional wrestling" is a good thing. These men embody everything that I would  not want my son to be inspired by - arrogance, aggression, violence, absurd and fake showmanship. Pretending that it is not true is not respecting the dead man, it is just pretending.
If we're going to disagree, let's do it like ladies and gentlemen.

We are here to discuss strength - let us demonstrate strength of character by showing restraint when we disagree.  No pointing fingers at each other - disagree with an opinion, not a person - and no disrespect for those who have left this world for what we hope is a better place, regardless of our opinion of them when they were among the living.


I guess I interpret "showing restraint when we disagree" as being a passive form of lying if it means not saying what you really think. If you don't say what you really mean, then you are not being genuine. I don't think I went out of my way to be mean or attack him personally. I just said what I thought. Also, not all of us fantasize about an afterlife, or think that it exists.
Scientist, whether or not you believe in afterlife has no bearing on whether or not there really is an afterlife.
The Scientist,

I mentioned men over 250lbs and and am assuming the Ultimate Warrior, who I had never heard of before his death, weighed more than nature intended. Where did you get the idea I was referring to 6' 0 200lb athletes? More mass around vital organs, not just the heart, is why men die of organ failure more than women. Women carry their excess weight in their arms, rear, legs and thigh. Men have it in the midsection and chest. The heavier athletes, even those with lean muscle, have lower life expectancy than the leaner ones. Powerlifter Hugh Cassidy ate and lifted his weight up from 175 to 290 for his competitive career but leaned out to 180 when he retired.


That is absolutely correct. I wasn't trying to assert anything with certainty, but was pointing out that not everyone shares that belief and that people should speak individually and not use a collective "we" when referring to it. I certainly don't want this debate heading that way...
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Top Bottom