Does shooting video decrease the life of a DSLR more than taking photos?

I have read several posts here saying that one of the first things that breaks down on a DSLR is the shutter mechanism (because it is mechanical)

I follow a facebook group of used camera sales where people are selling DSLRs, commenting that what they sell has neven been used for video (just for photos) as an advantage.

However I thought that using a DSLR for video would actually lengthen the life of it because the shutter (and other mechanical parts) are NOT used during video.

So am I missing something? When looking to buy a used DSLR is it good or bad if the camera has seen extensive video use? Or it does not matter?

Thanks

Update: I do not care about the connection of video and shutter use. My question is simple. When I buy a used camera should I take into account whether it has seen heavy video use or not? Or it does not matter at all?

Let's say that I find a Canon 700d with 2.000 clicks and 100000000 hours of video use, and a Canon 700d with 50.000 clicks and no video use at all. Both have the same price. Which one should I take?

Answer

I think there is some urban myths regarding this, and that this has to do with the CCD/CMOS debate some time ago. CCD sensors really heated up so much that they cannot record video. The technology then switched to CMOS, that can support video seamlessly, and not heating that much.

Obviously, having the sensor to be working for hours taking video instead for fractions of a second taking photos is a difference, but sensor frabrication process has taken this into account. You may end up with dead pixels and such, but they also come up spontaneously, so I wouldn't worry much about video/non-video usage.