Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

well.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 152 posts

Re: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

#31

Post by pingswept »

jordanpg wrote: post #28

My reaction to this is similar to this one: http://norvig.com/21-days.html (Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years) I've been exercising regularly for a long time and know pretty well what my "equilibrium" exercise time is, and it's about 5 - 6 times longer than 7 minutes. If I thought it could be shorter, then I would make it shorter because my #1 goal is to minimize the number of minutes of my life I spend on exer…

If it makes you feel better, each hour you spend exercising extends your life by around 3.5 hours (net 2.5 after the hour you spent) on average. These are just rough numbers, backed up by the Framingham heart study and an analysis of the Framingham data by Jonker, et al.: http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/1/38.full.pdf They say 2.5 hours per week over a 75 year lifetime makes you live 3.5 years longer, and 2.5 hours per week over 75 years is around 1 year.

(Of course, you might get hit by a bus tomorrow, but that's true whether you exercise or not. I guess you should avoid exercising near traffic.)

Re: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

#33

Post by jwmerrill »

wdewind wrote: post #16
mparramon wrote: post #13

I tried this about a year ago and blogged my results: http://www.developingandstuff.com/2013/09/50-days-of-scienti...

Are you still doing it? No offense but it doesn't seem to have had a tremendous effect besides making you feel better, which in and of itself may be totally worth it for 7 minutes of work anyway. Regardless, the only reason I say this is because I don't think that this is a good program, and I think the science around it is short sighted and not very well carried out. The major problem is that the studies are not nea…

I've really enjoyed Mark Rippetoe's writing about the difference between Exercise and Training.

From the gloss for Practical Programming for Strength Training [1]: "Exercise is physical activity for its own sake, a workout done for the effect it produces today, during the workout or right after you're through. Training is physical activity done with a longer-term goal in mind, the constituent workouts of which are specifically designed to produce that goal."

He emphasizes that a realistic means of progression is one of the most important aspects of any training program.

Practical Programming and Starting Strength [2] (which is a better introduction to these ideas for novices) are together the best analytical discussion of physical training that I've seen.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Programming-Strength-Trainin...

[2] http://www.amazon.com/Starting-Strength-3rd-Mark-Rippetoe/dp...

Re: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

#34

Post by avalaunch »

conception wrote: post #2

Please note you are supposed to do the 7 minute workout 2-3 times.

People keep mentioning that the study says that the workout should be repeated 2-3 times but what it actually says is that the "Participants can repeat the 7-minute bout 2 to 3 times, depending on the amount of time they have." To me that implies that repeating 2-3 times is optional, and that once is enough to see results.

Also, as an aside, if you are repeating something 2-3 times, doesn't that mean you're doing it a total of 3-4 times?

Re: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

#35

Post by adwf »

12 exercises in 7 minutes seems a little rapid. I usually manage 4-5 in 30-45 minutes...

I guess if you're beginning from a very sedentary level, this is probably a great starting point. It exercises most major muscle groups and will at least activate them far more than just sitting in an office chair.

Re: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

#36

Post by jesserwilliams »

mariodiana wrote: post #18
wdewind wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you still doing it? No offense but it doesn't seem to have had a tremendous effect besides making you feel better, which in and of itself may be totally worth it for 7 minutes of work anyway. Regardless, the only reason I say this is because I don't think that this is a good program, and I think the science around it is short sighted and not very well carried out. The major problem is that the studies are not nea…

> As a way to trick yourself into the habit of exercise [...] I heard something about this, only in the past few months, but I can't remember where. Apparently, the way to create habits is to trick yourself by doing something almost ridiculous or trivial. For example, say you want to start flossing regularly. For a lot of people, this is a tough thing to make a habit of. The suggestion is to just floss one tooth, onc…

I don't know if James Altucher is the originator of that thought line, but he mentions it in his book Choose Yourself. It's been such a long time since I read it. I actually did try the flossing one tooth- it worked for about 10 days before I fell back into my bad habit of a few times per month. (http://www.amazon.com/Choose-Yourself-James-Altucher/dp/1490...)

The 7 min workout definitely will not make you look like a cross-fit junkie, but who really needs to be that fit? For someone who doesn't work out at all, and sits in front of a screen for 8 hrs a day, 7 min a day is likely to add a few years to your life.

Re: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

#37

Post by SiVal »

dwg wrote: post #24
wdewind wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you still doing it? No offense but it doesn't seem to have had a tremendous effect besides making you feel better, which in and of itself may be totally worth it for 7 minutes of work anyway. Regardless, the only reason I say this is because I don't think that this is a good program, and I think the science around it is short sighted and not very well carried out. The major problem is that the studies are not nea…

True, but I think you should consider another perspective. For most, the problem is getting started and forming a habit. By the time 7 minutes a day gives you diminishing returns, you've probably got a good routine going. Once you have a good routine is very easy to increase the duration or intensity. So, in a sense, it doesn't make people healthy but it does get them on the right track. You seem to get this, because…

I have yet another perspective. When I try something that sounds too good to be true, and that's how it turns out, I usually drop it rather than investing more in it.

Re: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

#39

Post by melling »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #29

I tried the seven minute workout for a little while and saw no improvement in any dimension. This[1], on the other hand, has gotten me some significant results so far, five months in. [1] http://stronglifts.com/

I find it hard to believe that you can do squats more than one day a week. It takes a while for large muscles to recover, especially when you're doing heavy weight.

Re: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

#40

Post by speedyapoc »

melling wrote: post #39
jamesaguilar wrote: post #29

I tried the seven minute workout for a little while and saw no improvement in any dimension. This[1], on the other hand, has gotten me some significant results so far, five months in. [1] http://stronglifts.com/

I find it hard to believe that you can do squats more than one day a week. It takes a while for large muscles to recover, especially when you're doing heavy weight.

The first few workouts are tough. As a beginner I could squat heavy 3x a week for the first 6ish months, increasing weight per workout. Now it's 2 days heavy and 1 day light.
Post reply on HN