Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds • Hacker News Board

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#161

Post by Nomentatus » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 3:25 AM UTC

Boxxed wrote: post #5

vladharbuz wrote: post #3

The article's title is somewhat misleading. The study emphasises the level of fitness rather than the regularity of exercise. [0] > Question: What is the association between cardiorespiratory fitness and long-term mortality? > Findings: In this cohort study of 122 007 consecutive patients undergoing exercise treadmill testing, cardiorespiratory fitness was inversely associated with all-cause mortality without an obse…

That's a little pedantic, even for HN, don't you think? "Oh, it's not the exercise that's important, it's the stuff that happens BECAUSE you exercise."

Grip strength is also an excellent marker of longevity/imminent death - but this is probably not a result of exercise, and certainly not grip-strength exercise. Science is not assuming that what seems like a very reasonable guess is true, and questioning such assumptions must be "pedantic." Instead, we do the experiments and know one way or another.

PS - one of the things that happens when most people exercise is more UV exposure as they walk, run or cycle: and previous studies have shown UV exposure to be more important for longevity than exercise per se.

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#162

Post by sorenjan » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 3:26 AM UTC

toasterlovin wrote: post #154

seanp2k2 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got into running, thinking that I wanted to try for a half-marathon. I actually worked up to the distance surprisingly quickly. I was under 30 at the time and it took like 2 months, and before that I wasn't running at all or doing any other exercise regularly. I started having some knee pain (flat feet don't help) and stopped after it became painful to run even a mile or two. About a year later, I fell on a skatebo…

Something like 50% of runners get injured in a given year. It’s insane. Do something that’s easier on your body. If you want cardio, hike or bike. I like weight lifting, personally. If you want to try weight lifting, check out Starting Strength.

> Something like 50% of runners get injured in a given year.

That's because most people use bad technique and would probably benefit from strength training as well. Sitting all day and then expecting your body to run for 30-60 minutes and then sitting again will lead to high risk of injury. I see a lot of people run like they're walking with longer strides, or hunched over, or any number of bad habits. The feet should land under your center of mass, not in front of it, and the turnover should be pretty fast. Short and fast steps instead of long and slow. Don't run too fast, use your core for stability, and keep an upright posture, slightly leaned forward at the ankles.

Look up proper running form, do some drills, and add body weight strength training a couple of times each week if you're thinking of starting running.

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#163

Post by Shivetya » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 3:34 AM UTC

Gatsky wrote: post #92

If there is one universal truth of human biology, it is that exercise is good. It is good if you do a bit or a lot, if you are young, old, male, female, trans, pregnant, trying to get pregnant, single, married, divorced, depressed, a smoker, have cancer, have heart disease, have dementia, an astronaut, a pure mathematician, a plumber, tall, short, liberal, conservative etc etc. There isn't anyone that doesn't benefit…

don't overlook genetics, there are family lines that just live longer regardless of many what people consider bad habits. exercise rightly cannot be dismissed but all the exercise in the world won't fix what is in your DNA.

still on the exercise front there needs to be more work in find easy routines that even the least inclined can participate in

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#164

Post by cryoshon » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 3:52 AM UTC

toasterlovin wrote: post #153

Gatsky wrote: post #92

If there is one universal truth of human biology, it is that exercise is good. It is good if you do a bit or a lot, if you are young, old, male, female, trans, pregnant, trying to get pregnant, single, married, divorced, depressed, a smoker, have cancer, have heart disease, have dementia, an astronaut, a pure mathematician, a plumber, tall, short, liberal, conservative etc etc. There isn't anyone that doesn't benefit…

> I think we can just stop doing studies about how exercise is good I heartily disagree. People have limited time. We need to figure out what form of excercise gives the most benefit for unit of time spent. There is serious disagreement about this (the two camps being cardio vs strength training, basically).

>People have limited time. We need to figure out what form of excercise gives the most benefit for unit of time spent.

optimizing for the wrong variable.

there's always time which could be spent exercising. people are often too stressed or tired to do it, or don't have enough motivation.

flossing your teeth takes four minutes. but how many people do it?

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#165

Post by tacon » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 4:10 AM UTC

shin_lao wrote: post #66

ddebernardy wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not pedantic at all. I'm ~40 and don't exercise at all, yet I'm still perfectly fit. I presume it's due to doing groceries by foot several times per week, having a standup desk, and carrying the kid around. Perhaps genes help too. But the point I'd like to get across is: going to the gym isn't the sine qua non of making you fit. You can get enough "exercise" by simply living without a car, standing, and walking.

I think you need to define perfectly fit. Can you do 10 pullups?

If you check, you will find it is incredibly rare for health and fitness books and articles to define "health", "fitness" or "exercise". Body by Science[0][1] gets right to it on pages 2 and 3 to define all three:

Health: A physiological state in which there is an absence of disease or pathology and that maintains the necessary biologic balance between the catabolic and anabolic states.

Fitness: The bodily state of being physiologically capable of handling challenges that exist above a resting threshold of activity.

Exercise: A specific activity that stimulates a positive physiological adaptation that serves to enhance fitness and health and does not undermine the latter in the process of enhancing the former.

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Body-Science-Research-Strength-Traini...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PdJFbjWHEU

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#166

Post by teslaberry » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 4:18 AM UTC

pen2l wrote: post #160

toasterlovin wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think we can just stop doing studies about how exercise is good I heartily disagree. People have limited time. We need to figure out what form of excercise gives the most benefit for unit of time spent. There is serious disagreement about this (the two camps being cardio vs strength training, basically).

> There is serious disagreement about this (the two camps being cardio vs strength training, basically). Huh, strange to hear this. I do strength training (basically a lot of compound lifts like squats and deadlifts and so on) and I consider them to be a cardio. If I do a speedy 12 rep set, I am properly spent and breathing heavy and see my heart rate at 160 and above

theres no disagreement . moderate strength training preserves muscle mass as you age, consistent preservation of skeletal muscle mass is required to stave off acute muscle degeneration beyond some point in you late 60 to 70s.

heart muscle doesnt waste as easily, but moderate cardio, including moderate sprinting can be very useful for keeping a strong heart.

endurance cardio has no longevity/healthspan benefits beyond those wrought by virtue of stressing the heart and muscles in the initial moderate dose.

freqiency and consistency of above average myscle useage are key to preserving muscle function. also range of motion helps all muscle get used and keeps loads balanced to prevent injury.

my grandma is 96. never did a day of cardio running in her life.

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#167

Post by Gatsky » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 4:21 AM UTC

toasterlovin wrote: post #153

Gatsky wrote: post #92

If there is one universal truth of human biology, it is that exercise is good. It is good if you do a bit or a lot, if you are young, old, male, female, trans, pregnant, trying to get pregnant, single, married, divorced, depressed, a smoker, have cancer, have heart disease, have dementia, an astronaut, a pure mathematician, a plumber, tall, short, liberal, conservative etc etc. There isn't anyone that doesn't benefit…

> I think we can just stop doing studies about how exercise is good I heartily disagree. People have limited time. We need to figure out what form of excercise gives the most benefit for unit of time spent. There is serious disagreement about this (the two camps being cardio vs strength training, basically).

> We need to figure out what form of excercise gives the most benefit for unit of time spent.

Retrospective observational studies like the one in the original post aren't going to to that though.

Although I agree with you in principle, the differences between types of exercise are likely to be small compared to the benefit of doing anything at all. Most of the population aren't that concerned with what type of exercise gives the biggest delta in VO2 max.

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#168

Post by pnathan » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 4:21 AM UTC

Gatsky wrote: post #92

If there is one universal truth of human biology, it is that exercise is good. It is good if you do a bit or a lot, if you are young, old, male, female, trans, pregnant, trying to get pregnant, single, married, divorced, depressed, a smoker, have cancer, have heart disease, have dementia, an astronaut, a pure mathematician, a plumber, tall, short, liberal, conservative etc etc. There isn't anyone that doesn't benefit…

My physical advice runs as follows, with commentary below.

> Eat (non-processed) food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (Pollan)[0]

> Invest in strength and cardio training. Couple hours per week[1].

> Listen to qualified medical professionals, critically[2].

[0] tl;dr - make your own meals, high frequency of salads, don't overeat, and don't fuss too much.

[1] I recommend serious kettlebell work to achieve this; takes very little equipment and very little space.

[2] They aren't always right, and you always have to self-advocate.

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#169

Post by tacon » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 4:21 AM UTC

shafyy wrote: post #68

themagician wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “It should always be a person's #1 priority to live as long as possible.” Why? I personally don’t want to live as long as possible, definitely not if I develop some kind of neurodegerative disorder. I’d honestly be happy with 65. I don’t see too many people over the age 65 who I envy. Diet and exercise are big contributors to preventing heart disease, but when it comes to things like the vast array of cancers it’s…

That's a very shortsighted statement, but I can see where you're coming from. I thought the same way when I was in my late teens/early twenties. Was a way for me to justify unhealthy food, smoking and alcohol. Now I'm 30 and slowly realized it's not true. Living healthy when you're young doesn't have short-term reward. But I'm pretty sure when you're 50+ you'll be happy that you ate healthy, exercised and had a way t…

I will be 65 in a few months. I did my first ever dead hang strict pullup about a year ago. Lately I can do six. This time next year, probably twelve. It is fun slowing or reversing sarcopenia, which is mainly a societal result, not a genetic curse.

Re: Not exercising worse than smoking, diabetes and heart disease study finds

#170

Post by pnathan » Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 4:33 AM UTC

A book on barbell work for older (> 50y/o) adults defines a particular symptom set as "Sick Aging Phenotype". Diabetic, overweight, and physical inability are hallmarks of that symptom set.

One of my aims as someone who spends his work hours sitting is to avoid that fate. This is largely within my capability. I can choose to invest regularly in my enjoyment of life down the road. I can't control all sorts of things in life; but I can control if I can find time to swing a kettlebell.