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

Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

howardluksmd.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 159 posts

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#71

Post by wotmatetherow »

rootusrootus wrote: post #59
wotmatetherow wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obesity is an independent risk factor, even if otherwise active/healthy. It's worth getting under control for lifespan and healthspan.

Across the population as a whole, BMI 30 is basically negligible increase in all-cause mortality. For someone otherwise reasonably active I wouldn't stress about the number. Ideal is somewhere around 27.

Where are you getting this number? Over 27% body fat is a health risk. For an active but not muscular individual, 30 BMI is at least 33% body fat, likely higher.

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#72

Post by domenicd »

torben-friis wrote: post #46
domenicd wrote: post #22

A lot of people in the comments are expressing curiosity about "ideal" amounts of exercise to avoid these sorts of problems. I have a real-life friend whose hobby is studying this stuff. His recommendations boil down to: - 1/week 20 minutes HIIT: 5 minutes warmup, 3x(2 minutes high intensity + 3 minutes low intensity) blocks. - 1/week strength training focused on large muscle groups. - 12,000 steps per day walking (H…

Anaerobic training’s returns increase ridiculously with days/week until about 3 and it’s large diminishing returns after that. Just saying, once you’re willing to lift weights once a week with all the upfront cost (gym membership, leaving your comfort zone, learning the ropes, etc) it’s a really good bang for your buck adding one or two more.

For sure. My friend's program is longevity-focused, not strength focused.

I usually do 2/week strength training + 1/week bouldering, but have dropped to 1/week strength training + 1/week bouldering while I worked to incorporate the 12k steps into my routine. I'm also currently doing a cut so am less motivated to lift. After I hit 10% body fat I plan to start bulking and go back to 2/week + bouldering or maybe even 3/week + bouldering.

Regarding diminishing returns, at least for longevity,

> Training once or twice a week for less than an hour can reduce the chance of death from any cause by 35%. But, if the time is increased to over an hour in a week or more than three sessions, then the longevity benefit disappears to zero compared with people who never put their hands on a weight.

from https://www.unaging.com/exercise/weight-lifting-for-life/ which cites https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7385554/ . Pretty interesting.

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#73

Post by domenicd »

jumpingbeans wrote: post #53
domenicd wrote: post #22

A lot of people in the comments are expressing curiosity about "ideal" amounts of exercise to avoid these sorts of problems. I have a real-life friend whose hobby is studying this stuff. His recommendations boil down to: - 1/week 20 minutes HIIT: 5 minutes warmup, 3x(2 minutes high intensity + 3 minutes low intensity) blocks. - 1/week strength training focused on large muscle groups. - 12,000 steps per day walking (H…

[dead]

My friend's main study that he cites is https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209525462... . The interesting thing is that there is no real cutoff. The benefit kind of tapers off logarithmically, but all-cause mortality just gets lower and lower the more steps/day you take. So his 12k is somewhat arbitrary.

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#74

Post by trjordan »

jaggederest wrote: post #25
trjordan wrote: post #20

Between this and http://myticker.com (posted recently), I want to share a theory of mine: 1) the internet is mostly made up of spaces where the median opinion is vanishingly rare among actual humans. 2) the median internet opinion is that of a person who is deep into the topic they're writing about. The net result is that for most topics, you will feel moderate to severe anxiety about being "behind" about what you sh…

Don't feel bad about your VO2 max, the baseline and ceiling are largely genetic. Most people can only bump VO2 max by about 10-15% even with absurd training regimens. Same goes with many of the markers people track - you can control them to an extent, but some people just have high blood pressure or poor lipid profiles and thus need intervention.

Appreciate it. The Apple-Watch-measured version came up to 44 since I’ve started running. I’ve been pleased.

None of my markers are high enough to trigger a doctor to care.

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#75

Post by trjordan »

wotmatetherow wrote: post #44
trjordan wrote: post #20

Between this and http://myticker.com (posted recently), I want to share a theory of mine: 1) the internet is mostly made up of spaces where the median opinion is vanishingly rare among actual humans. 2) the median internet opinion is that of a person who is deep into the topic they're writing about. The net result is that for most topics, you will feel moderate to severe anxiety about being "behind" about what you sh…

Obesity is an independent risk factor, even if otherwise active/healthy. It's worth getting under control for lifespan and healthspan.

Sure. I lost 20lbs in the last 12 months. I agree it’s worth working on, but not that it’s worth stressing about.

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#76

Post by stevenwoo »

Insanity wrote: post #3

But how do you know if you exercise enough?

There's a mention in this article a measurement of various epigenetic clocks but one would have to measure a baseline then try increasing or decreasing to see the effect on test results.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2501185-our-bodies-are-...

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#77

Post by abraxas »

I dislike most forms of exercise for one reason or another. I'm likely on the autism spectrum and have all the clumsiness that comes with the package so ball sports or dance are particularly hard and turned me off of sports for decades.

I also dislike walking and hiking as nature loves to make me miserable - I'm a pale mosquito magnet. Meanwhile walking in my city is a miserable experience as the urban environment is ugly and depressing where I live. And it's frigid most of the year.

But at last a few years ago I found a discipline that I enjoy and might be considered decent at. It's also one that to my understanding is one of the most beneficial of them all - I'm talking about swimming. I go to the pool every weekday before work and try to get at least 2-3 km at a decent clip. Mixing styles every few hundred metres to make sure I move different muscle groups.

It has done wonders for my physical appearance and my mental health which is what actually motivated me to try this after years of failed psychiatric treatments. If you know how to swim or are willing to learn I can't recommend it highly enough.

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#78

Post by softwaredoug »

rester324 wrote: post #18

I haven't read the paper, but what I am curious about, how much of the damage can be turned back if someone becomes physically active after a long sedentary period? Let's say someone already had low fat oxidization and/or cardiovascular disease, how much of that can be "cured" by being active? This post claims: the good news is, this is reversible. But is that so? Is it also proven to reverse things in all cases? I w…

I didn’t strength train until my 40s. Started being able to curl 15 pound weights. Now at the same reps I’m up to 20 or 25. Years later :)

It takes time. It’s a very steady climb. No doubt if I was a teenager I’d make much faster progress.

But it’s not just about the raw amount of weights, my running pace, etc. The benefits for my mental health in the moment. Improving my sleep and stress. And myriad other benefits make it worth it.

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#79

Post by burnt-resistor »

domenicd wrote: post #22

A lot of people in the comments are expressing curiosity about "ideal" amounts of exercise to avoid these sorts of problems. I have a real-life friend whose hobby is studying this stuff. His recommendations boil down to: - 1/week 20 minutes HIIT: 5 minutes warmup, 3x(2 minutes high intensity + 3 minutes low intensity) blocks. - 1/week strength training focused on large muscle groups. - 12,000 steps per day walking (H…

Walking 2 hours per day is a completely impractical fantasy.

A better resource: Body By Science a book containing recommendations based on research and data. The overall goal is proper volume of effective effort of cardio and strength exercise that doesn't take too long and reduces risks of wear/tear and injury.

Re: Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

#80

Post by djtango »

daemonologist wrote: post #47
sublinear wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The walking is the only true daily exercise commitment here, and 10k steps is a classic goal. Close enough for me would be reinterpreting this as "walk about an hour a day". Otherwise, I think once-a-week HIIT and once-a-week strength training sounds very reasonable and easy to maintain for just about anyone.

An hour is only 5k, maybe 6k steps for me (I'm sure it varies by individual). 12k is two hours of walking minimum, six or seven miles, which is a pretty big chunk - I did that much in college walking to class, and when I briefly lived in a city, but no way I'm getting that in on a daily basis out here in the suburbs. The other stuff, yeah no problem.

I'm pretty sure steps count when you get up and go to the toilet...

When I did my masters, we were in a Chemistry wet lab 8 hours a day and during the first month I would come home completely exhausted. I realised later that this was because I wasn't used to being on my feet all day walking around even though it didn't feel like I was being active shuffling from machine to machine, fume hood to sink etc

Post reply on HN