33 ms·

I always like to show this picture as an example. https://i.imgur.com/ZcDedfo.jpg https://i.imgur.com/ZcDedfo.jpg I don't have an original source but it shows

by lysp 8y ago

I always like to show this picture as an example. https://i.imgur.com/ZcDedfo.jpg https://i.imgur.com/ZcDedfo.jpg I don't have an original source but it shows a MRI leg scan comparison between a 40yo triathlete, a sedentary 70yo and a 70yo triathlete. The picture tells the story...

maxxxxx 8y ago
That's a good one. Amazing how little muscle the sedentary person has.
- jlawson 8y ago
  I'm pretty sure the images are scaled differently (note the sizes of the bones, which should be the same). The sedentary person isn't just sedentary, they look to be morbidly obese. That image is zoomed out, but the actual size of the muscle isn't that different. It's just surrounded by a huge amount of fat.
christophilus 8y ago
Yeesh. That's a great visual. I'm a sedentary software engineer... gotta make some changes. It reminds me of the cancer slides in the "How Not to Die" talk https://youtu.be/7rNY7xKyGCQ?t=780 https://youtu.be/7rNY7xKyGCQ?t=780 which is partly why I'm now vegan.
- andy_ppp 8y ago
  Love the talking style of the speaker as well as the terrifying content!
- hokkos 8y ago
  Dr Greger and its undisclosed vegan agenda using cherry picked or wrongly interpreted studies to push it.
  - chillingeffect 8y ago
    Would you consider adding to the discussion by presenting meta-studies showing meat is not carcinogenic?
    - close04 8y ago
      That's not how things work. A study can only prove something was not carcinogenic during the study. It cannot prove it's not carcinogenic [period]. The other way around works: if a study shows something was carcinogenic during the study, it proved it's carcinogenic [period]. All of this assumes properly conducted studies. On the other hand studies proved UV rays are carcinogenic [0]. Assuming knowing meat is carcinogenic turns you into a vegetarian let me know how you'd approach getting out of the house from now on. [0] https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/uv-radiation/uv-radiation-does-uv-cause-cancer.html https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposu...
      - LinXitoW 8y ago
        That's quite the comparison, considering one of those is practically impossible to do and would have a lot of negative consequences in other areas. Whereas the other is doable (as evidenced by the existence of vegans) AND has a lot of other positive consequences (environmental, moral). Most definitions of veganism include something like "reduce suffering as far as possible and practicable". It's not absolute. Of course, another objection to your comparison is that it suggests if we cannot remove ALL bad things, we ought not to do anything.
        close04 8y ago
        I replied to a comment asking to "prove a negative". Either due to poor understanding of how it works or to skew the answer in their favor. But to the point, you could wear sunscreen. But you consider that to be too much of a hassle even when risking cancer. And no, that's not what my comparison was suggesting. What I tried to say clearly (not just suggest) is that if you live and die by studies than don't cherry pick. Don't ask for studies only when it suits you and it supports your point of view. In the end it's mostly personal preference. No study said "moderate meat consumption will cause cancer" yet people are willing to skew the conclusions to better justify a personal choice. Just give up meat if you feel like it and use the study as additional justification if needed. Don't go waving studies to justify your choice but put them aside when they don't.
- chillingeffect 8y ago
  definitely start a sit/stand desk as early as possible. I didn't think I was that unhealthy sitting all day until I had an injury from a car accident which took waaay too long to heal - primarily bc my hamstrings and IT band were shortened from all that sitting! when i left my last job, I started working from home without the sit/stand for about 2 weeks thinking "that didn't help that much," until I started noticing the tightness all over my body. I just bought a sit/stand (Varidesk fwiw) last night.
  - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
    Do you have a pad for under your desk? I find that I can't just stand all day without getting stiff either.
    - chillingeffect 8y ago
      I didn't have one and yes it took a few weeks of building up to being able to stand all day, so I would take sitting breaks for 1-2 hours. From what I understand, it's actually better to have a mix than to stand only. But yes, now that you remind me, I will get a pad! Thank you.
      - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
        > From what I understand, it's actually better to have a mix than to stand only. Yeah, we like to think that standing is something new, but cashiers have done it for years, and, having spent time as one in my youth, I can tell you that there is a lot of discomfort during the work week. I'd really recommend sitting and standing.
      - frankzinger 8y ago
        > From what I understand, it's actually better to have a mix than to stand only. Indeed. You will probably get spider veins otherwise. Happened to me. I've been working standing up since 2011 and only noticed it a couple of years ago so it might take a while.
Numberwang 8y ago
The patterns on the 40 and 70 year old triathlete match far too well. I'm calling bullshit. The "70 year old triathlete" scan is just further up the leg of the 40 year old.
- oihoaihsfoiahsf 8y ago
  To be fair, the legs of healthy people who perform the same type of exercise do tend to have very similar shapes.
- dotancohen 8y ago
  You find it surprising that two different humans have the same muscles in the same locations? Have you ever noticed that chicken wings also have the same meat in the same spot across two different wings?
  - Numberwang 8y ago
    This is too stupid to answer to, but have you noticed Yao Ming and Britney Spears do not look the same? Good. Now have you noticed carbon atoms are strikingly similar? Good, almost there. Somewhere in-between these two views unique features emerge. Tell me where on the scale of atom to human the quads are? There is plenty in these pictures that is unique in the two persons depicted. There is no need to lie to make a good argument for exercise. This image belong on your grandmothers Facebook page at best.
- randcraw 8y ago
  I agree that it's typical for authors to cherry pick the samples used to illustrate their major message most forcefully. That's why discriminating readers (like us) should rigorously overlook pretty pictures and instead look only at: 1) the amount of separation between groups (big effect?), 2) the stat. significance across the given population (consistent signal?), 3) the constraints the authors used to create that population (representative of the real world?), and 4) whether the discriminating signal they chose selectively detects the causal effect they propose. No picture can do all of that.
- nradov 8y ago
rerx 8y ago
The picture is taken from this study: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1933 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1933 (use Sci-Hub if you do not belong to an institution paying for access)
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  Thank you! I couldn't come up with a reputable source on reverse image search to figure out if it's fake or not.
- wjnc 8y ago
  The fallacy in this article is as follows: (quote) "A cross-section of 40 high-level recreational athletes (“masters athletes”) who were aged 40 to 81 years and trained 4 to 5 times per week underwent tests of health/activity, body composition, quadriceps peak torque (PT), and magnetic resonance imaging of bilateral quadriceps." The 81 yr old that trains 4-5x (!) a week is a lot more special than the 40 yr old (that's my hypothesis at least). Thus any regression is spurious, since we are sampling from different quantiles! So you don't know anything about the correlation with age. I'm not disputing that training 4-5x a week keeps muscles strong and the body lean, but it's hardly prescriptive. It's like winning the lottery will make you richer when you retire. I've tried to reach the authors about this when the article came out, but alas. A letter to the editor in a to me unknown journal seemed not the best use of my time. I've even got code demonstrating the fallacy with quantile regression ;)
  - maxerickson 8y ago
    The paper's discussion contains this statement: In addition, studying masters athletes partially limits the applicability of these data to the general population of aging adults who do not aggressively exercise 4 to 5 times per week. It's unfortunate that such a statement won't make it into popular treatments, but the paper doesn't get very far out over its skis.
    - wjnc 8y ago
      My point is they are not sampling from genpop And they are sampling Different populations with age rising. I've met quite a few fit 60 yr olds, but have never seen a that fit 80 yr old.
matwood 8y ago
Most people have no idea I'm 41, and instead think I'm in my 30s. Balding and grey hair show I'm not in my 20s ;) My 'secret' is I workout every single day. I might do heavy weight training, sled pushing, surfing, or a spin class. It doesn't matter as long as I do something physically challenging. I also follow an 80/20 rule on eating paleo-ish. Mainly I try to avoid processed foods, but I'll still eat a pizza or good sandwich - just not all the time. Most meals consist of meat/dairy and veggies. If I'm fortunate enough to live into old age, I don't plan to stop exercising. It's part of what gets me out of bed every morning.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  If you just do some exercise regularly and eat halfways right you are already way ahead of 90% of the population . It always amazes me to learn that a lot of people do absolutely nothing.
  - matwood 8y ago
    Exactly. This is why I do it everyday - it becomes a habit. I wake up and work out. No different than brushing my teeth.
    - 131012 8y ago
      You do that on empty stomach? Serious question, it's my main difficulty with morning workout.
      - otherdave 8y ago
        Not the person you were replying to, but I'm a morning workout person (mostly weightlifting but also some cardio-type stuff). Yeah, empty stomach. For weightlifting I may have a protein shake with just enough water and almost always a banana and that's it. Doesn't bother me. I'm not sure if it's optimal (or if I could even tell what is optimal) but weights are still heavy and I still make progress so I'm happy with it.
      - 8y ago
dfsegoat 8y ago
Doesn't tell the whole story: Was told by a doc that with the amount of scar tissue in my R shoulder / bicep that he could easily trick new medical residents into thinking it was the MRI of a 70 or 80 year old. ... I train jiu jitsu 3x / week + cardio 3x / week.
- pc86 8y ago
  JJ is notoriously hard on the body, especially the joints, and especially if you're rolling with less experienced folks.
- kkarakk 8y ago
  ...martial artists are guaranteed bodily harm in some form or the other.scarifying tissues,ligament damage and microfracturing are a fact of life. not to mention if you're doing it competitively then someone else is actively going to cause grevious bodily injury that you cannot prevent. the bill comes due someday
hazz99 8y ago
Was the 70yo triathlete just a triathlete in their younger years, or did they keep up the exercise as they got older? If you can remember, of course.
- maxerickson 8y ago
  Both. The subjects in the paper trained a lot before age 40 and continued to train a lot into old age.
amelius 8y ago
You should also show the brain scans of the triathlete versus a sedentary computer programmer.
- fahadkhan 8y ago
  You missed a triathlete computer programmer.
  - SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
    In my office we have a CrossFitting computer programmer, a BJJ-ing computer programmer, and indeed a triathlete computer programmer. Being a computer programmer and being fit are by no means mutually exclusive.
    - CodeCube 8y ago
      yay BJJ! Been doing this for about two years, and it's the best thing I ever started. Really enjoy both the physical training aspect of it, and also the "human chess" aspect of it.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  How smart do you have to be to out-think a heart attack?
amelius 8y ago
Can be summarized as "use it or lose it".
- EForEndeavour 8y ago
  Counterpoint that becomes increasingly relevant as one ages: "wear and tear."
  - nradov 8y ago
    That's not a valid counterpoint. Assuming proper technique, frequent sustained use keeps joints healthier. In particular the old myth that running is bad for knees has been debunked.
notyourday 8y ago
The key is balanced (non-crappy) diet and a certain level of activity whatever that activity. Look at people in NYC vs. people in Scranton. NYC folks have more muscles because they have to walk to get to the subway, stand in a subway, walk up the stairs and down the stairs to get to the platform, walk from one place to the other, cross a dozen of blocks, etc. Folks in Scranton walk from their couch to their car, ride to their work in that car, barely move at their work, walk 100ft back to their car and get themselves back to their couch.
transpy 8y ago
This picture made me jump out of my chair and start doing squats.
mrfusion 8y ago
Very neat! Why does the 3rd picture have so much less fat than the first?
Steve44 8y ago
> The picture tells the story... IMHO what it needs to show is the 40yr old sedentary picture too. Without that I don't think you can separate ageing from sedentary affects. I doubt the 40 yr old sedentary person is the same as the 40yr old athlete.
agumonkey 8y ago
40 and 70 are so similar I'm almost dubious. that said I want to run now
singularity2001 8y ago
Wow, thanks so much for sharing. this must be one of the most important medical documents out there. I can't believe that after reading thousands of words in magazines on aging I never saw this! One could ask how much more exhausting it is for someone to do a triathlon at 70ya. But I remember someone in my family really enjoying being very active right until they dropped dead. That is such a positive message.
ummonk 8y ago
That image seems to be somewhat misleading though, as the scale isn’t preserved across pictures. If you look at the bone size, the middle pic mostly has more fat.
RickJWagner 8y ago
Wow, great pic. Thanks for sharing.

by lysp 8y ago

maxxxxx 8y ago

That's a good one. Amazing how little muscle the sedentary person has.

jlawson 8y ago
I'm pretty sure the images are scaled differently (note the sizes of the bones, which should be the same). The sedentary person isn't just sedentary, they look to be morbidly obese. That image is zoomed out, but the actual size of the muscle isn't that different. It's just surrounded by a huge amount of fat.

christophilus 8y ago

Yeesh. That's a great visual. I'm a sedentary software engineer... gotta make some changes. It reminds me of the cancer slides in the "How Not to Die" talk https://youtu.be/7rNY7xKyGCQ?t=780 https://youtu.be/7rNY7xKyGCQ?t=780 which is partly why I'm now vegan.

andy_ppp 8y ago
Love the talking style of the speaker as well as the terrifying content!
hokkos 8y ago
Dr Greger and its undisclosed vegan agenda using cherry picked or wrongly interpreted studies to push it.
- chillingeffect 8y ago
  Would you consider adding to the discussion by presenting meta-studies showing meat is not carcinogenic?
  - close04 8y ago
    That's not how things work. A study can only prove something was not carcinogenic during the study. It cannot prove it's not carcinogenic [period]. The other way around works: if a study shows something was carcinogenic during the study, it proved it's carcinogenic [period]. All of this assumes properly conducted studies. On the other hand studies proved UV rays are carcinogenic [0]. Assuming knowing meat is carcinogenic turns you into a vegetarian let me know how you'd approach getting out of the house from now on. [0] https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/uv-radiation/uv-radiation-does-uv-cause-cancer.html https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposu...
    - LinXitoW 8y ago
      That's quite the comparison, considering one of those is practically impossible to do and would have a lot of negative consequences in other areas. Whereas the other is doable (as evidenced by the existence of vegans) AND has a lot of other positive consequences (environmental, moral). Most definitions of veganism include something like "reduce suffering as far as possible and practicable". It's not absolute. Of course, another objection to your comparison is that it suggests if we cannot remove ALL bad things, we ought not to do anything.
      - close04 8y ago
        I replied to a comment asking to "prove a negative". Either due to poor understanding of how it works or to skew the answer in their favor. But to the point, you could wear sunscreen. But you consider that to be too much of a hassle even when risking cancer. And no, that's not what my comparison was suggesting. What I tried to say clearly (not just suggest) is that if you live and die by studies than don't cherry pick. Don't ask for studies only when it suits you and it supports your point of view. In the end it's mostly personal preference. No study said "moderate meat consumption will cause cancer" yet people are willing to skew the conclusions to better justify a personal choice. Just give up meat if you feel like it and use the study as additional justification if needed. Don't go waving studies to justify your choice but put them aside when they don't.
chillingeffect 8y ago
definitely start a sit/stand desk as early as possible. I didn't think I was that unhealthy sitting all day until I had an injury from a car accident which took waaay too long to heal - primarily bc my hamstrings and IT band were shortened from all that sitting! when i left my last job, I started working from home without the sit/stand for about 2 weeks thinking "that didn't help that much," until I started noticing the tightness all over my body. I just bought a sit/stand (Varidesk fwiw) last night.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  Do you have a pad for under your desk? I find that I can't just stand all day without getting stiff either.
  - chillingeffect 8y ago
    I didn't have one and yes it took a few weeks of building up to being able to stand all day, so I would take sitting breaks for 1-2 hours. From what I understand, it's actually better to have a mix than to stand only. But yes, now that you remind me, I will get a pad! Thank you.
    - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
      > From what I understand, it's actually better to have a mix than to stand only. Yeah, we like to think that standing is something new, but cashiers have done it for years, and, having spent time as one in my youth, I can tell you that there is a lot of discomfort during the work week. I'd really recommend sitting and standing.
    - frankzinger 8y ago
      > From what I understand, it's actually better to have a mix than to stand only. Indeed. You will probably get spider veins otherwise. Happened to me. I've been working standing up since 2011 and only noticed it a couple of years ago so it might take a while.

Numberwang 8y ago

The patterns on the 40 and 70 year old triathlete match far too well. I'm calling bullshit. The "70 year old triathlete" scan is just further up the leg of the 40 year old.

oihoaihsfoiahsf 8y ago
To be fair, the legs of healthy people who perform the same type of exercise do tend to have very similar shapes.
dotancohen 8y ago
You find it surprising that two different humans have the same muscles in the same locations? Have you ever noticed that chicken wings also have the same meat in the same spot across two different wings?
- Numberwang 8y ago
  This is too stupid to answer to, but have you noticed Yao Ming and Britney Spears do not look the same? Good. Now have you noticed carbon atoms are strikingly similar? Good, almost there. Somewhere in-between these two views unique features emerge. Tell me where on the scale of atom to human the quads are? There is plenty in these pictures that is unique in the two persons depicted. There is no need to lie to make a good argument for exercise. This image belong on your grandmothers Facebook page at best.
randcraw 8y ago
I agree that it's typical for authors to cherry pick the samples used to illustrate their major message most forcefully. That's why discriminating readers (like us) should rigorously overlook pretty pictures and instead look only at: 1) the amount of separation between groups (big effect?), 2) the stat. significance across the given population (consistent signal?), 3) the constraints the authors used to create that population (representative of the real world?), and 4) whether the discriminating signal they chose selectively detects the causal effect they propose. No picture can do all of that.
nradov 8y ago

rerx 8y ago

The picture is taken from this study: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1933 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1933 (use Sci-Hub if you do not belong to an institution paying for access)

lotsofpulp 8y ago
Thank you! I couldn't come up with a reputable source on reverse image search to figure out if it's fake or not.
wjnc 8y ago
The fallacy in this article is as follows: (quote) "A cross-section of 40 high-level recreational athletes (“masters athletes”) who were aged 40 to 81 years and trained 4 to 5 times per week underwent tests of health/activity, body composition, quadriceps peak torque (PT), and magnetic resonance imaging of bilateral quadriceps." The 81 yr old that trains 4-5x (!) a week is a lot more special than the 40 yr old (that's my hypothesis at least). Thus any regression is spurious, since we are sampling from different quantiles! So you don't know anything about the correlation with age. I'm not disputing that training 4-5x a week keeps muscles strong and the body lean, but it's hardly prescriptive. It's like winning the lottery will make you richer when you retire. I've tried to reach the authors about this when the article came out, but alas. A letter to the editor in a to me unknown journal seemed not the best use of my time. I've even got code demonstrating the fallacy with quantile regression ;)
- maxerickson 8y ago
  The paper's discussion contains this statement: In addition, studying masters athletes partially limits the applicability of these data to the general population of aging adults who do not aggressively exercise 4 to 5 times per week. It's unfortunate that such a statement won't make it into popular treatments, but the paper doesn't get very far out over its skis.
  - wjnc 8y ago
    My point is they are not sampling from genpop And they are sampling Different populations with age rising. I've met quite a few fit 60 yr olds, but have never seen a that fit 80 yr old.

matwood 8y ago

Most people have no idea I'm 41, and instead think I'm in my 30s. Balding and grey hair show I'm not in my 20s ;) My 'secret' is I workout every single day. I might do heavy weight training, sled pushing, surfing, or a spin class. It doesn't matter as long as I do something physically challenging. I also follow an 80/20 rule on eating paleo-ish. Mainly I try to avoid processed foods, but I'll still eat a pizza or good sandwich - just not all the time. Most meals consist of meat/dairy and veggies. If I'm fortunate enough to live into old age, I don't plan to stop exercising. It's part of what gets me out of bed every morning.

maxxxxx 8y ago
If you just do some exercise regularly and eat halfways right you are already way ahead of 90% of the population . It always amazes me to learn that a lot of people do absolutely nothing.
- matwood 8y ago
  Exactly. This is why I do it everyday - it becomes a habit. I wake up and work out. No different than brushing my teeth.
  - 131012 8y ago
    You do that on empty stomach? Serious question, it's my main difficulty with morning workout.
    - otherdave 8y ago
      Not the person you were replying to, but I'm a morning workout person (mostly weightlifting but also some cardio-type stuff). Yeah, empty stomach. For weightlifting I may have a protein shake with just enough water and almost always a banana and that's it. Doesn't bother me. I'm not sure if it's optimal (or if I could even tell what is optimal) but weights are still heavy and I still make progress so I'm happy with it.
    - 8y ago

dfsegoat 8y ago

Doesn't tell the whole story: Was told by a doc that with the amount of scar tissue in my R shoulder / bicep that he could easily trick new medical residents into thinking it was the MRI of a 70 or 80 year old. ... I train jiu jitsu 3x / week + cardio 3x / week.

pc86 8y ago
JJ is notoriously hard on the body, especially the joints, and especially if you're rolling with less experienced folks.
kkarakk 8y ago
...martial artists are guaranteed bodily harm in some form or the other.scarifying tissues,ligament damage and microfracturing are a fact of life. not to mention if you're doing it competitively then someone else is actively going to cause grevious bodily injury that you cannot prevent. the bill comes due someday

hazz99 8y ago

Was the 70yo triathlete just a triathlete in their younger years, or did they keep up the exercise as they got older? If you can remember, of course.

maxerickson 8y ago
Both. The subjects in the paper trained a lot before age 40 and continued to train a lot into old age.

amelius 8y ago

You should also show the brain scans of the triathlete versus a sedentary computer programmer.

fahadkhan 8y ago
You missed a triathlete computer programmer.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
  In my office we have a CrossFitting computer programmer, a BJJ-ing computer programmer, and indeed a triathlete computer programmer. Being a computer programmer and being fit are by no means mutually exclusive.
  - CodeCube 8y ago
    yay BJJ! Been doing this for about two years, and it's the best thing I ever started. Really enjoy both the physical training aspect of it, and also the "human chess" aspect of it.
SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
How smart do you have to be to out-think a heart attack?

amelius 8y ago

Can be summarized as "use it or lose it".

EForEndeavour 8y ago
Counterpoint that becomes increasingly relevant as one ages: "wear and tear."
- nradov 8y ago
  That's not a valid counterpoint. Assuming proper technique, frequent sustained use keeps joints healthier. In particular the old myth that running is bad for knees has been debunked.

notyourday 8y ago

The key is balanced (non-crappy) diet and a certain level of activity whatever that activity. Look at people in NYC vs. people in Scranton. NYC folks have more muscles because they have to walk to get to the subway, stand in a subway, walk up the stairs and down the stairs to get to the platform, walk from one place to the other, cross a dozen of blocks, etc. Folks in Scranton walk from their couch to their car, ride to their work in that car, barely move at their work, walk 100ft back to their car and get themselves back to their couch.

transpy 8y ago

This picture made me jump out of my chair and start doing squats.

mrfusion 8y ago

Very neat! Why does the 3rd picture have so much less fat than the first?

Steve44 8y ago

> The picture tells the story... IMHO what it needs to show is the 40yr old sedentary picture too. Without that I don't think you can separate ageing from sedentary affects. I doubt the 40 yr old sedentary person is the same as the 40yr old athlete.

agumonkey 8y ago

40 and 70 are so similar I'm almost dubious. that said I want to run now

singularity2001 8y ago

Wow, thanks so much for sharing. this must be one of the most important medical documents out there. I can't believe that after reading thousands of words in magazines on aging I never saw this! One could ask how much more exhausting it is for someone to do a triathlon at 70ya. But I remember someone in my family really enjoying being very active right until they dropped dead. That is such a positive message.

ummonk 8y ago

That image seems to be somewhat misleading though, as the scale isn’t preserved across pictures. If you look at the bone size, the middle pic mostly has more fat.

RickJWagner 8y ago

Wow, great pic. Thanks for sharing.