4 ms·

> Why not just like, exercise properly? Why do you think walking isn't exercising properly? Exercise doesn't have to be weight-bearing or high-intensity to cou

> Why not just like, exercise properly? Why do you think walking isn't exercising properly? Exercise doesn't have to be weight-bearing or high-intensity to count. In fact, since those types of exercise increase injury risk, moderate exercise is probably better. Study after study after study - which I can cite just as soon as you cite some of your own - shows that walking or similar exercise captures practically all of health benefits without any risk (even to those who are older or who have already had heart attacks etc.) and with more likelihood of people sticking to it. Why go harder? And yes, when you dismiss walking as not exercising properly you are suggesting that.

generalenvelope 5y ago
> Why go harder? Because there's a dose dependent relationship between aerobic activity and positive health outcomes - the more you do, the more you get - and aerobics that are more intense than walking provide more "bang for back". And because there are unique benefits to weight bearing activities. Strengthening your muscles, for example, improves your ability to handle your body in space and reduces risk of falls, in addition to increasing bone density, which reduces severity of such injury from any falls. Sarcopenia (loss of muscle mass) is associated with significantly worse mortality when in the hospital. Having strength and confidence in your body improves quality of life through enabling you to keep up with physical tasks as you age. Reinforcing that movement is safe, especially loaded movement, is associated with better pain outcomes. Exercise does not have to be weight bearing or high-intensity. But if you are able and interested in your health, you should do those things. I only agree with your implication re:injury risk in the sense that lifting something up is inherently more dangerous than not because there is more load involved. This is a nonsensical reason to only walk, as humans adapt well to loading given reasonable fatigue and load management. Most people should not be concerned about any increased injury risk - but you should always consult with your doctor. See the physical activity guidelines for Americans: https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Activity_Guidelines_2nd_edition.pdf https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Acti... (There's lots of evidence provided).
- notacoward 5y ago
  Those are all good things. There are additional benefits to getting more or different exercise. But the point remains that walking is real exercise, it's more than most people get, and dismissing it as "not real" is privileged gym-rat bullshit. Even your own citation emphasizes aerobic activity - leading with moderate aerobic activity such as walking - over strengthening exercises. You yourself have said in another comment: > There are enormous health benefits to be had by small incremental increases Yes incremental. The more people pile on about doing even more before it "counts" as "real exercise" the fewer people will do even the first part. Not everyone is in their twenties, or built exercise into their lifestyle when they were. I myself started a bit late, and it's only because I'm more stubborn than most that I've kept progressing. People need encouragement, goals they can meet and victories they can savor, not "everyone should exercise the way I do" from people in more favorable circumstances. Ten people sticking with a modest exercise program is better than one person sticking with a more aggressive one, as far as public health is concerned.
  - generalenvelope 5y ago
    I agree with everything you said. I don't agree with the "real exercise" mantra for the reasons you've stated (creating unnecessary barriers and stigma). I was probably reading into the details too much. Mainly I want people to understand that loading is safe - and encouraged - even when you're older. Load management and fatigue are essential and should not be taken for granted.

generalenvelope 5y ago

> Why go harder? Because there's a dose dependent relationship between aerobic activity and positive health outcomes - the more you do, the more you get - and aerobics that are more intense than walking provide more "bang for back". And because there are unique benefits to weight bearing activities. Strengthening your muscles, for example, improves your ability to handle your body in space and reduces risk of falls, in addition to increasing bone density, which reduces severity of such injury from any falls. Sarcopenia (loss of muscle mass) is associated with significantly worse mortality when in the hospital. Having strength and confidence in your body improves quality of life through enabling you to keep up with physical tasks as you age. Reinforcing that movement is safe, especially loaded movement, is associated with better pain outcomes. Exercise does not have to be weight bearing or high-intensity. But if you are able and interested in your health, you should do those things. I only agree with your implication re:injury risk in the sense that lifting something up is inherently more dangerous than not because there is more load involved. This is a nonsensical reason to only walk, as humans adapt well to loading given reasonable fatigue and load management. Most people should not be concerned about any increased injury risk - but you should always consult with your doctor. See the physical activity guidelines for Americans: https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Activity_Guidelines_2nd_edition.pdf https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Acti... (There's lots of evidence provided).

notacoward 5y ago
Those are all good things. There are additional benefits to getting more or different exercise. But the point remains that walking is real exercise, it's more than most people get, and dismissing it as "not real" is privileged gym-rat bullshit. Even your own citation emphasizes aerobic activity - leading with moderate aerobic activity such as walking - over strengthening exercises. You yourself have said in another comment: > There are enormous health benefits to be had by small incremental increases Yes incremental. The more people pile on about doing even more before it "counts" as "real exercise" the fewer people will do even the first part. Not everyone is in their twenties, or built exercise into their lifestyle when they were. I myself started a bit late, and it's only because I'm more stubborn than most that I've kept progressing. People need encouragement, goals they can meet and victories they can savor, not "everyone should exercise the way I do" from people in more favorable circumstances. Ten people sticking with a modest exercise program is better than one person sticking with a more aggressive one, as far as public health is concerned.
- generalenvelope 5y ago
  I agree with everything you said. I don't agree with the "real exercise" mantra for the reasons you've stated (creating unnecessary barriers and stigma). I was probably reading into the details too much. Mainly I want people to understand that loading is safe - and encouraged - even when you're older. Load management and fatigue are essential and should not be taken for granted.