5 ms·

How much more evidence do we need, that exercise is good and any amount is better than none?

by eemil 2y ago

dartos 2y ago
More
yndoendo 2y ago
Until society has better work-life balance to allow for exercise while allowing for cost effect doctor visit to assign supportive and recognized improvement. Cheerleaders are more useful then people think.
- jimjimjim 2y ago
  Yes, Cheerleading is great exercise and the population would probably be healthier if everyone did it.
  - bobthepanda 2y ago
    Cheerleading is actually incredibly dangerous with the number of catastrophic spinal or brain injuries exceeding the combined totals of all other female sports. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/22/magazine/cheerleading-jeff-webb.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/22/magazine/cheerleading-jef...
    - jimjimjim 2y ago
      Interesting article. I hadn't considered the injury aspect.
- HuwFulcher 2y ago
  This is a big problem in the UK I think. The idea of having a regular checkup with a doctor is unheard of and will get you some weird looks if you ask for it. The NHS doesn't seem (as an outsider looking in) to do well with preventative care. I firmly believe (without necessarily a lot of evidence) that if we focused more on healthy lifestyles and made them more cost effective for people the amount of money we plough into the NHS every year could be reduced drastically.
  - ninalanyon 2y ago
    I suspect that regular check-ups for most people would simply regularly confirm what they already know: they need to lose weight, stop smoking, take more exercise, eat more fruit and veg. The UK now has a sugar tax on soft drinks that seems to be having a measurable positive effect. Whether it is a meaningful effect remains to be seen though: "The findings suggest that a year after the sugar tax was introduced, adults reduced their daily free sugar intake by about 10.9g, and a reduction in soft drinks accounted for over half of this reduction. This translates to a reduction of around 40 calories daily, which if maintained, and assuming no other changes, could lead to 1.5kg weight loss over a year." https://theconversation.com/how-do-we-know-the-uks-sugar-tax-is-working-234418 https://theconversation.com/how-do-we-know-the-uks-sugar-tax... So perhaps instead of exhorting people to do better the state should continue to try to make bad habits more expensive and good habits cheaper.
    - HuwFulcher 2y ago
      Yes a regular check-up wouldn't be the silver bullet but it would help expose larger problems under the surface which could be prevented with prescribed exercise, diet, etc. Ultimately it's down to the patient to put in the work but if the NHS focused more on creating community practices where these things could be more widely available then maybe we should see more meaningful change.
0xcde4c3db 2y ago
With the caveat that I'm just a random non-expert on the internet who has nevertheless spent too much time reading scattered studies and scholarly opinion articles: We don't need "more" evidence exactly, but rather a better model of how the effects of exercise map to a given individual's physiology. Exercise is good overall, but it's also considerably overhyped due to a procession of weak and narrowly-applicable results being misconstrued as adding up to a massive pile of benefits that applies to the average person. In reality, the average person does not get anywhere close to the sum of all the touted benefits; they get some constellation of some of the benefits, while other outcomes are flat or even regress [1]. So yes, "exercise is good" at a sufficient level of abstraction, but it's much harder to make the case that it's "good for [specific outcome] for [specific person]". Which is one reason that it's such an obnoxious trend for specific health complaints to be met with generic recommendations to exercise (or exercise more, or exercise differently). [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6818669/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6818669/
- brailsafe 2y ago
  It seems a bit silly to me that in many circumstances it's just way more acceptable for exercise to be zero part of your life than the reverse, and that an argument needs to be made for geting more than even 30 mins worth of movement in a week. A culture of getting exercise by default seems like the way things should be, and the should be an affordance for those who can't rather than a luxurious escape from not having to. It's not as true in some places in some circles, but it's hard not to notice a difference when you temporarily visit the others.
  - 0xcde4c3db 2y ago
    I think you're right overall, but a lot of that is an unexamined reaction to a built environment designed for motor vehicles, rather than being designed for humans. In suburban America, it too often doesn't occur to people to walk even modest distances, and when they decide to try, the experience can be scary considering that they're likely to interact with inattentive truck/SUV drivers while crossing intersections. If I just crossed the major intersection on the way to work without being paranoid about vehicle traffic, I'd probably be wheelchair-bound by now.
m3kw9 2y ago
The detail is in how regular are the exercises? Doing one hour at end of day after sitting 8 hr straight is worse then spreading it out. Of course doing 1 hour a day is better than nothing but it may not be effective
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
outworlder 2y ago
Well, I personally do not. I was about to be put in blood pressure medication. Then I started a gym, with a trainer. I noticed that, after the exercise, blood pressure would immediately drop and stay low for a few hours. Over time, the amount of time it spent lower than average increased, and it got lower and lower. It crossed 24h. Now? I can go to the gym Mon/Wed/Fri and it will remain low at all times. I did stop for a couple of weeks and it started creeping back up so it's not a 'cure', but functionally, as long as I keep it up, I have normal BP. I still have some weight to lose, that can further help things, most likely. And removing sugars also did help since I dropped a lot of liquid I was retaining.
- physicles 2y ago
  That’s amazing. How did you regularly monitor your blood pressure?
  - newaccount74 2y ago
    Presumably with a blood pressure monitor?
  - ninalanyon 2y ago
    I would guess that they did it using a blood pressure meter. That's how I do mine. They are cheap and reasonably accurate. Mine is from Omron, very similar to the one my doctor uses.
- lofaszvanitt 2y ago
  And it could skyrocket for example if you get into a stressful situation. And you wouldn't notice that you are over 180+. And one day you get a stroke and become paralyzed. Sure, do not take the medication. These exists since the 40s, there is nothing wrong with them.
  - LorenPechtel 2y ago
    The point is that exercise can remove the underlying problem. And those who stay active enough don't develop it in the first place. Doc was amazed that I wasn't on any maintenance meds at 55. (Since then I've gone on blood pressure meds but if other health issues were resolved I don't think I would need them.) Anybody can spike to 180 in a sufficiently stressful situation. (And, personally, I would very much notice 180. Otherwise calm, I'll probably notice 140.)

How much more evidence do we need, that exercise is good and any amount is better than none?

by eemil 2y ago

How much more evidence do we need, that exercise is good and any amount is better than none?

dartos 2y ago

yndoendo 2y ago

Until society has better work-life balance to allow for exercise while allowing for cost effect doctor visit to assign supportive and recognized improvement. Cheerleaders are more useful then people think.

jimjimjim 2y ago
Yes, Cheerleading is great exercise and the population would probably be healthier if everyone did it.
- bobthepanda 2y ago
  Cheerleading is actually incredibly dangerous with the number of catastrophic spinal or brain injuries exceeding the combined totals of all other female sports. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/22/magazine/cheerleading-jeff-webb.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/22/magazine/cheerleading-jef...
  - jimjimjim 2y ago
    Interesting article. I hadn't considered the injury aspect.
HuwFulcher 2y ago
This is a big problem in the UK I think. The idea of having a regular checkup with a doctor is unheard of and will get you some weird looks if you ask for it. The NHS doesn't seem (as an outsider looking in) to do well with preventative care. I firmly believe (without necessarily a lot of evidence) that if we focused more on healthy lifestyles and made them more cost effective for people the amount of money we plough into the NHS every year could be reduced drastically.
- ninalanyon 2y ago
  I suspect that regular check-ups for most people would simply regularly confirm what they already know: they need to lose weight, stop smoking, take more exercise, eat more fruit and veg. The UK now has a sugar tax on soft drinks that seems to be having a measurable positive effect. Whether it is a meaningful effect remains to be seen though: "The findings suggest that a year after the sugar tax was introduced, adults reduced their daily free sugar intake by about 10.9g, and a reduction in soft drinks accounted for over half of this reduction. This translates to a reduction of around 40 calories daily, which if maintained, and assuming no other changes, could lead to 1.5kg weight loss over a year." https://theconversation.com/how-do-we-know-the-uks-sugar-tax-is-working-234418 https://theconversation.com/how-do-we-know-the-uks-sugar-tax... So perhaps instead of exhorting people to do better the state should continue to try to make bad habits more expensive and good habits cheaper.
  - HuwFulcher 2y ago
    Yes a regular check-up wouldn't be the silver bullet but it would help expose larger problems under the surface which could be prevented with prescribed exercise, diet, etc. Ultimately it's down to the patient to put in the work but if the NHS focused more on creating community practices where these things could be more widely available then maybe we should see more meaningful change.

0xcde4c3db 2y ago

With the caveat that I'm just a random non-expert on the internet who has nevertheless spent too much time reading scattered studies and scholarly opinion articles: We don't need "more" evidence exactly, but rather a better model of how the effects of exercise map to a given individual's physiology. Exercise is good overall, but it's also considerably overhyped due to a procession of weak and narrowly-applicable results being misconstrued as adding up to a massive pile of benefits that applies to the average person. In reality, the average person does not get anywhere close to the sum of all the touted benefits; they get some constellation of some of the benefits, while other outcomes are flat or even regress [1]. So yes, "exercise is good" at a sufficient level of abstraction, but it's much harder to make the case that it's "good for [specific outcome] for [specific person]". Which is one reason that it's such an obnoxious trend for specific health complaints to be met with generic recommendations to exercise (or exercise more, or exercise differently). [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6818669/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6818669/

brailsafe 2y ago
It seems a bit silly to me that in many circumstances it's just way more acceptable for exercise to be zero part of your life than the reverse, and that an argument needs to be made for geting more than even 30 mins worth of movement in a week. A culture of getting exercise by default seems like the way things should be, and the should be an affordance for those who can't rather than a luxurious escape from not having to. It's not as true in some places in some circles, but it's hard not to notice a difference when you temporarily visit the others.
- 0xcde4c3db 2y ago
  I think you're right overall, but a lot of that is an unexamined reaction to a built environment designed for motor vehicles, rather than being designed for humans. In suburban America, it too often doesn't occur to people to walk even modest distances, and when they decide to try, the experience can be scary considering that they're likely to interact with inattentive truck/SUV drivers while crossing intersections. If I just crossed the major intersection on the way to work without being paranoid about vehicle traffic, I'd probably be wheelchair-bound by now.

m3kw9 2y ago

The detail is in how regular are the exercises? Doing one hour at end of day after sitting 8 hr straight is worse then spreading it out. Of course doing 1 hour a day is better than nothing but it may not be effective

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

outworlder 2y ago

Well, I personally do not. I was about to be put in blood pressure medication. Then I started a gym, with a trainer. I noticed that, after the exercise, blood pressure would immediately drop and stay low for a few hours. Over time, the amount of time it spent lower than average increased, and it got lower and lower. It crossed 24h. Now? I can go to the gym Mon/Wed/Fri and it will remain low at all times. I did stop for a couple of weeks and it started creeping back up so it's not a 'cure', but functionally, as long as I keep it up, I have normal BP. I still have some weight to lose, that can further help things, most likely. And removing sugars also did help since I dropped a lot of liquid I was retaining.

physicles 2y ago
That’s amazing. How did you regularly monitor your blood pressure?
- newaccount74 2y ago
  Presumably with a blood pressure monitor?
- ninalanyon 2y ago
  I would guess that they did it using a blood pressure meter. That's how I do mine. They are cheap and reasonably accurate. Mine is from Omron, very similar to the one my doctor uses.
lofaszvanitt 2y ago
And it could skyrocket for example if you get into a stressful situation. And you wouldn't notice that you are over 180+. And one day you get a stroke and become paralyzed. Sure, do not take the medication. These exists since the 40s, there is nothing wrong with them.
- LorenPechtel 2y ago
  The point is that exercise can remove the underlying problem. And those who stay active enough don't develop it in the first place. Doc was amazed that I wasn't on any maintenance meds at 55. (Since then I've gone on blood pressure meds but if other health issues were resolved I don't think I would need them.) Anybody can spike to 180 in a sufficiently stressful situation. (And, personally, I would very much notice 180. Otherwise calm, I'll probably notice 140.)