8 ms·

Metabolic and cellular differences between sedentary and active individuals

155 points by rzk 1y ago

Study: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.08.19.608601v1.full https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.08.19.608601v1....

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
Paper: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.08.19.608601v1.full.pdf https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.08.19.608601v1....
- andy99 1y ago
  Probably a better link for the post, the current article appears to be an AI generated ad
  - pinkmuffinere 1y ago
    I do like the scientific paper, but not everyone wants to read a true paper. Can you point out specific deficiencies in the linked article, aside from it being simplified but more accessible?
    - StrangeDoctor 1y ago
      it's disingenuous to say "We're discussing a paper that demands attention..." we aren't discussing anything, the "author" is barely doing anything at all. it's not a good summary, it's just a bunch of fact dumps out of context. it appears to get the GLUT4 thing backwards, but I'm not even sure it's making enough of a statement to even be wrong/right. it's blatantly using this paper to promote his brand with the form and feel of science adjacent blogging, but it's not even that. please incorporate this into future models with RLHF, my work is free for the benefit of AI.
      - pinkmuffinere 1y ago
        I appreciate that you give actual criticisms! That's IMO much better than saying "I ignore this because it was written by AI", because it doesn't add to the conversation. So with that context, I'd like to point out where I disagree with you: 1. "We aren't discussing anything" -- I don't know, I feel it does give a summary of the paper, which is a kind of discussion 2. "It's not a good summary" -- is it not? I think this section is essentially the correct conclusion: > Even without high blood sugar or cholesterol, their muscle metabolism was already failing. They were burning less fat, generating more oxidative stress, and clearing lactate poorly—evidence of inefficient, stressed mitochondria. These are likely to be the earliest findings in people who will develop metabolic disease states such as diabetes, fatty liver, hypertension, heart disease, etc. ... > San Millán puts it bluntly: sedentary people are not the control group. They are already metabolically impaired. 3. I don't think I know enough to comment on the GLUT4 thing, but I do feel that's kindof in the weeds. The main message is still true I think. 4. "it's blatantly using this paper to promote his brand" -- Maybe I just don't mind him building his personal brand. I think that's what the vast majority of blogging is. I don't even see a clear sales pitch on the page, so I'm very happy with this.
Insanity 1y ago
But how do you know if you exercise enough?
- pinkmuffinere 1y ago
  +1. I surf occasionally, and go rock climbing a couple times a week. Compared to the "average American" I suspect I'm pretty active. Compared to other rock climbers and surfers, I'm probably relatively inactive. If I'm not concerned about improving at these hobbies, and just want 80% of the health benefit of being active, am I achieving it? Or am I still below? Edit: From the linked paper: ''' 2.1 Subject Recruitment Nineteen male subjects ((41.9 ± 13.8 years; 82.6 ± 13.9 kg)) participated in this study and were assigned a research arm based upon meeting one of the following criteria related to physical activity: - Sedentary (SED): n= 10. Does not perform exercise regularly or elevate heart rate outside of daily tasks - Active (AC): n=10. Performs aerobic exercise for at least 150 minutes per week, and has at least a six-month history of doing so ''' I bet that "Performs aerobic exercise for at least 150 minutes per week" is related to some standard advice (but I'm too lazy to confirm that. I guess that provides an easy measuring stick to decide if we're being 'active enough'
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - Insanity 1y ago
    I am in a similar boat as you. I go bouldering twice a week for about 2h per session, I swim once a week for 45 minutes, and I walk an hour each day during my commute. But I would be interested to know how much this contributes to keeping me healthy.
  - justinator 1y ago
    Health is not the same as performance. You can have the former (sounds like you do to me), without the latter (but you're working on it -- what's the rush, going to the Olympics any time soon?). The extreme of "performance" is rarely healthy.
- solraph 1y ago
frmersdog 1y ago
Sumo wrestlers generally don't develop metabolic disease until after they retire, which comes with the cessation of their grueling, multi-hour daily training regimens. I wish I could find the NHK report on a group of scientists that were researching how metabolically-undesirable substances build up in muscles after as little as 20 minutes of inactivity. This is the one thing that makes me so angry about the state of AR/VR/XR. Human bodies are made to move when we work - not strenuously, not non-stop, but consistently and with some amount of vigor. Spatial software design represents an AMAZING opportunity to re-tune digital work processes to be movement-oriented, while still productive and efficient. Compare digital sculpting in ZBrush and Media Molecule's Dreams. It's maybe harder to envision a similar transformation for people dealing with data or communication for a living, but is it out of the realm of possibility? It shouldn't be, for anyone who who might compare common GUIs to interfaces like VIM and Emacs. The former are the unhappy compromise between the latter and the as-yet-to-be-created spatial interfaces that would be coming if the Bigs would stop trying to outmaneuver each other, and just create them. I am tired of trying to manage my photo library on a small laptop screen or monitor, with a single pointer. Let me summon them to my physical space and manipulate, stack, sort them, and more, with split controllers or my actual hands. I promise that my brain and body and your wallet will be much, much happier.
- skeledrew 1y ago
  I like the reenvisioning thoughts here. We're well overdue a Minority Report style upgrade to our I/O peripherals, with keyboard and mouse being relegated to backup use. We have/had a few things which could help (Leap Motion controller, Kinect, etc), but it's really hard to imagine how to generalize interfaces for these new device forms so they're at least on par with the old from a productivity perspective. Otherwise, people outside of research and maybe gaming won't really be sold on it.
storus 1y ago
Would 8 minute HIIT a few times a week do the job?
- solraph 1y ago
  tl;dr; Nope. Assuming that HIIT workouts are 100% vigorous activity (unlikely), then a "few" instances would only add up to around 24 minutes of vigorous activity, which is far short of the minimum recommended 75 minutes of vigorous activity. If you are short on time then performing HIIT for 15 minutes five days a week will get you much closer to the minimum requirements.
  - storus 1y ago
    4-minute HIIT run (30s full/5s walk, repeat) makes you vomit and not feel your legs. 15 minutes of HIIT 5-times a week is a wishful thinking. It's not your typical "vigorous" activity. At my athletic very best I could at most chain 3 HIITs in a row and be destroyed for a few days.
    - solraph 1y ago
      Fair enough, I don't think it changes my the conclusion though. On that basis, I would say that someone whose entire exercise regime is doing HIIT a few times a week for 8 minutes (24 minutes in total) is not going to be hitting the 6x multipler required for an equivalent of regular 150 minutes of exercise.
      - storus 1y ago
        Look up Tabata intervals, used to train speed-skating Olympians.
        solraph 1y ago
        If that is the entirety of their training regime, I will simultaneously be amazed and change my opinion. However, I still maintain that if someone is _only_ doing 8 minutes of HIIT 3x times a week, it is not equivalent of a getting 150 minutes of regular exercise per week. Without further context, it's impossible to comment further.
rester324 1y ago
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 would imagine there are caveats, and things are not that rosy in reality. The reason I am asking because if the answer is "None. It can only keep the symptoms from worsening" then it's not really reasonable to expect people with such physiological situation to become active again. They will most probably need to put in much more effort to achieve much smaller gain compared to a healthy individual, which is as I said is unreasonable. Especially because some people simply have worse genetics and or social circumstances which they might not be able to change. So I appreciate these findings, but how I read this: you need to be aware of this to prevent the ill effects. And I doubt the reversible claim (although I have not much of an argument to corroborate that).
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- jaggederest 1y ago
  That's not really a relevant question, actually. We know definitively that active is strictly better than inactive in all respects unless someone has such severe end stage cardiorespiratory issues that they risk actual death, or some other unusual condition that makes exercise contraindicated, in which case, of course, speak to a doctor and obey their advice. Even if it merely preserves function (which I would be skeptical about, humans are amazingly adaptive), the alternative is inactivity and thus gradual loss of function indefinitely over time until death.
- striking 1y ago
  It's not a question of trade-offs or utility. The sooner you intervene the more effective your interventions will be, sure, but it's hard for me to imagine a situation where there's absolutely no point in doing something about a sedentary lifestyle. It might be harder to improve your outcomes if you've already developed comorbidities but if one cares at all about living longer I don't see why that person should let perfect be the enemy of good.
trjordan 1y ago
Between this and http://myticker.com 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 shuld be doing. I'm 40, and I'm active. I ran a half marathon last weekend. I spent 5 hours climbing with my kids this weekend. My reaction to these articles, emotionally, was "I'm probably going to die of heart disease," because my cholesterol is a bit high and my BMI is 30. When I was biking 90 miles a week, my VO2 max was "sub-standard." Let's assume this information is true. That's OK. It's all dialed up to 11, and you don't have to do anything about it right now.
- jaggederest 1y ago
  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.
  - trjordan 1y ago
    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.
    - jaggederest 1y ago
      44 is nothing to sneeze at, that's a solid upper end of average range.
  - port11 11mo ago
    Thanks for saying that. Even when I ran every day — with the occasional VO2max sprint day —, my Apple Watch never placed me anywhere but Below Average for VO2max. It was disheartening. Some of these metrics actually put you off training.
domenicd 1y ago
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 (HIIT excluded). According to his reading of the literature, this gives you the best bang for your buck in terms of all-cause mortality avoidance. Most of the studies in this area are correlational, not randomized controlled trials, so it's hard to be sure. But I can vouch for his diligence in trying to get to the bottom of this. I've been following his program since January with reasonably good results over my already-active baseline. His website is https://www.unaging.com/ https://www.unaging.com/, and honestly it's a bit hard to recommend because he's definitely playing the SEO game: the articles are often repetitive of each other and full of filler. And the CMS seems janky. (I would tell you to find his older articles before he started optimizing for SEO, but, it seems like the CMS reset all article dates to today.) But, if you have patience, it might be worthwhile.
- dooglius 1y ago
  Isn't 12k steps like 6 miles? I could plausibly jog that much, but to walk it every day seems like a huge time commitment.
  - John23832 1y ago
    Then jog it? That's not a negative.
    - striking 1y ago
      There's a difference between aerobic and anaerobic exercise. For many people, that manifests as walking being different from running. Which "zone" your heart rate is in (as compared to your maximum heart rate for your age group) tends to be a good indicator of which kind of exercise you're doing. It's important to do both kinds of exercise, with an 80/20 rule being pretty commonly followed.
storus 1y ago
How about boosting mitochondria via supplements? Would that be something to look at? I climbed out of ME/CFS-like neurocovid mainly thanks to boosting mitochondria as much as I could and am wondering if the same lesson could be applied here?
- justinator 1y ago
  How about just moving around for 30 minutes most days? Supplements aren't going to help you mentally as a nice walk in the park.
  - storus 1y ago
    The point was that in ME/CFS you are essentially a conscious vegetable where drinking a glass of water or crawling to the toilet feels like a massive achievement. That mitochondrial supplements allowed pushing the limit every day a bit further in that state could have implications for regular folks as well who for whatever reasons can't move (imagine injury, lack of energy after a stressful day etc.).
    - justinator 1y ago
      I'm going to set aside the "you're a vegetable" use case, because that's wholly beyond of the pale of this discussion. The "lack of energy after a stressful day" is a lifestyle issue, and not something that I would suggest taking a drug to overcome. I would suggest taking a walk. You need to take responsibility for your well being, no one else should care about it more than you.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
abraxas 1y ago
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.
- stephen_g 1y ago
  I quite literally was thinking as I was reading your second paragraph, "hey, they should try swimming" - turns out you're well ahead of me! I started about four years ago, and it's been awesome for me too. For me I tried it because I just never liked how running makes me feel in my chest, whereas the aerobic intensity of swimming (slower burn in zones 2 and 3) feels way better to me. For anyone starting out, there is a bit of a hump to get over as you get some technique (I just used YouTube videos and feel). For a bit of an idea of how it can be to start, when my then-girlfriend (now wife) started coming along to some of my sessions, she had done three half marathons and was training for her fourth, but she couldn't swim 50m of freestyle in one go without a break! I remember doing two laps, having a break, then some breastroke, break, etc., whereas now I can pretty easily punch out 600m freestyle sets fairly fast before a break, or do 2km without stopping at a bit of a slower pace.
  - beingfit 1y ago
    > For anyone starting out, there is a bit of a hump to get over as you get some technique (I just used YouTube videos and feel). Are you saying you learned to swim from YouTube videos and applying those lessons? Any recommendations on videos or playlists?
inverted666 1y ago
This article describes issues lurking unseen for inactive people. I have the inverse. I'm one of the more active people I know: lots of walking, biking, swimming, hiking (with a heavy pack). I like to do outside work like digging and chopping firewood, etc. Yet, my blood glucose went prediabetic a couple of years ago (I'm 45). I actually eat very well too, lots of greens and whole grains, mostly vegetarian (my wife is a dietitian). I rarely eat sweets. So, I have the inverse issue: instead of being inactive with an unobserved symptom, I am active with an observed symptom. Alas, I haven't been able to get any relevant medical advice because the answer is always: diet and exercise. And, while I suppose I could find some way to improve my diet and exercise to some degree, I'm clearly above the norm. And, when I got a referral to an endocrinologist, they ended up canceling the appointment without seeing me because I'm only prediabetic. Does anyone have thoughts or advice?
__rito__ 1y ago
I will recommend working while walking. Also learning while working. One needs a standing desk and a treadmill. Also, if you are watching an episode of a tv show, randomly watching YouTube videos, listening to podcasts, etc., walk an hour or two during that time. That time won't feel 'wasted'. I can't point you towards any study. But intake of new knowledge and information is somehow better while I am walking.
eeasss 1y ago
One workaround that I have to maximize my steps is to have walking meetings whenever face 2 face camera is not mandatory or when discussing ideas. All hands - walk. Meet with peer - circle the office parking lot. The goal is to maximize steps starting from the first wake minute. That side I still have fatty liver. My doctor said it’s most likely due to genetics.
rzk 1y ago
There's a quote in that blog that I quite liked: We’ve engineered movement out of our lives. We sit in chairs, stare at screens, and outsource physical effort to machines. Then we try to cram all our movement into 45-minute bursts a few times a week. This is like eating only once a week and calling it a balanced diet. Most people are malnourished, not from lack of food, but from a lack of diverse, nutrient-dense movement.

155 points by rzk 1y ago

Study: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.08.19.608601v1.full https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.08.19.608601v1....

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

Paper: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.08.19.608601v1.full.pdf https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.08.19.608601v1....

andy99 1y ago
Probably a better link for the post, the current article appears to be an AI generated ad
- pinkmuffinere 1y ago
  I do like the scientific paper, but not everyone wants to read a true paper. Can you point out specific deficiencies in the linked article, aside from it being simplified but more accessible?
  - StrangeDoctor 1y ago
    it's disingenuous to say "We're discussing a paper that demands attention..." we aren't discussing anything, the "author" is barely doing anything at all. it's not a good summary, it's just a bunch of fact dumps out of context. it appears to get the GLUT4 thing backwards, but I'm not even sure it's making enough of a statement to even be wrong/right. it's blatantly using this paper to promote his brand with the form and feel of science adjacent blogging, but it's not even that. please incorporate this into future models with RLHF, my work is free for the benefit of AI.
    - pinkmuffinere 1y ago
      I appreciate that you give actual criticisms! That's IMO much better than saying "I ignore this because it was written by AI", because it doesn't add to the conversation. So with that context, I'd like to point out where I disagree with you: 1. "We aren't discussing anything" -- I don't know, I feel it does give a summary of the paper, which is a kind of discussion 2. "It's not a good summary" -- is it not? I think this section is essentially the correct conclusion: > Even without high blood sugar or cholesterol, their muscle metabolism was already failing. They were burning less fat, generating more oxidative stress, and clearing lactate poorly—evidence of inefficient, stressed mitochondria. These are likely to be the earliest findings in people who will develop metabolic disease states such as diabetes, fatty liver, hypertension, heart disease, etc. ... > San Millán puts it bluntly: sedentary people are not the control group. They are already metabolically impaired. 3. I don't think I know enough to comment on the GLUT4 thing, but I do feel that's kindof in the weeds. The main message is still true I think. 4. "it's blatantly using this paper to promote his brand" -- Maybe I just don't mind him building his personal brand. I think that's what the vast majority of blogging is. I don't even see a clear sales pitch on the page, so I'm very happy with this.

Insanity 1y ago

But how do you know if you exercise enough?

pinkmuffinere 1y ago
+1. I surf occasionally, and go rock climbing a couple times a week. Compared to the "average American" I suspect I'm pretty active. Compared to other rock climbers and surfers, I'm probably relatively inactive. If I'm not concerned about improving at these hobbies, and just want 80% of the health benefit of being active, am I achieving it? Or am I still below? Edit: From the linked paper: ''' 2.1 Subject Recruitment Nineteen male subjects ((41.9 ± 13.8 years; 82.6 ± 13.9 kg)) participated in this study and were assigned a research arm based upon meeting one of the following criteria related to physical activity: - Sedentary (SED): n= 10. Does not perform exercise regularly or elevate heart rate outside of daily tasks - Active (AC): n=10. Performs aerobic exercise for at least 150 minutes per week, and has at least a six-month history of doing so ''' I bet that "Performs aerobic exercise for at least 150 minutes per week" is related to some standard advice (but I'm too lazy to confirm that. I guess that provides an easy measuring stick to decide if we're being 'active enough'
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- Insanity 1y ago
  I am in a similar boat as you. I go bouldering twice a week for about 2h per session, I swim once a week for 45 minutes, and I walk an hour each day during my commute. But I would be interested to know how much this contributes to keeping me healthy.
- justinator 1y ago
  Health is not the same as performance. You can have the former (sounds like you do to me), without the latter (but you're working on it -- what's the rush, going to the Olympics any time soon?). The extreme of "performance" is rarely healthy.
solraph 1y ago

frmersdog 1y ago

Sumo wrestlers generally don't develop metabolic disease until after they retire, which comes with the cessation of their grueling, multi-hour daily training regimens. I wish I could find the NHK report on a group of scientists that were researching how metabolically-undesirable substances build up in muscles after as little as 20 minutes of inactivity. This is the one thing that makes me so angry about the state of AR/VR/XR. Human bodies are made to move when we work - not strenuously, not non-stop, but consistently and with some amount of vigor. Spatial software design represents an AMAZING opportunity to re-tune digital work processes to be movement-oriented, while still productive and efficient. Compare digital sculpting in ZBrush and Media Molecule's Dreams. It's maybe harder to envision a similar transformation for people dealing with data or communication for a living, but is it out of the realm of possibility? It shouldn't be, for anyone who who might compare common GUIs to interfaces like VIM and Emacs. The former are the unhappy compromise between the latter and the as-yet-to-be-created spatial interfaces that would be coming if the Bigs would stop trying to outmaneuver each other, and just create them. I am tired of trying to manage my photo library on a small laptop screen or monitor, with a single pointer. Let me summon them to my physical space and manipulate, stack, sort them, and more, with split controllers or my actual hands. I promise that my brain and body and your wallet will be much, much happier.

skeledrew 1y ago
I like the reenvisioning thoughts here. We're well overdue a Minority Report style upgrade to our I/O peripherals, with keyboard and mouse being relegated to backup use. We have/had a few things which could help (Leap Motion controller, Kinect, etc), but it's really hard to imagine how to generalize interfaces for these new device forms so they're at least on par with the old from a productivity perspective. Otherwise, people outside of research and maybe gaming won't really be sold on it.

storus 1y ago

Would 8 minute HIIT a few times a week do the job?

solraph 1y ago
tl;dr; Nope. Assuming that HIIT workouts are 100% vigorous activity (unlikely), then a "few" instances would only add up to around 24 minutes of vigorous activity, which is far short of the minimum recommended 75 minutes of vigorous activity. If you are short on time then performing HIIT for 15 minutes five days a week will get you much closer to the minimum requirements.
- storus 1y ago
  4-minute HIIT run (30s full/5s walk, repeat) makes you vomit and not feel your legs. 15 minutes of HIIT 5-times a week is a wishful thinking. It's not your typical "vigorous" activity. At my athletic very best I could at most chain 3 HIITs in a row and be destroyed for a few days.
  - solraph 1y ago
    Fair enough, I don't think it changes my the conclusion though. On that basis, I would say that someone whose entire exercise regime is doing HIIT a few times a week for 8 minutes (24 minutes in total) is not going to be hitting the 6x multipler required for an equivalent of regular 150 minutes of exercise.
    - storus 1y ago
      Look up Tabata intervals, used to train speed-skating Olympians.
      - solraph 1y ago
        If that is the entirety of their training regime, I will simultaneously be amazed and change my opinion. However, I still maintain that if someone is _only_ doing 8 minutes of HIIT 3x times a week, it is not equivalent of a getting 150 minutes of regular exercise per week. Without further context, it's impossible to comment further.

rester324 1y ago

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 would imagine there are caveats, and things are not that rosy in reality. The reason I am asking because if the answer is "None. It can only keep the symptoms from worsening" then it's not really reasonable to expect people with such physiological situation to become active again. They will most probably need to put in much more effort to achieve much smaller gain compared to a healthy individual, which is as I said is unreasonable. Especially because some people simply have worse genetics and or social circumstances which they might not be able to change. So I appreciate these findings, but how I read this: you need to be aware of this to prevent the ill effects. And I doubt the reversible claim (although I have not much of an argument to corroborate that).

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
jaggederest 1y ago
That's not really a relevant question, actually. We know definitively that active is strictly better than inactive in all respects unless someone has such severe end stage cardiorespiratory issues that they risk actual death, or some other unusual condition that makes exercise contraindicated, in which case, of course, speak to a doctor and obey their advice. Even if it merely preserves function (which I would be skeptical about, humans are amazingly adaptive), the alternative is inactivity and thus gradual loss of function indefinitely over time until death.
striking 1y ago
It's not a question of trade-offs or utility. The sooner you intervene the more effective your interventions will be, sure, but it's hard for me to imagine a situation where there's absolutely no point in doing something about a sedentary lifestyle. It might be harder to improve your outcomes if you've already developed comorbidities but if one cares at all about living longer I don't see why that person should let perfect be the enemy of good.

trjordan 1y ago

Between this and http://myticker.com 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 shuld be doing. I'm 40, and I'm active. I ran a half marathon last weekend. I spent 5 hours climbing with my kids this weekend. My reaction to these articles, emotionally, was "I'm probably going to die of heart disease," because my cholesterol is a bit high and my BMI is 30. When I was biking 90 miles a week, my VO2 max was "sub-standard." Let's assume this information is true. That's OK. It's all dialed up to 11, and you don't have to do anything about it right now.

jaggederest 1y ago
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.
- trjordan 1y ago
  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.
  - jaggederest 1y ago
    44 is nothing to sneeze at, that's a solid upper end of average range.
- port11 11mo ago
  Thanks for saying that. Even when I ran every day — with the occasional VO2max sprint day —, my Apple Watch never placed me anywhere but Below Average for VO2max. It was disheartening. Some of these metrics actually put you off training.

domenicd 1y ago

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 (HIIT excluded). According to his reading of the literature, this gives you the best bang for your buck in terms of all-cause mortality avoidance. Most of the studies in this area are correlational, not randomized controlled trials, so it's hard to be sure. But I can vouch for his diligence in trying to get to the bottom of this. I've been following his program since January with reasonably good results over my already-active baseline. His website is https://www.unaging.com/ https://www.unaging.com/, and honestly it's a bit hard to recommend because he's definitely playing the SEO game: the articles are often repetitive of each other and full of filler. And the CMS seems janky. (I would tell you to find his older articles before he started optimizing for SEO, but, it seems like the CMS reset all article dates to today.) But, if you have patience, it might be worthwhile.

dooglius 1y ago
Isn't 12k steps like 6 miles? I could plausibly jog that much, but to walk it every day seems like a huge time commitment.
- John23832 1y ago
  Then jog it? That's not a negative.
  - striking 1y ago
    There's a difference between aerobic and anaerobic exercise. For many people, that manifests as walking being different from running. Which "zone" your heart rate is in (as compared to your maximum heart rate for your age group) tends to be a good indicator of which kind of exercise you're doing. It's important to do both kinds of exercise, with an 80/20 rule being pretty commonly followed.

storus 1y ago

How about boosting mitochondria via supplements? Would that be something to look at? I climbed out of ME/CFS-like neurocovid mainly thanks to boosting mitochondria as much as I could and am wondering if the same lesson could be applied here?

justinator 1y ago
How about just moving around for 30 minutes most days? Supplements aren't going to help you mentally as a nice walk in the park.
- storus 1y ago
  The point was that in ME/CFS you are essentially a conscious vegetable where drinking a glass of water or crawling to the toilet feels like a massive achievement. That mitochondrial supplements allowed pushing the limit every day a bit further in that state could have implications for regular folks as well who for whatever reasons can't move (imagine injury, lack of energy after a stressful day etc.).
  - justinator 1y ago
    I'm going to set aside the "you're a vegetable" use case, because that's wholly beyond of the pale of this discussion. The "lack of energy after a stressful day" is a lifestyle issue, and not something that I would suggest taking a drug to overcome. I would suggest taking a walk. You need to take responsibility for your well being, no one else should care about it more than you.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

abraxas 1y ago

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.

stephen_g 1y ago
I quite literally was thinking as I was reading your second paragraph, "hey, they should try swimming" - turns out you're well ahead of me! I started about four years ago, and it's been awesome for me too. For me I tried it because I just never liked how running makes me feel in my chest, whereas the aerobic intensity of swimming (slower burn in zones 2 and 3) feels way better to me. For anyone starting out, there is a bit of a hump to get over as you get some technique (I just used YouTube videos and feel). For a bit of an idea of how it can be to start, when my then-girlfriend (now wife) started coming along to some of my sessions, she had done three half marathons and was training for her fourth, but she couldn't swim 50m of freestyle in one go without a break! I remember doing two laps, having a break, then some breastroke, break, etc., whereas now I can pretty easily punch out 600m freestyle sets fairly fast before a break, or do 2km without stopping at a bit of a slower pace.
- beingfit 1y ago
  > For anyone starting out, there is a bit of a hump to get over as you get some technique (I just used YouTube videos and feel). Are you saying you learned to swim from YouTube videos and applying those lessons? Any recommendations on videos or playlists?

inverted666 1y ago

This article describes issues lurking unseen for inactive people. I have the inverse. I'm one of the more active people I know: lots of walking, biking, swimming, hiking (with a heavy pack). I like to do outside work like digging and chopping firewood, etc. Yet, my blood glucose went prediabetic a couple of years ago (I'm 45). I actually eat very well too, lots of greens and whole grains, mostly vegetarian (my wife is a dietitian). I rarely eat sweets. So, I have the inverse issue: instead of being inactive with an unobserved symptom, I am active with an observed symptom. Alas, I haven't been able to get any relevant medical advice because the answer is always: diet and exercise. And, while I suppose I could find some way to improve my diet and exercise to some degree, I'm clearly above the norm. And, when I got a referral to an endocrinologist, they ended up canceling the appointment without seeing me because I'm only prediabetic. Does anyone have thoughts or advice?

__rito__ 1y ago

I will recommend working while walking. Also learning while working. One needs a standing desk and a treadmill. Also, if you are watching an episode of a tv show, randomly watching YouTube videos, listening to podcasts, etc., walk an hour or two during that time. That time won't feel 'wasted'. I can't point you towards any study. But intake of new knowledge and information is somehow better while I am walking.

eeasss 1y ago

One workaround that I have to maximize my steps is to have walking meetings whenever face 2 face camera is not mandatory or when discussing ideas. All hands - walk. Meet with peer - circle the office parking lot. The goal is to maximize steps starting from the first wake minute. That side I still have fatty liver. My doctor said it’s most likely due to genetics.

rzk 1y ago

There's a quote in that blog that I quite liked: We’ve engineered movement out of our lives. We sit in chairs, stare at screens, and outsource physical effort to machines. Then we try to cram all our movement into 45-minute bursts a few times a week. This is like eating only once a week and calling it a balanced diet. Most people are malnourished, not from lack of food, but from a lack of diverse, nutrient-dense movement.