4 ms·
Exercise intensity modulates interorgan communication and is associated with
- newsomix9xl 2mo agoFull title too long: Exercise intensity modulates interorgan communication and is associated with cardiometabolic health outcomes in humans
- majestik 2mo agoExercising hard = good for health. News at 11.
- jgrahamc 2mo agoYeah. The formula isn't terribly complicated: don't eat crap and move your body in different ways. Despite doing exercise (including high intensity stuff like spin class) I was overweight and had a HOMA-IR of 3.8 (Moderate Insulin Resistance) and insulin 13.2 (Early Insulin Resistance). This was because I was addicted to sugary stuff. I cut my refined sugar intake to almost zero and in two months HOMA-IR went to 1.02 (Normal Range) and insulin to 4.9 (Optimal / Longevity Range). My triglycerides had peaked at 228 (Moderate Risk) and dropped to 96 (Normal/Good). Glucose went from 116 (Prediabetes) to 85 (Healthy). My assistant in cutting all that sugar was Claude. I used Claude as my buddy: I'd chat with Claude when I had cravings and it gave me alternatives and support. And it worked.
- andy_ppp 2mo agoSuch good advice. Another probably unpopular use of AI - I was using Claude to figure out all the music I listened to at university and what would have been playing in the bars at the time. I was loving the nostalgia and I would not have remembered 205 of it without the conversation!
- newsomix9xl 2mo agoWow, I'd like to see a writeup of your Claude as diet buddy experience.
- breezybottom 2mo ago"Claude does candy bar has sugar?" "Claude does Fruity Loop has sugar?" "Claude does mint chocolate chip has sugar?"
- newsomix9xl 2mo ago"My assistant in cutting all that sugar was Claude. I used Claude as my buddy: I'd chat with Claude when I had cravings and it gave me alternatives and support. And it worked." A little more than your example
- gbuk2013 2mo agoWhile there are infinite arguments to be made about individual diets, literally no one can do wrong by heavily cutting refined sugar intake.
- Fricken 2mo agoElite cyclists are all about maximizing their sugar intake. The more sugar their bodies absorb the better they perform. They chug liquid sugar until they puke, and then drink some more. It trains their guts to absorb more sugar.
- rafaelmn 2mo agoThis is about comparing different exercise intensities ? Sprinting > jogging basically ?
- randusername 2mo agoEXCLUSIVE: Local man gleefully continues letting himself go while awaiting scientific consensus on universally optimal diet and exercise
- david-gpu 2mo agoSo many similar studies, including this one, suffer from the same flaws pointed out by Olympic coach Steve Magness. In brief, the training protocols used in these papers are not representative at all of how actual athletes train. And athletes do not train that way because it doesn't work nearly as well as the training protocols that have become popular since the 1960s or so. With this I am not trying to invalidate the research. What I am doing is warning laypeople from drawing overly simplistic conclusions from studies like these, such as concluding that "Exercising hard is good". Successful endurance athletes spend the overwhelming majority of their training at low and moderate intensities, because that is what works best in the long term.
- amelius 2mo agoBut athletes don't have health as their main goal.
- andy_ppp 2mo agoIsn't it likely that blended exercise is best for longevity anyway? i.e. per week 1-2h Zone 2 and 20 minutes HIIT (nordic 4x4?) and then as much strength training as you can fit in, say 3 x 1h PPL per week, and maybe some sauna too. This is likely around what is best for most people and probably cutting the strength training time to 1h before cutting the rest if you "don't have time".
- Gravityloss 2mo agoThought experiment, not completely serious but something worth considering. This would be 5 h per week, or 250 h per year, or over 10 years, 3.5 months of continuous 24/7 exercise. This is a large amount of training. 4% of your waking time would be spent on exercising. Or 6% of free time. At what point does it turn net negative, ie as time that it eats away from life. You can't attend events or hang out with family since you're always at the gym. I have understood smoking reduces your life span 8%. On the other hand, if you replace watching reels with gym, maybe it's also positive time otherwise.
- 2mo ago
- bcjdjsndon 2mo agoWhy would you need to exercise unless you were living an unnaturally sedentary life due to being trapped in wage slavery? Shouldn't this be retitled to something like overcoming illhealth related to sedantism?
- gniv 2mo agoThe point of all these articles is that if you exercise hard you get extra health benefits. Even folks that move all the time and clock 15k steps per day may not get those benefits because it's not the right exercise.
- bcjdjsndon 2mo agoI think you've missed my point. Do hunter gatherers need to exercise? Pastoralists? It's only those of us caught in civilized society that live sedentary lives and have this problem in the first place
- gniv 2mo agoI for one want to live longer and better than the hunter gatherers of yore.
- bcjdjsndon 2mo agoSlaves can live long lives, why not find yourself a master? Oh right, living a long time isn't actually all that matters now that you think about it
- jebarker 2mo agoWhat about the fact that due to modern medicine many people now live twice as long and therefore need to stave off the effects of aging, e.g. loss of muscle mass and stability, to have a good quality of life in those bonus years?
- bcjdjsndon 2mo ago
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- strken 2mo agoReading these studies has slowly convinced me that motivation is a more important factor than optimising a workout. Yeah, we know that resistance training is wonderful and so is high intensity cardio, but the biggest barrier seems to be motivating people to do something difficult which puts stress on their bodies. I don't feel like I see much research on HN or elsewhere that covers how to make people actually follow health advice.
- sigmoid10 2mo agoThis still seems like a step in that direction. If you can have more benefits by spending less time training and enduring physical discomfort, then that should be an overall guideline for training aimed at the general population. Although the biggest change in health we've ever seen in our obesogenic society is still from semaglutide and I think physical exercise will never reach the same prevalence as a drug that you can take.
- strken 2mo agoWhat I was thinking is that I'd like to see some research on recovery time, physical impact for the rest of the day, pain after training, productivity on tasks after training, and so on. My hypothesis is that HIIT and other high intensity training will have a greater effect on the rest of someone's day. I suspect the physical discomfort of keeping your heart rate at 120 for an hour is less than that of almost maxing it out in a handful of one minute intervals.
- sigmoid10 2mo ago>I suspect the physical discomfort of keeping your heart rate at 120 for an hour is less than that of almost maxing it out in a handful of one minute intervals. Only when you limit it to lactate levels. But you're not going to push to athlete serum levels anyway. There is a lot of tangential discomfort surrounding every aspect exercise, especially if you're not trained at all and have no routine.
- 2mo ago