192 replies to this topic

[Mind]

Running slows the aging clock.

When Fries and his team began this research in 1984, many scientists thought vigorous exercise would do older folks more harm than good. Some feared the long-term effect of the then-new jogging craze would be floods of orthopedic injuries, with older runners permanently hobbled by their exercise habit. Fries had a different hypothesis: he thought regular exercise would extend high-quality, disability-free life. Keeping the body moving, he speculated, wouldn't necessarily extend longevity, but it would compress the period at the end of life when people couldn't carry out daily tasks on their own. That idea came to be known as "the compression of morbidity theory."

Fries' team began tracking 538 runners over age 50, comparing them to a similar group of nonrunners. The subjects, now in their 70s and 80s, have answered yearly questionnaires about their ability to perform everyday activities such as walking, dressing and grooming, getting out of a chair and gripping objects. The researchers have used national death records to learn which participants died, and why. Nineteen years into the study, 34 percent of the nonrunners had died, compared to only 15 percent of the runners.

At the beginning of the study, the runners ran an average of about four hours a week. After 21 years, their running time declined to an average of 76 minutes per week, but they were still seeing health benefits from running.

On average both groups in the study became more disabled after 21 years of aging, but for runners the onset of disability started later.

"Runners' initial disability was 16 years later than nonrunners,'" Fries said. "By and large, the runners have stayed healthy."

Not only did running delay disability, but the gap between runners' and nonrunners' abilities got bigger with time.

"We did not expect this," Fries said, noting that the increasing gap between the groups has been apparent for several years now. "The health benefits of exercise are greater than we thought."

[lucid]

Summary:

According to research in the Archives of Internal Medicine, running regularly may help you live longer. In a study of over 280 members of a running club, and over 150 controls, all of whom were over the age of 50, researchers found that, after a 20 year period, 15% of runners had died compared to 34% of controls. In addition, runners were found to have fewer injuries of all kinds, including to their knees.

Study:

Reduced Disability and Mortality Among Aging RunnersA 21-Year Longitudinal Study

Eliza F. Chakravarty, MD, MS; Helen B. Hubert, PhD; Vijaya B. Lingala, PhD; James F. Fries, MD


Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(15):1638-1646.

Background Exercise has been shown to improve many health outcomes and well-being of people of all ages. Long-term studies in older adults are needed to confirm disability and survival benefits of exercise.

Methods Annual self-administered questionnaires were sent to 538 members of a nationwide running club and 423 healthy controls from northern California who were 50 years and older beginning in 1984. Data included running and exercise frequency, body mass index, and disability assessed by the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI; scored from 0 [no difficulty] to 3 [unable to perform]) through 2005. A total of 284 runners and 156 controls completed the 21-year follow-up. Causes of death through 2003 were ascertained using the National Death Index. Multivariate regression techniques compared groups on disability and mortality.

Results At baseline, runners were younger, leaner, and less likely to smoke compared with controls. The mean (SD) HAQ-DI score was higher for controls than for runners at all time points and increased with age in both groups, but to a lesser degree in runners (0.17 [0.34]) than in controls (0.36 [0.55]) (P < .001). Multivariate analyses showed that runners had a significantly lower risk of an HAQ-DI score of 0.5 (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.84). At 19 years, 15% of runners had died compared with 34% of controls. After adjustment for covariates, runners demonstrated a survival benefit (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.82). Disability and survival curves continued to diverge between groups after the 21-year follow-up as participants approached their ninth decade of life.

Conclusion Vigorous exercise (running) at middle and older ages is associated with reduced disability in later life and a notable survival advantage.

http://archinte.ama-...act/168/15/1638

Edited by lucid, 13 August 2008 - 02:53 AM.

[Heliotrope]

nice. i've always suspected this. I've read dozens of books on running. heck, i used to be addicted to distance running, what with the "Runner's high" and all.

a quote i like is: "Running may not add more years to your life, but it will add more life to your years."

one thing that turned me to run less and less is the possible joint problems w/ running, knee cartiledges, spine column compressions etc. i've also read that when you run regularly, the feet age at 4 to 6 times the rate of the rest of the body.

I've been running for 8 years, and according to that, my feet should be like 5*8+ 14= 54 years old! doesn't feel that way but i noticed change in some joints. i think another myth is run shrinks height. I read in a book with a coach's observation: "this 16yo cross country runner started off as 6 ft, but by the end [of his running seasons], he ended up 5 ft 8." my growth spurt seemed to be early, starting at 13 (~about the time when i entered puberty, the increasing calories, masturbation sessions, shaving facial hair, growth spurt etc all started when i was 13, right after, took up long-distance jogging) , and i think running stimulated it a little, but not completely sure. Easy to moderate jogging is best, and may help the knees etc more than hurting them. treadmills help too, and much better than unsafe paths

Edited by HYP86, 13 August 2008 - 03:32 AM.

[lucid]

Yeah, that is more or less what I had heard: Running is good for you but it puts a lot of strain on joints etc.. Interestingly the study found that runners had less joint disability. Either way though, swimming is probably the better choice for one's joints.

I recall having read quite a few studies showing exercise increases mean lifespan but not maximum (top 10%) lifespan. With that nice all cause mortality reduction into peoples 70's and 90's, running would probably have a really nice impact on mean lifespan and one would hope maybe tweak max lifespan up a little.

[proileri]

Please notice that strength training has been researched to have highly positive effect on functionality and quality of life, too.

Some muscle mass and functionality is naturally lost when aging, mainly due to dropping hormone levels. Regular gym training can overcome this effect by increasing the hormone levels in the body. Some research notes that strength gains of 100% have been reported with elderly people who take on regular training. Personally, I also suspect that gym training helps to sustain the natural range of motion, as many gym exercises are done in the range of from minimum to maximum extension.

I'm not familiar if a study exists about how strength training alone effects the lifespan, but considering the positive effect on functionality there should be at least some positive effect by preventing the accidents alone.

Edited by proileri, 15 August 2008 - 07:55 AM.

[Mind]

Exercise helps decrease excess fatty deposits in the liver

Seems most of the findings only confirm what has been known for eons - exercise is super for health and longevity.

According to researchers, who will present their findings on Sept. 18 at the annual meeting of the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, in Indianapolis, high liver fat levels are common among people with type 2 diabetes and contribute to heart disease risk.

The study's lead investigator, exercise physiologist Kerry Stewart, Ed.D., says the rise in the number of people with nonalcoholic fatty liver, mostly due to obesity, signals "a dark trend" because the disease, also called hepatic steatosis, may lead to cirrhosis and subsequent liver failure and transplantation, even cancer, as well as increased risk of diabetes-related heart disease.

"People with type 2 diabetes have added reason to be active and to exercise, not just because it is good for their overall health, but also because our study results pinpoint a key benefit to trimming the fatty liver that complicates their illness and which could accelerate heart disease and liver failure," says Stewart, a professor of medicine and director of clinical and research exercise physiology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and its Heart and Vascular Institute.

A majority of the quarter-million people who die each year from all kinds of diabetes do so as a result of some form of heart disease or stroke. And excess body fat is known to increase the likelihood of potentially life-threatening illness because the fat leads to more inflammation in the artery walls, high blood pressure and elevated blood cholesterol levels.

Stewart says the team's study is believed to be the first to specifically demonstrate the beneficial role played by exercise in controlling hepatic fat levels in people with diabetes.

In the study, 77 diabetic men and women in Baltimore, Md., were divided into two groups.

For a six-month period, half of the study participants were put through a moderate program of sustained aerobic exercise consisting of 45-minute sessions three times a week. They could bicycle, run on a treadmill or take brisk walks. In addition, they lifted stacked weights for about 20 minutes, also three times a week, and not at a heavy-duty pace. The other half of the participants were asked to avoid any formal aerobic fitness or gym classes.

Special magnetic resonance imaging scans performed at the start and end of the study showed much lower levels of liver fat in the active group, while levels remained the same in the nonexercising group (at 5.6 percent and 8.5 percent, respectively). Physical fitness exams were also done.

Among the team's other findings were better measures in general fitness and fatness among exercisers when compared to the nonexercising group. Averages for peak oxygen uptake levels during treadmill testing, or V02 levels, were greater by 13 percent (25.1 milliliters per kilogram per minute, compared to 22.2 milliliters per kilogram per minute), muscles were stronger by 7 percent (lifting 216.7 pounds, as opposed to 202.8 pounds for seven exercises tested), while percentages of body fat and body weight were each lower by 6 percent (35.5 percent versus 33.2 percent, and 98.5 pounds versus 92.2 pounds, respectively). Even waistlines shrunk on average by 2 inches (39 inches, compared to 41 inches).

[Mind]

Exercise increases brain growth factor and receptors in mice.

Exercise...the closest thing we have to a sliver bullet against aging.

The researchers trained young (3 months), adult (7 months), early middle-aged (9 months), middle-aged (13 months) and old (24 months) mice to run a treadmill for up to one hour a day.

The study tracked neurogenesis, age, exercise, serum corticosterone levels and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and its receptor TrkB levels in the hippocampus. The researchers focused on middle age as a critical stage for the decline of neurogenesis in the mice.

As expected, the study found that neurogenesis drops off sharply in middle-aged mice. For example, the number of neural progenitor and mitotic (dividing) cells in the hippocampus of middle-aged mice was only 5% of that observed in the young mice.

The researchers also found that exercise significantly slows down the loss of new nerve cells in the middle-aged mice. They found that production of neural stem cells improved by approximately 200% compared to the middle-aged mice that did not exercise. In addition, the survival of new nerve cells increased by 170% and growth by 190% compared to the sedentary middle-aged mice. Exercise also significantly enhanced stem cell production and maturation in the young mice. In fact, exercise produced a stronger effect in younger mice compared to the older mice.

How does this happen?

Based on these results, it appears that nerve growth factor has more to do with these findings than the corticosterone:

* The middle-aged exercisers had more brain-derived neurotrophic factor and its receptor, TrkB, compared to the middle-aged mice that did not exercise. This suggests that exercise promotes the production of brain-derived neurotrophic factor which, in turn, promotes differentiation and survival of new brain cells in the hippocampus.
* Exercise did not change the basal level of serum corticosterone in middle-aged mice. This suggests that the reduction of neurogenesis during aging is not due to the drop in corticosterone levels.

[Mind]

Nice little blog entry reviewing all the brain benefits of exercise.

Basically, exercise is awesome for the mind and body.

[VictorBjoerk]

isn't CR the silver bullet rather than exercise?

[HereInTheHole]

Sprints have been shown to increase the levels of serum growth hormone [link], which probably makes you feel and look a little younger. Anecdotally, I feel better (more energy, less joint aches) after 5 to 8 all-out, 20-second sprints than I did when I used to jog for an hour.

Edited by NarrativiumX, 29 December 2008 - 06:45 PM.

[Mind]

isn't CR the silver bullet rather than exercise?

CR has positive studies behind it as well. Both seem to be good for the body and mind.

[Mind]

Older women who are more physically fit have better cognitive function

The study, Effects of Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Cerebral Blood Flow on Cognitive Outcomes in Older Women, compares two groups of women whose average age was 65 years old. From a random sample of 42 women living in Calgary, the study observed women who took part in regular aerobic activity, and another group of women who were inactive. Poulin's team recorded and measured the women's cardiovascular health, resting brain blood flow and the reserve capacity of blood vessels in the brain, as well as cognitive functions. The team included scientists, doctors and graduate students, with MSc student Allison Brown taking a lead role.

The scientists found that compared to the inactive group, the active group had lower (10 per cent) resting and exercising arterial blood pressure, higher (5 per cent) vascular responses in the brain during submaximal exercise and when the levels of carbon dioxide in the blood were elevated, and higher (10 per cent) cognitive function scores.

[ksbalaji]

Thanks for the excellent discussion.

I have recently read from a daily newspaper that new research by universities of Queensland and Melbourne shows that half-an-hour in the gym will not make up for the waist-expanding damage caused by spending the rest of the day sitting. The study measured the intensity of physical activity in 168 subjects over seven days. It found that, regardless of how much moderate-to-vigorous exercise they did or their total sedentary time, those who took more breaks from sitting had lower waist circumferences, lower body mass indexes and lower levels of triglycerides and glucose in blood. The study joins the growing body of evidence suggesting too much sitting might undo the benefits of exercise. But the good news in the report is that pottering about the house or gently walking around the office while on the phone might be enough to keep one fit.

This information is gathered at:
http://www.hinduonne...00902241731.htm

Now I have an important (or may be silly?)question. (This question I have repeated elsewhere also) With all this information and motivation, why do people skip regular exercise? Why do we just lean on lame excuses like "no time available, busy schedule, forgot the appoinment, etc.,?"

I confess. I am sedentary. And still trying to join the regularly exercising lot. I also wonder how many imminsts are sedentary and trying to come out of it.

[Skötkonung]

Sprints have been shown to increase the levels of serum growth hormone [link], which probably makes you feel and look a little younger. Anecdotally, I feel better (more energy, less joint aches) after 5 to 8 all-out, 20-second sprints than I did when I used to jog for an hour.

There is no silver bullet to aging. Sure CR has some promising studies, but it has not even been fully proven in humans.

Regarding rate of aging, exercise has been shown to slow the shrinking of telomeres.

As for exercise:
Exercise Could Slow Aging Of Body, Study Suggests
http://www.washingto...2801873_pf.html

Physical Activity and Leukocyte Telomere Length
http://general-medic...tion/2008/214/2

Exercise, telmoeres and looking years younger
http://www.geneticsa...-years-younger/

[CobaltThoriumG]

Now I have an important (or may be silly?)question. (This question I have repeated elsewhere also) With all this information and motivation, why do people skip regular exercise? Why do we just lean on lame excuses like "no time available, busy schedule, forgot the appoinment, etc.,?"

I confess. I am sedentary. And still trying to join the regularly exercising lot. I also wonder how many imminsts are sedentary and trying to come out of it.

My take is that people's lives are filled with too many trivial distractions that they fail to recognize as such and they do not prioritize exercise over these distractions. Take television. In my opinion it is a trivial distraction. I don't own one and I don't watch it. I think it's a stupid waste of time. It's not important to me but exercise is.

[icyT]

Exercise can possibly improve your health (depending on how responsibly you do it and recover from it). It improves the lifespan of people who might have otherwised died from certain kinds of diseases like heart disease, though I doubt it does all that much for stuff like cancer.

[Brafarality]

If your diet is poor and you are not in harmony with yourself, then exercise accelerates aging.
But, if you eat well and have an intuitive sense of wellness and being, then moderate exercise can be quite beneficial.

Cheers!

[Skötkonung]

Exercise can possibly improve your health (depending on how responsibly you do it and recover from it). It improves the lifespan of people who might have otherwised died from certain kinds of diseases like heart disease, though I doubt it does all that much for stuff like cancer.

That is absolutely untrue. A recent study found that exercise fights the onset and spread of prostate cancer.

http://www.webmd.com...prostate-cancer

May 9, 2005 -- Exercise may be good for the prostate as well as the heart.

New research shows older men who exercise regularly have a much lower risk of dying from prostate cancer.

There are numerous other studies also linking other types of cancer prevention to exercise.

[VictorBjoerk]

Most people who exercise a lot like eg runners etc usually die in their 80's and so on of things like cancer etc. They live maybe 5-7 or so extra years beyond the average.

So by evidence it really doesn't seem to affect aging much. Jack Lalanne has very good genes (his brother died at 97) and also a very good diet...

[Mind]

Nice little popular media article reviewing many of the benefits of exercise.

Each year in the U.S., more 100,000 people are diagnosed with colon cancer. To see what effect exercise has on lowering this rate, researchers at Washington University and Harvard University combined to review 52 studies over the last 25 years which linked exercise and the incidence of cancer. Overall, they found that those that exercised the most (5-6 hours of brisk walking per week) were 24 percent less likely to develop the disease than those that exercised the least (less than 30 minutes per week).

"The beneficial effect of exercise holds across all sorts of activities," said lead study author Kathleen Y. Wolin, Sc.D. of Washington University. "And it holds for both men and women. There is an ever-growing body of evidence that the behavior choices we make affect our cancer risk. Physical activity is at the top of the list of ways that you can reduce your risk of colon cancer."

[Martinus]

Running slows the aging clock.

When Fries and his team began this research in 1984, many scientists thought vigorous exercise would do older folks more harm than good.

I'm 65 this spring and seem to have found the secret I was looking for in exercise (which I had never done appreciably, and I was 5'9" and 215lbs.)

Squash.

I play 4-5 times a week and LOVE to play, which is the key. Running may be boring, but I run plenty in 45 minutes of squash and can run more all the time- I'm now considered fast, whereas before I was leveraging my good hands. My weight has risen a few pounds recently to 195 although my pants got looser - leg muscle. If there is a squash club nearby, join it- it's an amazing game you never stop learning.

For appearance's sake, I live in Vancouver and see little sun, for 45 years now, so I look much younger. That's an unplanned bonus. I just married a gal 13 years younger, also a good influence.

And my attitude is not age-related, feel like I'm 40. I'm strong and expect to be for some time - and am going back into business full-bore (not so crafty on the stock market. ;-)

Do try squash, you're cooked in 45 minutes and will love being that way - truly addictive.

Edited by Martinus, 07 March 2009 - 06:23 PM.

[nowayout]

So I'm starting to get older and it depresses me. I've heard exercise can slow the rate of biological aging to some extent. True?

No I don't believe exercise can slow the rate of aging. You need to do Calorie Restriction to do that.... there is always a chance resveratrol 'might' work though.

CR is the ONLY way to slow down primary aging. Slowing down primary aging results in an increase in the maximal lifespan. Exercise can slow down secundary aging which results in an increase in the mean lifespan but NOT in the maximal lifespan.

Maybe and maybe not. The animal data is sketchy on the comparison. The human data in favor of exercise delaying the symptoms of aging is pretty overwhelming. Even if what you say is true in humans, in the context of a single individual, the distinction between mean and maximal lifespan are pretty much meaningless. One thing that is for sure is that if you are having a midlife crisis, initiating CR will only depress you more and likely make you look older, while exercise will likely make you feel much better and look younger.

Edited by andre, 07 March 2009 - 11:36 AM.

[automita]

Running slows the aging clock.

When Fries and his team began this research in 1984, many scientists thought vigorous exercise would do older folks more harm than good. Some feared the long-term effect of the then-new jogging craze would be floods of orthopedic injuries, with older runners permanently hobbled by their exercise habit. Fries had a different hypothesis: he thought regular exercise would extend high-quality, disability-free life. Keeping the body moving, he speculated, wouldn't necessarily extend longevity, but it would compress the period at the end of life when people couldn't carry out daily tasks on their own. That idea came to be known as "the compression of morbidity theory."

Fries' team began tracking 538 runners over age 50, comparing them to a similar group of nonrunners. The subjects, now in their 70s and 80s, have answered yearly questionnaires about their ability to perform everyday activities such as walking, dressing and grooming, getting out of a chair and gripping objects. The researchers have used national death records to learn which participants died, and why. Nineteen years into the study, 34 percent of the nonrunners had died, compared to only 15 percent of the runners.

At the beginning of the study, the runners ran an average of about four hours a week. After 21 years, their running time declined to an average of 76 minutes per week, but they were still seeing health benefits from running.

On average both groups in the study became more disabled after 21 years of aging, but for runners the onset of disability started later.

"Runners' initial disability was 16 years later than nonrunners,'" Fries said. "By and large, the runners have stayed healthy."

Not only did running delay disability, but the gap between runners' and nonrunners' abilities got bigger with time.

"We did not expect this," Fries said, noting that the increasing gap between the groups has been apparent for several years now. "The health benefits of exercise are greater than we thought."

if you are going to run you might as well eat french fries. keep muscles white not red. red muscle burns O, white glucose.

[Michael]

All:

I thought CR was superior to exercise

It is :

 

Effects of CR vs Exercise on Aging and Lifespan. Survival curves for 4 groups. Survival curve for sedentary control rats in group B is significantly different from that of runners in group A (P < 0.02), food-restricted runners in group C (P < 0.0001), and food-restricted sedentary rats in group D (P < 0.0001). Survival curve for runners in group A is significantly different from that of food-restricted runners in group C (P < 0.01) and food-restricted sedentary rats in group D (P < 0.01). Reproduced from (1)

... and similar results in (8) and other studies.
 

"adherence to a calorie restricted diet for long periods of times in humans is not common." What do you mean by that?

 

Presumably, he means that astonishingly few people practice CR for any length of time -- which is true. Plenty of people practice short-term weight loss diets, and a minority of people practice successful long-term obesity-avoidance dieting, but none of that is CR.
 

Well [exercise] can increase your length of life about 10 years according to most studies.

 

Egad, no. In human epidemiology, benefits of lifelong exercise are generally in the 1-2 year range,(2-6) and never more than 3 (7) -- and this, relative to the complete couch potato.†
 

 

CR is the ONLY way to slow down primary aging. Slowing down primary aging results in an increase in the maximal lifespan. Exercise can slow down secundary aging which results in an increase in the mean lifespan but NOT in the maximal lifespan.

What about resveratrol and other antioxidants?What about methionine restriction?

 

 

Resveratrol and every other antioxidant that's been tried has failed to increase average or maximal longevity in genetically-normal, normal, healthy, well-cared for mammals; methionine restriction is likely just crypto-CR.
 

Isn't muscle strength one of the things that remains relative unaffected by the aging process?

 

Zoo addressed this with his usual knowledge and competence. Lifelong exercise doesn’t even slow down most of the age-related decrements in muscle structure and function in rodents (tho' as Zoo rightly says, it can increase the size and strength in surviving, functional fibers), and similarly in humans, while master athletes remain more fit than sedentary people for most of their lives, the rate of their decline is similar, and even that suffers a sudden dropoff in performance after ~ age 70. Eg:
 

Wright and Perricelli’s findings replicate those of investigators in other Olympic sports. Meltzer complemented his cross-sectional study of 2 sets of Masters weight lifters with a longitudinal study of 64 Masters weight lifters over a mean of 8 years (range, 2–18 years).12 Both methods produced surprisingly concordant results, demonstrating a progressive diminution of lifting capacity over time that terminated in a more rapid decline after age 70 years. Tanaka and Seals conducted a cross-sectional study of the physiological functional capacity of Masters swimmers in 1997 and revisited the topic in a longitudinal study with Donato and other coauthors in 2003.3,14 In both investigations, they found that swimming performance declined progressively until age 70 years, at which point the decline became exponential.(9)

 

 

Figure 2: The performance of Masters athletes for the Marathon run (•) and weight-lifting (○). The data for the marathon run are taken from the Alan L. Jones website “Age graded running races” 2006. (http://home.stny.rr....s/AgeGrade.html) The Masters weightlifting data from IWF Masters Records December 2006 (men’s weight class 85 kg., clean & jerk). Figure from (10)

-Michael
 

†I know there are more such studies, tho’ they’re not coming immediately to mind; one problem is that so much of the epidemiology reports only relative mortality rates during a specified window, generally before most of the cohort is dead, rather than actual life expectancy.

References
1. Holloszy JO.
Mortality rate and longevity of food-restricted exercising male rats: a reevaluation.
J Appl Physiol. 1997 Feb;82(2):399-403.
PMID: 9049716 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

2. Paffenbarger RS Jr, Lee IM.
A natural history of athleticism, health and longevity.
J Sports Sci. 1998 May 1;16 (Suppl 1):31-45.

3. Lee IM, Paffenbarger RS Jr.
Associations of light, moderate, and vigorous intensity physical activity with longevity. The Harvard Alumni Health Study.
Am J Epidemiol. 2000 Feb 1;151(3):293-9.
PMID: 10670554 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

4. Lee IM, Hsieh CC, Paffenbarger RS Jr.
Exercise intensity and longevity in men. The Harvard Alumni Health Study.
JAMA. 1995 Apr 19;273(15):1179-84.
PMID: 7707624 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

5. Paffenbarger RS Jr, Hyde RT, Wing AL, Lee IM, Jung DL, Kampert JB.
The association of changes in physical-activity level and other lifestyle characteristics with mortality among men.
N Engl J Med. 1993 Feb 25;328(8):538-45.
PMID: 8426621 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

6. Paffenbarger RS Jr, Hyde RT, Wing AL, Hsieh CC.
Physical activity, all-cause mortality, and longevity of college alumni.
N Engl J Med. 1986 Mar 6;314(10):605-13.
PMID: 3945246 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

7. Fraser GE, Shavlik DJ.
Ten years of life: Is it a matter of choice?
Arch Intern Med. 2001 Jul 9;161(13):1645-52.
PMID: 11434797 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
[See Table 3]

8. Physical activity as a factor in the action of dietary restriction on aging: effects in Fischer 344 rats.
McCarter RJ, Shimokawa I, Ikeno Y, Higami Y, Hubbard GB, Yu BP, McMahan CA.
Aging (Milano). 1997 Feb-Apr;9(1-2):73-9.
PMID: 9177588 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

9. Wright VJ, Perricelli BC.
Age-related rates of decline in performance among elite senior athletes.
Am J Sports Med. 2008 Mar;36(3):443-50. Epub 2007 Nov 30.
PMID: 18055922 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

10. Age-related changes in the structure and function of skeletal muscles.
Faulkner JA, Larkin LM, Claflin DR, Brooks SV.
Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2007 Nov;34(11):1091-6. Review.
PMID: 17880359 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Edited by Michael, 02 January 2015 - 08:20 PM.

[JLL]

That's pretty sad. Just goes to show that you can't beat nature in its own game using natural means only.

[VictorBjoerk]

the longest living running rat lived roughly 1200 days and the longest living CR rat lived about 1400 days. That's only 16.5% lifespan extension. not very impressive, I thought CR in rats was much more effective...

[Skötkonung]

It may be true that exercise may not yield the same maximal life expectancy as CR, but it doesn't mean it should be discounted given its other benefits such as optimized health span and increased rate of survivability in emergency situations. Like CR, exercise changes gene expression to make individuals more resistant to cancer (1) and other diseases of aging.

That said, I think Michael's forecast on the life expectancy of those who exercise is a little skewed and far from conclusive:

2.) http://www.ingentaco...0104s1/art00005
Does not take into account diet and is reliant on self reporting. Changing knowledge of exercise science since 1916, when the study began, is also not figured into study.

3.) http://aje.oxfordjou...print/151/3/293
Does not take into account diet and is reliant on self reporting. Furthermore, the participants weren't actually "exercising" per say, they were just measuring the activity level of their lifestyle (gardening, walking, etc). Focuses only energy expenditure.

4.) http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/7707624
This study was conducted using the same data from citation 2. Like the other link, it relies on self reporting, uses antiquated data, and does not involve specific training regimen or schedule. Dietary intake not monitored.

7.) http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/11434797
Monitors 7th Day Adventists during the 70s and 80s. Again, relies on self reporting, does not require a set training schedule or regimen. Activity levels are derived from lifestyle such as shoveling snow, gardening, etc.

I could keep going with this, but the point I wanted to make here is that there is no conclusive evidence for either CR or a proper diet / exercise and their average increase in human lifespan. Although if I had to speculate based on the abundance of other studies posted to this thread, I would say exercise likely benefits individuals more than a paltry 1-3 years as Michael has tried to indicate above.

Edited by Skotkonung, 23 March 2009 - 09:17 PM.

[kismet]

Zoo addressed this with his usual knowledge and competence. Lifelong exercise doesn't even slow down most of the age-related decrements in muscle structure and function in rodents (tho' as Zoo rightly says, it can increase the size and strength in surviving, functional fibers), and similarly in humans, while master athletes remain more fit than sedentary people for most of their lives, the rate of their decline is similar, and even that suffers a sudden dropoff in performance after ~ age 70. Eg:

That dramatic drop-off is fearsome indeed.
http://www.sportssci...ing-part-1.html
http://www.sportssci...ing-part-2.html

Yes, 1-3 years may be an underestimation, but it shouldn't change the fact that exercise is not some sort of miraculous life extending intervention (everyone should exercise!)
CR, if it works, will probably provide more benefits and some of them will be additive.

Edited by kismet, 23 March 2009 - 09:34 PM.

[VictorBjoerk]

Michael: By how much do you believe Cr will extend the lifespan of humans?

[Mind]

I thought CR was superior to exercise

It is:

In mice.

During the interview with Dr. Fontana last night he mentioned several times that you cannot draw many "human" conclusions from mouse data.