192 replies to this topic

[Yornaldo]

Exercise and age both have connection. Exercise is good for health and fitness. With exercise we can live healthy life in every stage of life. Anyway good topic and information is nice. Thanks for sharing.

[Mind]

We already knew this one, because Longecity is so far ahead of the curve when it comes to life extension, but once again, physical activity is linked with lowering your Alzheimer's risk. (Even late in life!)

[Mind]

Even jogging, which is not everyone's favorite exercise (based on comments here in the forums), increases lifespan by a substantial amount.

[niner]

Even jogging, which is not everyone's favorite exercise (based on comments here in the forums), increases lifespan by a substantial amount.

And note how little it takes:

between one and two-and-a-half hours of jogging per week at a 'slow or average' pace delivers optimum benefits for longevity

Since this is the optimum, running longer will be less good for you, and eventually you will get to a point where running is harming your health even more than doing nothing. The next time you see a car with a "26.2" or "13.1" sticker on it, indicating that the driver runs marathons or half marathons, you might wonder if instead they should have a sticker that says "I'm killing myself with sport"... Maybe they are.

[lourdaud]

Even jogging, which is not everyone's favorite exercise (based on comments here in the forums), increases lifespan by a substantial amount.

And note how little it takes:

between one and two-and-a-half hours of jogging per week at a 'slow or average' pace delivers optimum benefits for longevity

Since this is the optimum, running longer will be less good for you, and eventually you will get to a point where running is harming your health even more than doing nothing. The next time you see a car with a "26.2" or "13.1" sticker on it, indicating that the driver runs marathons or half marathons, you might wonder if instead they should have a sticker that says "I'm killing myself with sport"... Maybe they are.

I agree with you but OTH I think it's a question of how you want to live your life.. "Tyrell" puts it pretty well in this magnificent film (at 00:40) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcJs4qJPQ_M&feature=fvwrel

Edited by klantskalle, 06 May 2012 - 08:26 PM.

[proileri]

between one and two-and-a-half hours of jogging per week at a 'slow or average' pace delivers optimum benefits for longevity

Since this is the optimum, running longer will be less good for you, and eventually you will get to a point where running is harming your health even more than doing nothing. The next time you see a car with a "26.2" or "13.1" sticker on it, indicating that the driver runs marathons or half marathons, you might wonder if instead they should have a sticker that says "I'm killing myself with sport"... Maybe they are.

I don't think that's completely correct. The Copenhagen City study found that in perspective especially to CVD, high amounts of exercise decrease the risk a lot more than moderate amounts, and in general higher amount is better. Why they say jogging in moderation is better, I don't know, there's dozens of things that can be used to explain the phenominon and I haven't seen the full study yet.

Men with high physical activity survived 6.8 years longer, and men with moderate physical activity 4.9 years longer than sedentary men. For women the figures were 6.4 and 5.5 years, respectively. http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/16575269

It has also been noted that elite athletes have longer lifespans than general population, especially if they participate in endurance-style training:

When elite athletes engaging in various sports are analysed together, their mortality is lower than that of the general population. In conclusion, long-term vigorous exercise training is associated with increased survival rates of specific groups of athletes. http://www.ncbi.nlm....pt=AbstractPlus

In conclusion, I don't think you have to worry about exercising too much

[johnross47]

In my younger days I ran several marathons and uncountable half marathons. I wasn't doing particularly high training mileages though.....peaked at about 55mpw. Nowadays I run twice a week mostly, maybe a 41/2 and a 6. But I also do two weight and circuit sessions 60-75 minutes each and take serious walks. I have looked at all the studies I can find and read this topic several times but I still find it a bit difficult to decide what the best regime is. I do find running a bit addictive, especially out on open hills, which is where I ran my most strenuous races. Once I get up a hill I see the next summit and think "well why not?" So am I living long or killing myself?

[Dataguru]

I agree with Matt !!!!!!! Exercise never create trouble ......

[scottknl]

In my younger days I ran several marathons and uncountable half marathons. I wasn't doing particularly high training mileages though.....peaked at about 55mpw. Nowadays I run twice a week mostly, maybe a 41/2 and a 6. But I also do two weight and circuit sessions 60-75 minutes each and take serious walks. I have looked at all the studies I can find and read this topic several times but I still find it a bit difficult to decide what the best regime is. I do find running a bit addictive, especially out on open hills, which is where I ran my most strenuous races. Once I get up a hill I see the next summit and think "well why not?" So am I living long or killing myself?

The way I look at it is that if you exercise enough to cause yourself to eat more calories, then you're going over the line from optimal into light damage. Every calorie you eat is converted into energy by your cells and releases some damaging free radicals. So if you decide to go for that extra 1/2 hr of running and it means that you eat 250 more calories to compensate then you've really done too much.

I'm just as guilty as you of going a little farther and sometimes I'll just feel good and run a 1/2 marathon. Later I feel rather hungry and almost always over eat to compensate. I consider it optimal if I limit myself to around 20 km per week of running.

I asked Dr. Luigi Fontana why elite athletes are not represented in centenarian cohorts. His response was that prolonged aerobic exercise over time damages the nerve tissues to the heart and causes arrhythmia and that most older athletes don't die from atherosclerosis, but rather from heart arrhythmia problems. So, exercise can really cause trouble. However, for the average person an daily walk or run a few times a week or similar exercise is probably good. More is not always better.

[johnross47]

I have sometimes had noticeably irregular skipping heart beat at night after heavier exercise sessions; I should maybe get it checked, but I suspect they would just look at my low resting HB and my low BP and say I'm totally fit. One reason I have for aerobic training is that I'm asthmatic (exercise induced admittedly) and it maintains my flow rate. I can still blow 650 at 65 years old. Swings and roundabouts.

[zorba990]

I have sometimes had noticeably irregular skipping heart beat at night after heavier exercise sessions; I should maybe get it checked, but I suspect they would just look at my low resting HB and my low BP and say I'm totally fit. One reason I have for aerobic training is that I'm asthmatic (exercise induced admittedly) and it maintains my flow rate. I can still blow 650 at 65 years old. Swings and roundabouts.

A few 'totally fit' athletes bite the dust every year. Skipped beats could be sodium, magnesium, or other deficiencies so I'd get it checked out.
It's fairly easy to do a self test with a little Celtic sea salt after a run with your water though. If it's sodium the effect should be pretty quick. Magnesium or other nutrients may take more time to normalize.

[johnross47]

I knew a guy who climbed serious cliffs and did heavy gym work to support it, until he fell over dead of a heart attack in the gym.

According to cron-o-meter most of my minerals are ok, unless I have absorbtion issues or something, but my diet is low on the salt so maybe I'll try that.

[Dataguru]

Morning walk, eating fresh fruits, vegetables .........

[reason]

Regular exercise, much like calorie restriction, has a beneficial effect on near all measures of aging in humans - though unlike calorie restriction it doesn't increase maximum life span in laboratory animals. Here is a reminder that decline in brain function is slowed by exercise:

The new research included about 700 people living in the United Kingdom who all had brain scans when they reached the age of 73. Three years earlier, at age 70, the study participants were questioned about the leisure and physical activities they engaged in. People in the study who reported being the most physically active tended to have larger brain volumes of gray and normal white matter, and physical activity was linked to less brain atrophy. Regular exercise also appeared to protect against the formation of white matter lesions, which are linked to thinking and memory decline.

[In another study, researchers] recruited 120 older inactive adults with no evidence of dementia. ... Half began a modest exercise routine that included walking at a moderate pace for 30 to 45 minutes, three times a week. The other half did stretching and toning exercises. A year later, MRI brain scans showed that a key region of the brain involved with memory, known as the hippocampus, was slightly larger in the walking group, while it has shrunk slightly in the non-aerobic stretching group.

"The old view is that as we get older our brains become less malleable and less able to change. The new view is that it remains plastic even very late in life. We were able to show positive change after just one year of moderate-intensity physical activity."

Link: http://www.webmd.com...g-brains-better

<br> <br>View the full article

[reason]

Following on from a recent post on exercise and the aging brain, here is yet another study to show that improvements in cognitive function can be brought about by regular exercise and its consequent effects on body composition, metabolism, and other line items. Use it or lose it, as they say:

A regular exercise routine can make you fitter than ever - mentally fit. In a new study, previously sedentary adults were put through four months of high-intensity interval training. At the end, their cognitive functions - the ability to think, recall and make quick decisions - had improved significantly.

Blood flow to the brain increases during exercise. The more fit you are, the more that increases. The pilot [study] looked at adults, average age 49, who were overweight and inactive. [Researchers] measured their cognitive function with neuropsychological testing, as well as their body composition, blood flow to the brain, cardiac output and their maximum ability to tolerate exercise.

The subjects then began a twice-a-week routine with an exercise bike and circuit weight training. After four months - not surprising - their weight, body mass index, fat mass and waist circumference were all significantly lower. Meanwhile, their capacity to exercise (measured by VO2 max) was up 15 per cent.

Most exciting, [cognitive function] had also increased, based on follow-up testing. These improvements were proportional to the changes in exercise capacity and body weight. Essentially, the more people could exercise, and the more weight they lost, the sharper they became.

Link: http://www.eurekaler...f-eis102212.php

<br> <br>View the full article

[reason]

In recent years a number of studies have tried to put numbers to the gains in life expectancy that might accompany exercise. Here is another:

In pooled data from six prospective cohort studies, the researchers examined associations of leisure-time physical activity of a moderate to vigorous intensity with mortality. They analyzed data from more than 650,000 subjects and followed subjects for an average of ten years - analyzing over 82,000 deaths.

Participation in a low level of leisure time physical activity of moderate to vigorous intensity, comparable to up to 75 min of brisk walking per week, was associated with a 19 percent reduced risk of mortality compared to no such activity. Assuming a causal relationship, which is not specifically demonstrated in this research, this level of activity would confer a 1.8 year gain in life expectancy after age 40, compared with no activity. For those who did the equivalent to 150 min of brisk walking per week - the basic amount of physical activity currently recommended by the federal government - the gain in life expectancy was 3.4 years.

Participants faring best were those who were both normal weight and active: among normal weight persons who were active at the level recommended by the federal government, researchers observed a gain in life expectancy of 7.2 years, compared to those with a BMI of 35 or more who did no leisure time physical activity.

You might compare these results to those obtained from a study of highly trained athletes and work examining jogging and life expectancy.

Link: http://www.eurekaler...h-paa110512.php

&lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt;View the full article

[Mind]

among normal weight persons who were active at the level recommended by the federal government, researchers observed a gain in life expectancy of 7.2 years, compared to those with a BMI of 35 or more who did no leisure time physical activity.

No surprise here. If you are over weight and sit around all day, you can expect to live 7.2 years less than someone who is normal weight and gets a few minutes of exercise per day.

Edited by Mind, 07 November 2012 - 07:06 PM.

[Mind]

Hmmm, this might be the same study, but it is worth repeating....exercise will most often help you live A LOT longer.

[okok]

I've always wondered why earlier studies put the benefit so low at around 2 years. Some of that might be attributed to individual variation in exercise response.

http://well.blogs.ny...nd-to-exercise/

I think Dr. Timmons can be seen in a BBC doc on this topic, it's on youtube.

[Michael]

I've always wondered why earlier studies put the benefit so low at around 2 years.

Well, this study (the one we're talking about) still puts the benefit at around 2 y for minimal exercise:

A physical activity level of 0.1–3.74 MET-h/wk, equivalent to brisk walking for up to 75 min/wk, was associated with a gain of 1.8 (95% CI: 1.6–2.0) y in life expectancy relative to no leisure time activity (0 MET-h/wk). Higher levels of physical activity were associated with greater gains in life expectancy, with a gain of 4.5 (95% CI: 4.3–4.7) y at the highest level (22.5+ MET-h/wk, equivalent to brisk walking for 450+ min/wk).

This really isn't that far out of most other studies:

Other studies reported activity levels using different metrics than our own, but obtained broadly consistent estimates. The Seventh Day Adventist study [11] assessed an index comprising vigorous exercise and occupational activity, and found that a high versus low level of activity was associated with 1.9–2.7 y of life gained. The Framingham Heart Study [8] examined total energy expenditure, including energy expended while sleeping or sedentary, and found that an expenditure of 33+ versus 30 or fewer MET-h/wk was associated with 3.5–3.7 y of life gained. The Uppsala Longitudinal Study [10] ascertained leisure time physical activity, and a high versus low activity level was associated with 3.8 y of life gained.

And just 'cause this study is the newest, doesn't mean its somewhat high numbers are the most reliable.

Someone is going to say, reasonably enough (without looking at the paper), "Oh, come on: an hour of brisk walking a day? What about high-intensity workouts?" Remembering, first, that what the definition of a MET suggests, and what the HIIT and other research mostly shows, is that one gets similar metabolic benefits from shorter duration, higher-intensity exercise as from longer duration, lower-intensity exercise. So eg. 22.5+ MET-h/wk is also what's achieved by ~3 h of jogging/wk, or half an hour's worth 6 days a week. Recall, also, that the data on measured cardiorespiratory fitness (as opposed to self-reported physical activity) from Blair's Cooper Institute of Aerobics studies and others pretty clearly show that there is a rapid tailing-off of benefits on CVD and mortality not long after one moves from being completely sedentary to being minimally fit -- not, as one might think, a near-linear continuation of greater and greater benefit with increasing cardiorespiratory fitness (or, as some might imagine, a nonlinear further increase of benefit at high levels of activity).

The new study's results are entirely consistent with that body of research, with most of the benefit obtained at 10 Met-h/wk, and little marginal gain in going from 22.5 MET-h/wk to 30:

Our spline curves showed that the dose–response relationship was curvilinear (p_nonlinear<0.01), with the greatest gains in years of life expectancy occurring at approximately 15+ MET-h/wk, equivalent to approximately 300 min of brisk walking per week.

And the Copenhagen City Heart Study has apparently found an inverted u-shaped dose-response to jogging on mortality:

“The relationship appears much like alcohol intakes. Mortality is lower in people reporting moderate jogging, than in non-joggers or those undertaking extreme levels of exercise,” said Schnohr. The ideal pace can be achieved by striving to feel a little breathless. “You should aim to feel a little breathless, but not very breathless,” he advised.

More on the Copenhagen City Heart Study in a post in the CR Society Archives which are, unfortunately, down at the moment; I'll link it when they're up again.

Reference

Leisure time physical activity of moderate to vigorous intensity and mortality: a large pooled cohort analysis.

Moore SC, Patel AV, Matthews CE, Berrington de Gonzalez A, Park Y, Katki HA, Linet MS, Weiderpass E, Visvanathan K, Helzlsouer KJ, Thun M, Gapstur SM, Hartge P, Lee IM.
PLoS Med. 2012 Nov;9(11):e1001335. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001335. Epub 2012 Nov 6. PMID: 23139642

Edited by Michael, 22 November 2012 - 09:45 PM.

[okok]

As the Copenhagen study aggregated and did not differentiate (?) for genotype, the curve for sound responders will probably be steeper still - maybe around 10 years?

Edited by okok, 23 November 2012 - 04:48 PM.

[Mind]

Get off your butt, exercise slows neurodegeneration.

Reason is a sage and poet:

Exercise and calorie restriction are two of these, shown to produce benefits in almost every circumstance examined to date - if they were pills, the world would beat a path to the door of their manufacturer, and they would be household names. Billions of dollars are sometimes spent on commercializing therapies that do not do as well as either exercise or calorie restriction for specific groups and medical conditions.

[malbecman]

I think that its very interesting they see similar longevity increases across high, moderate
and low intensity sports-some apparent small advantage in power sports.

Overall, I think the important message is to be active, no matter what it might be!

http://health.usnews...vival-advantage

[reason]

A number of studies have shown that it is possible to be both old and very healthy in comparison to your peers, and surveying older athletes is a good way to find some of those old, very healthy people. The big question is one of causation: are they healthy because they are athletes, or did they become healthy athletes because they are more physically robust, thanks to genetic or other differences? This is a part of the uncertainty over whether more exercise is always better and the degree to which genetics versus lifestyle versus chance contributes to the course of aging.

People who exercise on a regular basis up to the age of 80 have the same aerobic capacity as someone half their age, says a new study. "These athletes are not who we think of when we consider 80-year-olds because they are in fantastic shape. They are simply incredible, happy people who enjoy life and are living it to the fullest. They are still actively engaged in competitive events."

Researchers examined nine endurance athletes from northern Sweden and compared them to a group of healthy men from Indiana in the same age group who only performed the activities of daily living with no history of structured exercise. The endurance athletes were cross-country skiers, including a former Olympic champion and several national/regional champions with a history of aerobic exercise and participation in endurance events throughout their lives. The athletes exercised four to six times a week, averaging 3,700 more steps per day than the non-exercisers.

Members of the two study groups rode exercise bikes as researchers measured oxygen uptake. When the participants reached total exhaustion, they had reached maximum oxygen uptake (also known as VO2 max). Skeletal muscle biopsies were then taken to measure the capacity of their mitochondria, the aerobic base of their muscle and other cells. The study also found the endurance athletes established new upper limits for aerobic power in men 80-91 years old, including a maximum oxygen uptake that was nearly twice that of untrained men their age.

"To our knowledge, the VO2 max of the lifelong endurance athletes was the highest recorded in humans in this age group, and comparable to nonendurance-trained men 40 years younger. We also analyzed the aerobic capacity of their muscles by examining biopsies taken from thigh muscles, and found it was about double that of typical men. In fact, the oldest gentleman was 91 years old, but his aerobic capacity resembles that of a man 50 years younger. It was absolutely astounding."

Link: http://cms.bsu.edu/n...d-be-the-new-40

<br> <br>View the full article

[reason]

The weight of scientific evidence tells use that regular moderate exercise is very beneficial; aside from calorie restriction, it is the best thing that basically healthy people can do for themselves. No presently available medical technology surpasses the benefits of exercise and calorie restriction for long term health for the vast majority of the population - which is a strange thing to be saying in the midst of modern medicine and biotechnology. Strange but nonetheless true. This is a state of affairs we'd all like to see change for the better, via the introduction of new biotechnologies of rejuvenation, therapies that can be envisaged in some detail today, and which (if research and development is well funded) lie only a few decades ahead of us.

Near enough to matter, but still out of reach. So at this point exercise and calorie restriction are all that most of us have to work with to increase the odds of you still being alive to benefit from future rejuvenation therapies. It has to be said that the odds are not going to be moved to anywhere near the degree they would if a very large amount of funding arrived at the SENS Research Foundation, thus speeding up progress towards clinical reversal of age-related degeneration, but most of us are not in a position to make that happen.

The benefits of exercise are very broad, much like those offered by calorie restriction. It impacts mechanisms and the speed of change throughout the body and the aging process. On this topic, I recently noticed a couple of papers that note two small aspects of the interaction of exercise and aging, one in mice, and one in we humans. In mouse studies, it's quite possible to show that exercise causes numerous health benefits: mice are short-lived and thus researchers can follow them all the way through their lives:

Enhanced Diastolic Filling Performance with Lifelong Physical Activity in Aging Mice

Fourteen C57Bl/6J mice (seven male and seven female) were individually housed at eight weeks of age in cages with a running wheel, magnetic sensor and digital odometer. Duration, distance and running velocity were recorded daily. Fourteen additional mice C57Bl/6J mice (seven male and seven female) were placed in individual cages without running wheels at eight weeks of age. [Ultrasound techniques] were used to image the left ventricle every four weeks throughout the lifespan.

Lifelong physical activity resulted in greater diastolic filling parameters by the second quarter of the lifespan highlighting the clinical importance of regular aerobic activity in young adulthood as a mechanism for improved left ventricular performance with aging.

In the case of humans a research group must instead work with shorter snapshots of time, drawing data from existing populations with their quirks and histories. Given that, it is much harder to prove the degree to which exercise causes good health and slower aging versus only being associated with these line items.

The impact of physical activity on endothelial function in middle-aged and elderly subjects: the ikaria study

The study was conducted on a subgroup population of the IKARIA study consisting of 185 middle-aged (40-65 years) and 142 elderly subjects (66-91 years). Endothelial function was evaluated by ultrasound measurement of flow-mediated dilatation (FMD).

In the overall study population FMD was inversely associated with age and middle-aged subjects had higher FMD compared with the elderly. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that among middle-aged subjects the physically active had higher FMD compared with the physically inactive. Physically active subjects in the middle-aged group showed higher FMD compared with the physically active elderly. However, there was no difference in FMD values between middle-aged inactive subjects and the elderly physically active.

The present study revealed that increased [physical activity] was associated with improved endothelial function in middle-aged subjects and that [physical activity] in elderly subjects can ameliorate the devastating effects of ageing on arterial wall properties.

The full PDF version of the Ikaria study paper quoted above is available, so you can judge for yourself just how justified the authors' conclusion might be. Causation is hard to demonstrate - but the general presumption is that the causation shown in animal studies is also operating in human ones when it comes to things like exercise and cardiovascular health in aging. Proving and then putting numbers to that presumption are the challenges.

<br> <br>View the full article

[Mind]

As if you needed anymore reasons to exercise: It reorganizes the brain in order to reduce stress and anxiety.

[reason]

If regular exercise were a drug, people would stampede to buy it at any price. It is more effective for prevention and treatment of near all common chronic conditions - and for healthy people too - than any presently available medical technology. The only thing to match it (and even do somewhat better) is the practice of calorie restriction. To be clear, you can't exercise your way out of aging to death on a broadly similar schedule to your peers - but exercise does correlate with a longer life expectancy, and given that we're in a race between aging and the development of rejuvenation biotechnologies to reverse aging, it would be foolish not to take every proven advantage along the way.

If there were a drug that treated and prevented the chronic diseases that afflict Americans and we didn't give it to everyone, we'd be withholding a magic pill. If this drug was free, in a country that spends more than $350 billion annually on prescription drugs, where the average 80-year-old takes eight medications, we'd be foolish not to encourage this cheaper and safer alternative as first-line treatment. If every doctor in every country around the world didn't prescribe this drug for every patient, it might almost be considered medical malpractice.

We have that drug today, and it's safe, free, and readily available.

Exercise has benefits for every body system; it is effective both as a treatment and for prevention of disease. It can improve memory and concentration, lessen sleep disorders, aid heart disease by lowering cholesterol and reducing blood pressure, help sexual problems such as erectile dysfunction, and raise low libido. Exercise does it all. Even with cancer, particularly colon and recurrent breast cancer, the data show clearly that exercise is a deterrent. Newer studies on a glycoprotein called Interleukin 6 suggests that general body inflammation, a factor in almost every chronic disease, is reduced by regular exercise.

Link: http://www.slate.com...flammation.html

View the full article at FightAging

[Mind]

Doctors should be prescribing exercise! I agree.

[nupi]

Doctors should be prescribing exercise! I agree.

They most definitely do. I recently even got a prescription for a loosely tabatha inspired HIIT protocol. I didn't much care for the specifics of it (I in particular think target heart rate is too low) but it's good to see them moving towards more reasonable approaches than chronic cardio.

[Maecenas]

Here is an interesting example of the benefits of exercise. This 102 year old French exercised all his life and was cycling for 52 years and today he set his new record:
http://www.velonatio...ars-of-age.aspx
I've never seen a person so agile and full of energy at this age.You can also notice that he is short in height, which is one of the best overall predictors of longevity.
He reminded me about this indian bodybuilder, who is 101 at this time. What they have in common is their height.
http://www.bbc.co.uk...-india-17485000
I've also found a list of centenarians among professional athletes on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia...._(sportspeople)
As you can see, the longest lived athlete lived up to 113, which contradicts some studies which state that exercise is not compatible with absolute maximum lifespan, but only with maximum average lifespan.

Edited by Maecenas, 02 February 2014 - 10:49 PM.