Some species of gut-dwelling bacteria activate nerves in the gut to promote the desire to exercise’
OMG…I need that… lol.
I exercise religiously every other day - going in a few minutes…arghh.
Hate it… but do it!
2 Likes
They don’t do a very good job of defining vigorous exercise vs. very vigorous exercise. And that’s the difference between heart disease and no heart disease. One is good, the other is bad. Fairly important.
I run zone 2, heart rate around 130 for 2 miles. Lift weights for another 10 minutes. Is that vigorous for very vigorous for a 62 yr old man?
What is the single best strength-building exercise many of us could be doing right this minute but almost certainly are not? Consult enough exercise scientists and the latest exercise research, and the answer would likely be a resounding: squats.
“For lower-body strength and flexibility, there is probably no better exercise,” said Bryan Christensen, a professor of biomechanics at North Dakota State University in Fargo, who studies resistance exercise.
The benefits are not confined to the lower body. “It is really a whole body exercise,” said Silvio Rene Lorenzetti, the director of the Performance Sports division of the Swiss Federal Institute of Sport in Magglingen. “It requires core stability and trains the back.”
3 Likes
I like this idea of using this to track my fitness:
Epigenetic Biomarker for Measuring Aging Through Fitness
This biomarker is a useful addition to GrimAge.
Research Paper:
Physical fitness is a well-known correlate of health and the aging process and DNA methylation (DNAm) data can capture aging via epigenetic clocks. However, current epigenetic clocks did not yet use measures of mobility, strength, lung, or endurance fitness in their construction. We develop blood-based DNAm biomarkers for fitness parameters gait speed (walking speed), maximum handgrip strength, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) which have modest correlation with fitness parameters in five large-scale validation datasets (average r between 0.16–0.48). We then use these DNAm fitness parameter biomarkers with DNAmGrimAge, a DNAm mortality risk estimate, to construct DNAmFitAge, a new biological age indicator that incorporates physical fitness. DNAmFitAge is associated with low-intermediate physical activity levels across validation datasets (p = 6.4E-13), and younger/fitter DNAmFitAge corresponds to stronger DNAm fitness parameters in both males and females. DNAmFitAge is lower (p = 0.046) and DNAmVO2max is higher (p = 0.023) in male body builders compared to controls. Physically fit people have a younger DNAmFitAge and experience better age-related outcomes: lower mortality risk (p = 7.2E-51), coronary heart disease risk (p = 2.6E-8), and increased disease-free status (p = 1.1E-7). These new DNAm biomarkers provide researchers a new method to incorporate physical fitness into epigenetic clocks.
1 Like
2 Likes
These types of studies are seriously flawed. There are multiple reasons but let me give you one example. The power an individual generates during short duration intervals is highly correlated to their chronic training load (CTL). CTL is a rolling average of training stress score (TSS) across 42 days.
TSS = IF^2 x Duration (mins)/60 x100
So 1 hour at 80% functional threshold power (FTP) = (0.8^2) x 60/60 x 100 = 64 TSS
2 hours at 70% FTP = (0.7^2) x 120/60 x 100 = 98 TSS
LIT and MIT increase CTL and so provide the ‘base’ that allows you to perform intervals at a higher absolute power… and therefore derive greater benefit. Additionally, most serious athletes understand that you cannot perform more than 2 (perhaps 3 if younger) high intensity sessions per week without provoking symptoms of overtraining. Therefore if you’re training 6 days per week 4 sessions are typically performed well below threshold power. Whether this is LIT or MIT largely depends on the duration of time you have available (see example above) but either way ‘non HIT’ is vital!
1 Like