[Daedalus Audio]

I like the approach that is advocated in the Primal Blueprint for exercise - several days of just walking around, punctuated by an occasional day of high intensity interval work (sprints), followed by more walking, followed by high intensity lifting, followed again by several days of walking.  He also estimates that diet is about 80% responsible for body composition, and exercise only 20%.  Judging by how he looks, I believe him! 

Even if his approach is not "more effective" than standard training, I'd personally rather spend the majority of my time moving about at a moderate pace, which has a long history of proven health benefits, and only a little bit of time doing the sprints and heavy lifting - both of which do not have the same proven benefits in studies.  Of course, this type of interval, intense training is still fairly new and hasn't had the time to be studied quite as thoroughly as good old walking.  I am guessing it will prove quite valuable too, over time, but the results are still not fully in (although they are trending in the right direction). 

From a personal standpoint, walking most days I can stick with, and I can even get myself to do some weight training or sprints on occasion.  But kicking my ass every day (or even every other day) with high intensity physical work?  Ain't gonna happen, I'll just stop doing it eventually, and sooner than later. 

The cool thing is that jogging and "aerobics" is completely off my radar.  I f'ing hate jogging, or the elliptical, etc...  Luckily, the studies that have compared jogging to walking have shown zero additional benefit for jogging over walking.  And in some cases it's seems as though jogging a lot is actually detrimental!  So, moderate walking with sometimes doing sprints or heavy lifting seems very doable and very reasonable to me.

Oh, and if anyone wants to check it out, I highly recommend the website for the Primal Blueprint:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com

moderation is a good thing, but what you describe is a bit vague (several days) and could easily cause injury. if there is too much rest time between vigorous workouts it is likely tho create injuries, and then the whole cycle collapses.  Photon46 describes a good regimen of a day or two of light exercise then a day with intensity and one day a week off.
 Tyson while jogging or running may not work for you it is very good for most people. most of the orthopedists who trash running are too busy giving people useless and dangerous shots to really do their homework.  (read "Born To Run")
one of the big problems I see in general health is that people don't integrate their diet and lifestyle/exercise, they think one or the other will get them in shape. it takes both and the proportion really depends on the genetic makeup of the individual.  another issue is that people do not push themselves outside their comfort zone and hence get minimal benefit from the 'regimen' (or lack thereof) and then give up.

[Tyson]

I'd agree except for findings like this:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19332846?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=1

and:

http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ACC/19091


Yes, you are reading those correctly - distance runners had arteries/hearts that were in worse shape than the non-runners! 

This makes sense if you look at the larger picture of modern thought on the disease process - more and more the medical community is looking to various types of inflammation as causative (or at least associative) with almost every type of chronic disease process.  And constant jogging can certainly contribute to that.  I think as a society we work too much, stress out too much, don't relax enough, and have way more stressors than we are able to handle.  Adding daily jogging is just going to increase the stress overall.  Better to do shorter, more intense workouts less frequently, with the in-between days used for something fun, like a walk or a hike with your family, or doing some outdoor work like gardening, etc... 

I'd also point to Olympic athletes - compare the distance runners (steady state cardio training) versus the sprinters (short duration, high intensity training). 

I  think we both agree that exercise is important!  But how to approach  exercise is different.  As someone with heart disease, I don't really  have the luxury of running for "fun" and the science is trending away  from jogging being healthy, even in a normal population. 

I completely agree with you that exercise alone or diet alone will work very well, you really do need both. 

For I put "several days" as my frequency, because that's what I do.  But that can be tinkered with.  An alternate approach would be a day of sprints followed by a day of walking, followed by a day of lifting, followed by walking, etc... More frequent but still a good amount of time between each sprint workout and each lifting workout. 

Anyway, it's been good talking to you, I think we just disagree on the finer points of exercise here, and that's OK   Hope to see you again at the next RMAF!

[Daedalus Audio]

Tyson, yep we are just discussing the finer points, I just like to be clear on this because so many people can benefit from a lifestyle change which incorporates vigorous exercise.
I'm aware of those studies, BUT they only apply to "elite" and extreme runners who run at least one marathon a year for the past 25 years! these results were not observed in typical runners but only in those who habitually push themselves past their limits.  anyhow glad all is working well with you and your heart is healthy!  we each have to find our own best healthy lifestyle. 
look forward to seeing you at the next RMAF, maybe we can go for a run?

[Tyson]

Run?  Only if it's to run to Pasquini's and get some of that yummy food again

[Daedalus Audio]

Run?  Only if it's to run to Pasquini's and get some of that yummy food again

YES!!

[dwk]

Interesting discussion. My wife and I have also recently converted to a Primal style diet after spending some time on the research and getting comfortable with it - coming to terms with the 'lipid hypothesis' was definitely a hurdle. I have to say that it's proving itself in our experience as well, though. I'm working out way less than back when I was doing triathlons and/or half-marathons, but am dropping weight and body composition is improving as well (not that I was ever significantly overweight, but the weight had been creeping up slowly since a knee injury halted the running two years ago).  Energy levels are better, sleep is better.  The single most amazing thing though is eating what I'm pretty sure is noticeably fewer calories and just not getting hungry.  On the 'low fat' regimen I'd followed for years I was pretty healthy but I absolutely needed mid-morning and mid-afternoon snacks to make it through the day.  Now, I can easily make it from breakfast at 8 to lunch at 1 or 2 without problems.

Of course, it remains to be seen whether this results in longevity or not, but it sure seems to deliver on the 'stay functional' aspects.

The downside is that it's shocking how much "food" contains one or more of the following (all of which we've eliminated)
- wheat / corn
- added sugar/fructose
- vegetable oils (polyunsaturated - corn, sunflower, safflower, soy etc)
- soy
This list puts virtually anything in a box off-limits, and restaurant food is also pretty tough. 

[dwk]

Tyson, yep we are just discussing the finer points, I just like to be clear on this because so many people can benefit from a lifestyle change which incorporates vigorous exercise.
I'm aware of those studies, BUT they only apply to "elite" and extreme runners who run at least one marathon a year for the past 25 years! these results were not observed in typical runners but only in those who habitually push themselves past their limits.

I think this may be a bit unclear at this point - there are only a few studies and research is ongoing. The original studies were only on frequent marathoners, but I think Kurt Harris has recently referenced newer studies which show accumulated damage that runs proportional to total mileage.  Now, that accumulation may not amount to a significant total for your typical 10-20 mile/week jogger who runs less in a year than an elite does in a month, but it's still something of an interesting result.

 What isn't clear to me is where intensity enters the equation - do you have to exceed a certain exertion threshold for the damage to accumulate?  This might help to explain the conflict between apparently having evolved to be very good distance runners but that distance running is damaging.  Maybe our evolutionary running was much lower intensity; Maffetone style training (also used by Gordo Byrn for Ironman training) where you do large volumes at rather low/moderate intensities might be an example.

Anyway, a bit of a digression.  Anything that gets you off the couch is good.  My week pans out as 2x lifting, 1x elliptical and 1x sprint, with stretching/yoga on the filler days. I think it's delivering pretty good results, but if/when I resume playing hockey I may find my cardio isn't where it was - we'll see how it goes.

[WGH]

Todays Talk of the Nation program is:

Secrets To Longevity: It's Not All About Broccoli
To live a long life, we've been told, eat well and exercise, and manage stress. Now an eight-decade study shows that much of the advice may be wrong. Howard Friedman and Leslie Martin explain how factors such as social connections, personality and marriage affect our lives in The Longevity Project.

Listen live on your favorite NPR station right now!

Or listen later

http://www.npr.org/programs/talk-of-the-nation/

Wayne

[rollo]

  The Indians didn't need the food police as well as many other races that did not consume processed food. Our family in Sicily has members over 100. They live on a farm grow their own, butchher their own meat make wine, have little stress and are very happy. Both Mom and Dad are over 80 and doing well. We eat for our blood type which are meat based [ type"O"] and veggie based [ type"A"]. The best thing we ever did. My wife beat her cancer and I no longer have digestion or intestinal issues. I wonder who funded the study ? Just saying.
   NPR no thank you.


charles

[WGH]

It is a mistake to outright dismiss all information broadcast on NPR, without the Secrets to Longevity program I would not have known about The Longevity Project.

Psychologist Lewis Terman tracked 1,500 children for more than 80 years in a massive longitudinal study begun in 1921 (49 years before NPR was founded).

"In The Longevity Project the psychology professors Howard S. Friedman and Leslie Martin describe their two-decade-long odyssey to answer that question using Terman's data. Eventually publishing about 50 scholarly papers on the subject, they discovered that many adages promising long life—get married, exercise regularly, think happy thoughts, don't work so hard—are not shortcuts to immortality, and for certain groups of people, they can actually have the opposite effect."
http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/03/the-longevity-project-decades-of-data-reveal-paths-to-long-life/72290/

Google is your friend

Wayne

[rollo]

It is a mistake to outright dismiss all information broadcast on NPR, without the Secrets to Longevity program I would not have known about The Longevity Project.

Psychologist Lewis Terman tracked 1,500 children for more than 80 years in a massive longitudinal study begun in 1921 (49 years before NPR was founded).

"In The Longevity Project the psychology professors Howard S. Friedman and Leslie Martin describe their two-decade-long odyssey to answer that question using Terman's data. Eventually publishing about 50 scholarly papers on the subject, they discovered that many adages promising long life—get married, exercise regularly, think happy thoughts, don't work so hard—are not shortcuts to immortality, and for certain groups of people, they can actually have the opposite effect."
http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/03/the-longevity-project-decades-of-data-reveal-paths-to-long-life/72290/

Google is your friend

Wayne

  Sorry Wayne did not mean to kill the messenger. Just have a peeve over NPR. the content howeve is veryinformative and a good heads up.thanks for the info.


charles

[Tyson]

I think from a nutrition standpoint, it's clear that we eat less of the "whole" animal (liver, kidney, bone marrow, etc...), and more of the "muscle meat".  There's a lot of stuff in the organs that are very important to our health that we miss out on.  Combine that with greater wheat and sugar consumption overall and you have a recipe for disaster on a large scale.  Add in industrial farming that depletes veggies of mineral and vitamin content, along with a processed food industry that creates wonderful stuff like trans-fats, and it's no wonder our rate of chronic diseases (stroke, heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity), are on steep upward trends. 

I think a big part of the "French Paradox" is that they maintain traditional food consumption (ie, organs), and better quality vegetables, and eat them in greater quantity and variety.  Of course, all that wine, cheese, and sex probably helps too

[WGH]

For those who have not listened to the program yet, the radio spot has Friedman and Martin, the two authors of The Longevity Project, answering callers questions. The interview is a combination Q&A and book tour for their new book. It does look like an interesting read but I wonder if buying the book will enable you to live longer.


http://www.amazon.com/Longevity-Project-Surprising-Discoveries-Eight-Decade/dp/1594630755

My lifestyle and mental makeup is very close to what Friedman and Martin talked about in the interview. Based on that, I'm going to live forever. How cool is that? 

Wayne

[JLM]

Yes, I've been in plenty of nursing homes and care for my 86 year old father, so I tip the scale towards quality, not quantity of life.

But the real question is what you think the alternatives are (after life).

[John Casler]

Somewhere I either read or wrote:

1) He who dies with the most toys WINS

2) He who "lives" with the most toys WINS

3) He who LIVES . . . WINS.

So, I'm with the "quality of life'ers".