Sitting Down Too Long Is Bad Even If You Exercise

My excuse by hedgemage · 2010-01-19 22:08 · Score: 4, Funny

I can't remember things when I'm standing. I think its because I keep all my thoughts in my lap and when I stand up, they fall on the floor and roll under the desk.

Re:My excuse by laederkeps · 2010-01-20 00:15 · Score: 1

I can't remember things when I'm standing. I think its because I keep all my thoughts in my lap and when I stand up, they fall on the floor and roll under the desk.
I always wondered what the rounded corners on my lapt^Wnotebook were for!
Re:My excuse by happy_place · 2010-01-20 02:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

I don't think we really consider the impact of what it means to be in front of a computer day in and day out. yesterday a coworker and I put together some cabinets for a lab. It was outside the normal routine of programming/code work that we normally do. After four hours of this, we were both pretty beat, though there was nothing of extraordinary physical prowess required in putting the stupid cabinets together. We had to use a screwdriver, lift metal panels into place, etc, but nothing like my old grandpa used to do day in and day out on his farm. Feeling winded just climbing the steps to my office, I am starting to regret a lot about this particular field.
Sure one can exercise, but even so, it's always forced and "unnatural" in the sense that it's not required effort for what i do all day long. It's a bit like the guy who engages in body building just long enough to get a movie deal or go on his honeymoon, and then the moment he stops he's worse off than when he started, because all that unnatural muscle turns flabby, because it simply isn't used.
The other effect that comes with low-activity levels is that I am crankier--less willing to get up and help the kids, keep moving. When you're out of shape you tend to think of the shortest path to doing everything. I noticed this first when I saw an obese couple leaving a shopping market. Both were bickering over who put the groceries away. Then they had to climb up into their pickup, and the cart they were to put away started to drift. Since they'd already both gone to all the effort of climbing into the cab of the truck, neither of them wanted to climb out and get the cart so they yelled at each other. Someone in decent physical condition would not have thought twice about jumping out, grabbing the cart and putting it in its own spot.
I don't know how one might solve these issues outside of making programming a full-body sport, but the concerns are legit, imo. Exercise really can't be something you tack onto the end of your day. It really should be part of the whole work experience, and there really aren't a lot of trivial solutions to that problem.

--
http://www.beanleafpress.com
Re:My excuse by EvanED · 2010-01-20 02:32 · Score: 1

I don't know how one might solve these issues outside of making programming a full-body sport, ...
One suggestion that might help is some sort of standing desk. I used to use my laptop like this: I have a 5-drawer filing cabinet, and if I put my laptop on top of it, it was a comfortable height for the screen. If I put the keyboard on top of one of the drawers, it was an acceptable height to type at, so I just did it that way. Even if you're not moving a whole lot more, the simple fact you're standing means, I suspect, that your muscles are working more to keep you upright.
The problem is that it's probably hard to find a standing desk of the right height, because the "right" height will vary much more from person-to-person than the right height of a standard desk.
Re:My excuse by neonmonk · 2010-01-20 02:35 · Score: 1

Every hour on the hour I do ~5 pushups. It might be forced, but I don't see myself stopping doing pushups. I find it helps my coding in some way, too.
Re:My excuse by xaxa · 2010-01-20 02:50 · Score: 5, Interesting

A little over a year ago, a month into my first job since graduation, I decided I was long overdue some exercise (I'm 24). I've always been a healthy weight, and I've never had trouble running up stairs, to catch a train, when I'm late, dancing in a nightclub etc, but I'd not done anything more than that since school. I knew that I didn't feel fit and energetic, even if I looked OK.
I also hate doing exercise for the sake of it. Playing sport for fun is OK, but I wanted something that would force me to do exercise as often as possible. Someone suggested I cycled to work, and lent me their spare bike. This was excellent: an hour's good exercise every day (2×30mins), and it was quicker, cheaper and more reliable than any other way of getting to work -- excellent incentive to continue.
For the first couple of weeks I was really tired when I got home -- I had only enough energy to cook something and then slob in front of the TV. But after the initial shock I seemed to adjust to it, and felt better in the evenings than I used to. After a month a few people commented that I looked healthier, and I definitely felt healthier.
For extra exercise I tried cycling to other towns (which has purpose: I can look at tourist stuff, and the countryside is pretty along the way). I also tried cycling to the coast (80km/50miles) but lost the map halfway. I really need a companion if I'm to do it again, it got a bit dull going alone.
Re:My excuse by Moryath · 2010-01-20 02:59 · Score: 2, Interesting

A good start is to set up an adjustable height desk.
Your heart rate remains higher if you remain vertical. And you'll move around a bit more just being in a standing position.
I wish I could bike to work. Unfortunately, I'd have to go through a couple really shitty neighborhoods. Plus, they take a dim view of riding bicycles on the "freeway" or "highway" around here, and half of them don't have frontage roads.
Re:My excuse by greyline · 2010-01-20 03:04 · Score: 3, Funny

Occasionally, I will shuffle my way over to my pantry from my computer to procure another bag of Cheetos and perhaps a Mnt Dew Code Red. Every now and then, I'll also have to empty the used bottles of Mnt Dew of urine too. My standing up and moving around requirements are thus securely met.
Re:My excuse by vtcodger · 2010-01-20 03:09 · Score: 1

***I am starting to regret a lot about this particular field.***
But think of all the beautiful sunrises you would have missed out on had you chosen to repair cars or dig wells.

--
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Re:My excuse by RobDude · 2010-01-20 03:26 · Score: 2, Informative

Muscle doesn't turn to flab. Ever.
Re:My excuse by Gilmoure · 2010-01-20 03:45 · Score: 1

Just moved to a new job and they have an adjustable height desk there. Guess I should start using it. After standing here for 15 minutes, am thinking I need to ask the boss for one of those squishy mats to stand on. This will be interesting, trying to work this way.

--
I drank what? -- Socrates
Re:My excuse by operagost · 2010-01-20 03:50 · Score: 1

I'm glad that you drink Code Red so that the full bottles may be readily distinguished from the ones containing your urine... I hope.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Re:My excuse by tehcyder · 2010-01-20 04:05 · Score: 3, Funny

I really need a companion if I'm to do it again, it got a bit dull going alone.

a/s/l?

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:My excuse by krotkruton · 2010-01-20 04:18 · Score: 1

Way to find a practical way to get healthy... until you get testicular cancer and die.

Once again we need to remember to do things in moderation. One would think that barbers / stylists would be in better shape than desk jockeys as they are at least walking around all day and moving, yet they can develop major shoulder / back / neck problems from their repetitive tasks. Laborers tend to have shorter lifespans due to the strain it puts on their bodies. Eat too much junk food, health problems. Drink too much pop, health problems. Drink too much water, health problems.

Moderation, moderation, moderation. (But seriously, congrats on getting the motivation to bike to work every day)
Re:My excuse by X0563511 · 2010-01-20 04:28 · Score: 1

I used to ride my bike through a nice little place called the Rainbow Village. Definitly sketchy. One evening, I was followed by a car who turned their lights off shortly after spotting me. I got away, because I hopped a barrier and rode through a construction site they couldn't drive through. Scary, but only happened once in the year I worked along that route.
Now, I would have to ride across the Gandy Bridge - only just shy of 3 miles, but I don't fancy riding across the bridge at 2pm in rainy weather... I'd be more worried about a car hitting me than the water though.
But... I gotta do something. I'm a mess right now, and it is only getting worse.

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:My excuse by gregstumph · 2010-01-20 05:05 · Score: 0

I've been using a standing-height desk (with a rubber mat to stand on) for several years. After a couple of weeks, you get used to it. I used to have a tall chair to use occasionally, but I don't bother with it anymore.
I started standing at work because I herniated a disk, and standing felt better than sitting. But I've kept it up because it feels better for me. Another benefit is that when you're standing, your posture is better. I found that when I slouched when sitting, I had nerve pain in my arm using the mouse. I don't get that when standing...
Re:My excuse by BJ_Covert_Action · 2010-01-20 05:16 · Score: 4, Interesting

I started running after I got my first cubicle jockey job. Thirty minutes of pushing myself hard after work every day and ten minutes of stretching before and after. This qualifies as the 'exercise you tack on the end of your day' category, but I feel great. My legs are in excellent shape. I have more energy than I ever used too. I have a much more 'get shit done' attitude. I'm not nearly as lazy. Of course for the first few months I was just tired and sore all the time. Nowadays, however, after a year's worth of running, I feel great. It works for me =)

I agree, a sedentary lifestyle is a problem as well as unhealthy. My recommendation, start doing outdoorsy stuff on weekends and afternoons. Pick up some sort of board sport or something. If you are new at it, it will always suck for the first couple of months. Have some perseverance though and soon you will find you have a great new hobby. The plus side of a steady workout is that you can indulge yourself. Build some muscles, increase your metabolism, you can start eating some hearty meals. Good stuuf.

Also, you mentioned you have kids, try getting involved in a sport or something with them. Take 'em hiking. Some of my best home memories involved my dad and I wandering around in the forest finding old deer skeletons and such on the weekend =)

--
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
Re:My excuse by CapnStank · 2010-01-20 05:21 · Score: 1

It is sort of obvious that you haven't invested the time to fight the "unnatural" feeling to work out. Yes, when you start to jog/lift/stretch/etc. it sucks. Your body wants to quit early and you feel like crap the day after but that's because you're attempting to change something your body has developed a habit for. This is like eating. If you're used to eating huge portions (above what is reasonable and healthy) then going to a regular portion sized meal looks stupid; you want more!!!

The reality is that your body is habit forming, you can force it to learn new things. In my case it took about one month of 'forced' workout sessions to get into a rhythm. Now, I'm sitting between classes at my university and am itching to get home to my treadmill to get a dose of the runner's high.

TL;DR: Yes its unnatural to you now but if you force the action it becomes habit and actually becomes difficult to give up in the same way it was difficult to start.
Re:My excuse by ca111a · 2010-01-20 05:22 · Score: 2, Interesting

I biked to work couple times, but then decided not to. The problem is - you share the road with *cars*. So, unless there is a dedicated bike trail or a separate bike lane, it is simply too dangerous. First: the drivers do not want to share the road with a slow moving object - not only bikes, but even seniors for example. Fortunately for seniors, they are usually inside very big and somewhat safe cars. Bicyclists are not. Second: chances of staying intact in an accident for a bicyclist are much lower compared to those of a car driver/passenger. Now, let's combine the first and the second... And I haven't even started with bad weather, visibility issues or intentional desire to hurt a bicyclist (ugly, but possible).
Re:My excuse by BJ_Covert_Action · 2010-01-20 05:23 · Score: 1

One other thing (since I replied to your post already). I stopped buying replacements for broken items and stopped paying handymen/mechanics these past two years. I do all my own maintenance on my vehicles as well as around the house. Find yourself a good 'fix it yourself' manual (good ones have exploded diagrams of most home appliances, like dishwashers, washing machines, etc.) and start collecting some tools. Start doing your own maintenance on everything (even the stuff that still works but could be better) unless of course it is dangerous or requires some specialized hydraulic jack or something. This has two advantages. First, it stimulates your mind (just like coding or engineering as a hobby does). Secondly, it puts you on a first name basis with your Sears and Home Depot staff, which make for some great deals and friends. Finally, the reasons to do it are A) you save money, B) your upper body (forceps, wrists, fingers, etc.) start toning and and getting stronger, and C) you build your confidence. Seriously, maintenance as a hobby is good stuff, and quite fulfilling. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a toaster to go debug.

--
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
Re:My excuse by lupinstel · 2010-01-20 05:36 · Score: 2, Funny

Thats ok, the caffeine in Mountain Dew elevates your heart rate so it is like working out. But remember that you need to keep it elevated for at least 30 minutes to get any benefit. May I suggest a 2 liter and a straw.

--
Don't blame me, I voted for Cthulhu.
Re:My excuse by yurtinus · 2010-01-20 05:48 · Score: 3, Informative

Cycling 1 hour a day *is* moderate...

--
+1 Disagree
Re:My excuse by XDirtypunkX · 2010-01-20 05:48 · Score: 1

So you can't have sex because you forget how it works when you try?
Re:My excuse by SleazyRidr · 2010-01-20 05:54 · Score: 1

I live kinda near a park with a cycle/walking track, and my office has just relocated to a new building near that same track. I've planned on cycling to work along there, but my first few attempts have told me that I'm still not fit enough to do even that...
Now I go to a gym and cycle at lunchtimes until I can make it all the way to work...

--
Is 1563649 a prime number?
Re:My excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 06:04 · Score: 1, Insightful

I second bike commuting. It was the best lifestyle choice I've made in memory.
Wake up, drink 18 oz. of water. The physical exertion of riding the bike oxygenates my blood, and gives me energy to start the day. Waking up and riding in the sunshine is much more inspiring than going underground in to a rat-infested subway station -- it's made a huge difference in my mood when I arrive at work. I feel alive and full of energy. Plenty oxygen to the brain makes for clearer thinking.
In addition to the mental and physical health benefits, I save $4.50 every day in subway fare.
Re:My excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 06:52 · Score: 1, Interesting

For extra exercise I tried cycling to other towns (which has purpose: I can look at tourist stuff, and the countryside is pretty along the way).
It's sad that even though you now seem to enjoy exercise 'for the sake of it', which is natural and healthy attitude, you still cling to the notion that you have to justify it as a practical endeavour. Please stop doing this.
Re:My excuse by buswolley · 2010-01-20 07:08 · Score: 1

I've been wanting to do this for a long time.. Now that I'm a professional at a University stuck on a computer, I have begun to miss all the standing I did when I was serving coffee at a cafe.

--
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
Re:My excuse by buswolley · 2010-01-20 07:18 · Score: 1

I live in Davis, CA fools! http://daviswiki.org/Bicycling

--
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
Re:My excuse by pbot · 2010-01-20 07:37 · Score: 1

Start up an office sports team. I am on two after work teams during the week where we get together and play indoor soccer. Its fun and a great work out. I think businesses ought to consider extending lunch hours to allow employees to go work out - lift weights, run, etc. This would be another alterntative and an ideal way to stay in shape. Plus just a chance to stop staring at the computer screen for awhile.
Re:My excuse by wurble · 2010-01-20 07:57 · Score: 1

I highly recommend you purchase a handgun and get a Conceal Carry permit. Florida is a "shall issue" state, so unless you have a criminal record or have been involuntarily committed to an mental institution in the past, you'll be approved. Florida also has a strong Castle Doctrine, so you are well protected by the law should you have to use a firearm in self defense. There are many holsters which are quite comfortable and fit snugly and securely.
Re:My excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 08:08 · Score: 0

better be careful:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stationary_Bike
Re:My excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 08:29 · Score: 0

If we make our workflow that of Minority Report, and stand in front of a giant screen waving our hands all day, we will rival bodybuilders.
Re:My excuse by psithurism · 2010-01-20 08:48 · Score: 1

Parent: I don't know your situation exactly, but I found the secret to long bike rides, which is: take it easy. It's almost no effort to go 10mph and you can do it all day, but you'll get impatient and try to maintain 20mph and tire out and need some breaks. Hope that helps.
GP: I know! I feel like I'm surrounded by fat, vocal people going on about high gas prices, how life is making them sedentary, CO2 emissions of our roadways. I recommend simple solutions like wide shoulders for bikers and no one will listen. So I'm driving to work everyday after too many scary experiences with the narrow shoulders around my office.
Re:My excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 09:28 · Score: 0

I don't know about that. I have no problem at all with CCW issuance to non-nutcases, but I'd have to ask myself every day why I'm living in a place where I feel it's necessary to carry a weapon. It just doesn't seem civilized, somehow... or wise, for that matter.
The very idea of arming myself before venturing out into my current neighborhood would be silly, and that's the way I like it. I'd say the GP poster should move if possible, if they feel that threatened.
Re:My excuse by serialband · 2010-01-20 10:09 · Score: 1

The solution to the sitting around problem is to get up walk around the office, carouse with coworkers every hour or two. Take the hour lunch break and go do something. While I probably couldn't do a full day of farm work, I have no problems mounting the occassional 50-100 pound servers. After finishing each section of a project I get up and walk around, quench my thirst, check in with other people and get them off their butts too(at least the ones who want to get off their butts). I usually try to get people to work with me moving equipment around. While I could cary 50-100 pounds on my own, it's boring by myself and work gets done faster with help.
Another thing to do is always take the stairs. I decided long ago to only take an elevator when I have to wheel a cart of heavy items between floors, and that's quite infrequent. If it's more than 4 floors, I might use the elevator, but I decided that anything less could be done by my own leg power. I'll even carry a single system or CRT up or down a floor or two.
I would never go to a gym as a separate routine just to work out, but making simple small changes to part of my routine negates my need to go. The thing to know is that it's always hardest when you first start, especially that first week, but once it becomes easy, just keep doing it. If you can manage that, you'd be in much better shape than you are now. If you live close enough to work you can even start bicycling to work. I started bicycling because it's faster than public transit with all the transfers and stops. It saves me money too and keeps healthy without that extra unnatural step.
I remember as a kid, that fat people were frequently made fun of, since there weren't very many fat people back then. Theses days being fat almost seems a badge of honor. It's quite sad. From my experience, Saint Nick couldn't have been jolly.
Re:My excuse by Phoenixlol · 2010-01-20 10:38 · Score: 1

wtf, maybe someone pointed this out and I missed it but the summary doesn't seem very accurate. I didn't see anything in the article implying experts warn that the excessively sedentary are running serious health risks, irrespective of how much exercise they get when they're not plonked behind a desk or lying on a sofa", but rather simply that the more TV you watch the worse your heart is. It's ridiculous to imply that working out doesn't help. FTFA: "EVERY hour spent sitting idle in front of the television raises the risk of premature death from heart disease by 18%, an Australian study found." 1. My risk of heart disease is at least 2,721,600% what it was? (watching TV one hour a day for 24 years, does not include my desk job) 2. The less you excercise the less healthy you'll be!?!?!?!? FUCK!
Re:My excuse by wealthychef · 2010-01-20 11:56 · Score: 1

Standing still might be just as bad as or worse than sitting still. I think you're better off interrupting yourself for 5 minutes out of every hour to do some physical activity.

--
Currently hooked on AMP
Re:My excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 13:07 · Score: 0

Sure one can exercise, but even so, it's always forced and "unnatural" in the sense that it's not required effort for what i do all day long. It's a bit like the guy who engages in body building just long enough to get a movie deal or go on his honeymoon, and then the moment he stops he's worse off than when he started, because all that unnatural muscle turns flabby, because it simply isn't used.
This is an old, and unfortunately, dangerous misconception. Muscle cells cannot turn into fat anymore than fat can turn into teeth. Muscle and fat cells are distinct. What generally causes people who used to exercise to turn flabby is that they continue to consume calories at the rate they did when they were active. When that activity stops they quickly lose muscle mass and the fat cells start storing more fat. There are also a lot of misconceptions about "muscle memory", types of muscle (slow vs fast), fat within muscle, etc..
Pretty much anything that an advertised diet or exercise program is saying is wrong. The ads will generally take some study, pull out some aspect of it, simplify that aspect to the point of deception, then market it to millions. Somehow these ads become "medical fact".
I don't know how one might solve these issues outside of making programming a full-body sport, but the concerns are legit, imo. Exercise really can't be something you tack onto the end of your day. It really should be part of the whole work experience, and there really aren't a lot of trivial solutions to that problem.
And you're absolutely correct. It comes down to a lifestyle change. But there are a few things you can do that can improve your overall health. For example, try changing the size of your dinner plates. I had a buddy visit from England. One of the first things he said when we sat down to dinner was that all the dinner plates in my house were enormous. When the food was served he also informed that our portion sizes were enormous. I thought nothing of putting half a roasted chicken, a mound of rice, vegetables and lots of gravy on my plate. After the meal, I thought nothing of eating a "slice" of keylime pie. He informed that the "slice" that I had for myself was what would serve as dessert for his family of four.
Now I'm not a doctor, but for various purposes I have doctors poking me with needles and taking my weight all the time. This information is straight from them. But don't put too much faith in the doctors. The ones who can tell you the most are the freaking life insurance folks. Those bastards literally have it down to a science. :D
Re:My excuse by EvanED · 2010-01-20 13:55 · Score: 1

Standing still might be just as bad as or worse than sitting still.
I doubt it, for the reason I stated. But also, being already standing makes it much easier to have other little motions. If you get stumped, you can pace back and forth for a minute instead of lean back in your chair and look at the ceiling. (Your habits may vary. :-))
Re:My excuse by Meski · 2010-01-20 16:00 · Score: 1

Are you sure it's your thoughts in your lap?
Re:My excuse by wealthychef · 2010-01-20 16:28 · Score: 1

I've started thinking about whether I could get a stand-up desk at work... I know my Mom works long shifts on her feet, as did I when I was a waiter, and it can be really draining. But as you say, perhaps it's easier to get moving... I do get quite a bit of inertia at my desk.

--
Currently hooked on AMP
Re:My excuse by st0nes · 2010-01-20 16:55 · Score: 1

I don't know how one might solve these issues outside of making programming a full-body sport
It's important to take a break at least once an hour and spend 5 minutes doing something else. Our offices are above the warehouse which is 200m long. Every hour I suspend programming activities and walk to the end of the warehouse and back. Apart from getting the blood flowing (how many programmers succumb to economy class syndrome?) it also gives my eyes a chance to focus on something more than two feet away.

Incidentally, we have two fat girls in our team who don't lift their enourmous arses off their suffering chairs all day except to go to the canteen to consume vast mounds of chips. We work one floor up and they take the lift. They whine that their obesity is caused by glandular problems, but we know better: a combination of gluttony and laziness will do it every time.

--
Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
Re:My excuse by wurble · 2010-01-21 03:22 · Score: 1

As Robert Heinlein once said, an armed society is a polite society. Honestly it doesn't matter where you live, the potential for you being attacked is there. Simply having a firearm statistically reduces those chances. In bad neighborhoods, not being armed is a bad idea. In most assault situations, simply displaying the firearm, or drawing the firearm is enough to end the threat.

As for not feeling it's "civilized", that may be your opinion, but that opinion has no impact on reality. The reality of the matter is, if you live in a bad neighborhood, or pas through a bad neighborhood on a regular basis, you risk attack at some point. Choosing not to carry because you think you shouldn't have to is wishful thinking.

Last but not least, this nation was founded on the concept of freedom and a cornerstone of that freedom is that all citizens should be armed. There's a good reason why the ability to be well armed is ranked only just under freedom of speech, religion, and press. If you want a good example of what a fully armed society looks like, check out Switzerland. Every able bodied male citizen is REQUIRED to have a firearm. Shooting is the national sport.
Re:My excuse by xaxa · 2010-01-21 03:32 · Score: 1

I really need a companion if I'm to do it again, it got a bit dull going alone.
a/s/l?
23, male, SW London.
Re:My excuse by X0563511 · 2010-01-21 05:35 · Score: 1

Oh I already have. And that wasn't my neighborhood, but a piece of shit one that was in the way of me getting to work back then (unless I wanted another hour on the bike ride...)

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:My excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-21 06:48 · Score: 0

he/ho/bi?
Re:My excuse by zsau · 2010-01-22 04:12 · Score: 1

Sure one can exercise, but even so, it's always forced and "unnatural" in the sense that it's not required effort for what i do all day long.
You need to get from home to your place of work somehow. If you have two cars, sell one of them (nb. If walking/riding sounds tough, don't say "I'll get used to it first, then sell". Old habits die hard). Walk or ride. If it takes more than an hour to get to your place of work by bike, you might consider using public transport for a portion. Don't say "it's raining/snowing today, so I won't ride". Don't say "it's 40 deg C/100 deg F so I won't ride". Just make sure you've thought about the extreme weather conditions you'll have and you're adequately prepared before you'll face them. And make sure bike riding is your preferred option over any alternative. Bike riding is fun, once you know how to do it.
Obviously, to get to the point where you're able to ride an hour to and from work, you'll need to have exercise "tacked on". If you can, you might consider leaving a bike at work and riding to buy lunch from a location maybe fifteen minutes ride away. And make sure you have a lot of walking in your life as well. Buy a dog, and walk it with your kids (they'll love you for this). My only exercise is walking to and from uni every day (about 30 minutes each way at a decent pace), as well as to the shops (about 10-15 minutes each way) every now and again. I think I get the recommended minimum daily exercise out of that and not much more (I don't own a bike; I'm writing this post today instead of buying one...). But when I've borrowed someone else's bike, I'm able to do reasonably long rides (four hours) at a decent pace (nb. I'm generally a bike rider, and like in every field I think practice as well as fitness is important. So I wouldn't suggest you should do this unless right away unless you know you can cope if you find yourself exhausted, two hours from home by bike, and facing a strong headwind).
People who are younger (you say you've got kids, so this probably won't work for you) should try living in a multi-storey building, somewhere near the top, and avoiding the elevator. I only use elevators if I'm talking to someone who I can't convince to walk up. It's easier to do this if you've been stuck for an hour after the shop closed in a lift with a skip full of smelly rubbish, but it's probably a bit difficult to arrange for this to occur.
You're absolutely right that exercise needs to be something you integrate into your daily life and you don't notice you get it. I focus here on riding to work, because in American cities you're unlikely to be able to walk effectively. And because I hate buses, and that's all they've got in the city I presently live in. But if you could take public transport, but only by walking half an hour uphill at a decent pace, that's definitely a viable option.
Walking to the expensive local shops is also a way to save money, depending on your lifestyle: you're less likely to make impulse purchases because you have to carry everything home, and because you know that the very tasty looking icecream here costs twice as much as the equally tastey icecream at the shops you do your weekly shopping at.
If you do buy a bike, buy a good one. It's harder to ignore your $2000 bike sitting in the garage, than a $200 bike, because it sits in your wallet for ten times as long. Make sure it's suitable for its purpose by buying it from a bike shop, not a department store. And most important, pedal fast, not hard. Go for the lowest gear you can maintain your desired speed at, and don't look at the top gears until you're doing 30+ km/h (20+ mph).

--
Look out!
Re:My excuse by thickdiick · 2010-01-22 10:31 · Score: 1

Once you build muscle, you're set for life. Muscle burns calories just existing, so you get less fat. And there's no such thing as muscle tissue "turning into fat" or "turning flabby." That's just additional fat accumulating, and eventually, if you don't use the muscles, they are slowly consumed by the body for use as energy. Never has muscle tissue "turned into" fat.

Synonyms by clemdoc · 2010-01-19 22:09 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Can somebody please point me to a dictionary where these synonyms are explained? 'sedentary behavior', what a bullshit terminology is that supposed to be? And then, of course, we have to abolish (abolish, right) or change the definitions of these buzzwords so before any discussion might take place, consent about the use of said definitions needs to be reached.

Re:Synonyms by polar+red · 2010-01-19 22:13 · Score: 2, Informative

the article point out that current definitions are inadequate ... so they try to come up with new ones. a language is not static, but dynamic, otherwise we would still speak assyrian or something similar ...

--
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Re:Synonyms by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 22:17 · Score: 0

Whats the problem on this 2 words? "Sedentary behavior" Is there another english word which was overloaded 100 of times in its meaning to reflect that?
Re:Synonyms by Jurily · 2010-01-19 22:30 · Score: 1

a language is not static, but dynamic,
And the most dynamic of them all: bullshit.
The problem is not that they have a new word, it's that they have a new word for no reason and nobody knows what it means exactly.
Re:Synonyms by xaxa · 2010-01-19 22:48 · Score: 3, Informative

"Sedantary behaviour", originally a medical term, has found its way into normal British English. Looking at Google Trends it's in everyone else's English too.
Re:Synonyms by beelsebob · 2010-01-19 22:57 · Score: 1

Which new word do they have? Both sedentary, and behaviour have been words for a long time. Not only that, but they've had meanings that when you associate with each other mean "generally being lazy" or "not moving much". I don't get what you're complaining about at all.
Re:Synonyms by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:18 · Score: 0

The Swede's can by dynamic with their own language. We don't need them coming over here and putting their dynamo's everywhere. In American, we say "power plant." Duh.
Re:Synonyms by A12m0v · 2010-01-20 00:03 · Score: 1

Overloading is a good language feature.
Disclaimer: This post may contain overloaded words.

--
GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Re:Synonyms by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 01:59 · Score: 0, Flamebait

I didn't read the FA of course (eye muss knot bee knew hear), but I just don't believe this. I'm convinced that it's exersize that's bad for you, not its lack. Do some physical labor and what do you feel like the next day? That's right, you're in pain. Pain is your body's way of saying "stop that, you fool."
Running is a drug addiction. It's addictive because the only reason heroin works is because heroin fits your endorphin receptors. The runner "hits the wall" and gets a "runner's high" -- that high is the endorphins kicking in to combat the pain.
Moderate exersize is ok; I like to walk. But if you do it until it hurts, it can't possibly be good for you.
I go to "working man's" bars where construstion workers hang out. These guys spend all day in heavy exersize, and the ones ten years my junior look ten years older than me. If exersize is so good for you then why do I look so young while these guys look like they could be my dad?
The notion that exersize, especially exersize that results in sore muscles is good for you is an excuse by drug addled jocks. The fact that it's your body producing the drug doesn't matter -- it's a drug addiction, and "it's good for you" is an excuse to keep getting high.
The only difference between a runner and a heroin addict is heroin addicts don't blindly run out in front of your car because they're too stoned to pay attention.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Synonyms by PopeRatzo · 2010-01-20 02:04 · Score: 3, Funny

I go to "working man's" bars where construstion workers hang out.
I may have just learned more than I want to about you. Don't worry, I won't tell your wife and kids.
Say, are there cops and indians at this bar, too? And bears?
Keep hanging around there. You'll get more "exercise" than you need.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Re:Synonyms by John+Hasler · 2010-01-20 02:12 · Score: 1

> Do some physical labor and what do you feel like the next day?
Same as I do every day.
> That's right, you're in pain.
That's wrong, I feel fine. Perhaps that's because I do physical labor every day.
> I go to "working man's" bars where construstion workers hang out. These guys
> spend all day in heavy exersize...
No they don't. They spend all day operating machines that do heavy exercise. And all night drinking, gobbling burgers, and watching TV.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Re:Synonyms by joss · 2010-01-20 02:20 · Score: 1

Masterful. You definitely deserve feeding.

--
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
Re:Synonyms by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 02:50 · Score: 1

Don't worry, I won't tell your wife and kids.

I don't have a wife any more, why do you think I started going to bars? The one I go to is a redneck bar in the ghetto; I just bought a t-shirt from them. The motto is "Got Guts?" A woman who picked me up in a hippie bar took me there, and I found out that I'd known one of the owners for years.
The cops go to the Firehouse, a bar downtown that some firefighters own. The indians are too busy running the convenience stores to go to bars.
Keep hanging around there. You'll get more "exercise" than you need.

As it's in the ghetto, I think I'm more in danger staggering home. The guys at the bar like me; everybody needs a nerd friend these days. How else will they keep their computers running? Who else is going to hook up their AV gear?

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Synonyms by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 03:23 · Score: 1

No they don't. They spend all day operating machines that do heavy exercise.
You've never had any construction done to your house, have you? Watch them put a new roof on it some time. These guys work their asses off. As to burgers, we're omninivorous creatures. The more different kinds of foods you eat the better.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Synonyms by newdsfornerds · 2010-01-20 03:57 · Score: 1

There are bearfuckers at that bar.

--
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
Re:Synonyms by jedidiah · 2010-01-20 04:58 · Score: 1

Physical jobs, especially hard ones use up your body. It's as simple as that. It's structural. It has nothing to do with how you might abuse yourself after work with booze, burgers or Television. By the time you are ready for your midlife crisis, a laborer will be all used up. He will be lucky if his back and knees aren't shot.
Whether or not you've pickled your internal organs or clogged your ateries is another matter entirely.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:Synonyms by DrgnDancer · 2010-01-20 05:08 · Score: 1

I think you're missing a few important details here...

Do some physical labor and what do you feel like the next day? That's right, you're in pain. Pain is your body's way of saying "stop that, you fool."
But if you keep doing it for a few weeks it stops hurting. Like anything else your body has to get used to exercise. Moderate discomfort from lactic acid build-up and muscle building is not the same as debilitating pain from injury. Creation and destruction are linked. We have to damage muscles slightly in order to build them. The trick is not to damage them too much at once.

I go to "working man's" bars where construstion workers hang out. These guys spend all day in heavy exersize, and the ones ten years my junior look ten years older than me. If exersize is so good for you then why do I look so young while these guys look like they could be my dad?
You are not considering other contributing factors. These men aren't exercising in a gym all day; they're working outside in the sun (skin damage) and wind (dries skin, which in the long term is skin damage). They do dangerous work which is more likely to injure them either through over-strain of muscles or simply being hit, cut, burned or otherwise beat up by job site hazards. They are culturally more likely to smoke, and certainly more likely to be be exposed to second hand smoke (since workplace smoking laws don't affect uncompleted buildings) which is bad for the skin. If they avoid non-exercise related risk factors (Smoking, excessive drinking, poor diet, extreme stress caused by trying to raise a family on a "workman's" salary), and work related risk factors (injuries, particle inhalation, etc) then they are most likely healthier than you on the inside, regardless of whether their skin looks like old leather. Even then, it's possible that you've won the genetic lottery and they haven't so your heart is in better shape despite everything. Exercise is just one factor in health. It's good for you, but just because you run 5 miles a day doesn't mean you won't keel over from colon cancer next year anyway.
The nice thing about exercise is that it's one of the controllable risk factors. I can choose to exercise more or not. I can, to an extent, control my diet, or not smoke. I can't do a lot about air quality (short of moving), genetic factors, or job related risk (I could change jobs, maybe, but not if I lack the skills to do so).

The notion that exersize, especially exersize that results in sore muscles is good for you is an excuse by drug addled jocks. The fact that it's your body producing the drug doesn't matter -- it's a drug addiction, and "it's good for you" is an excuse to keep getting high.
It's all a matter of perspective. What causes sore muscles? A combination of mild damage to the muscles (which will result in eventual strengthening) and lactic acid build up from anaerobic respiration. In either case, building those muscles will increase their maximum ability to work with stress and prevent pain in the future. You say walking is fine, because it doesn't result in sore muscles, but what if you walked all day? What if you were in worse shape than you are now? I know a very obese person for whom walking around the block a few times *does* result in sore muscles. Does that mean they should not do even so little exercise? Conversely, I can run for 15 or 20 minutes without any sore muscles at all ( I used to be able to go for much longer with no negative affects, but I've just restarted my exercise program after a long break). So I should run, but not very far or fast?
Also your argument about running endorphins is completely disingenuous. You say that pain is your body's natural way to tell you that you to stop doing something, but don't accept that equally natural endorphins might be your body's way to tell you to keep doing something? It works both ways after all. If your body uses unpleasant stimuli to tell you to stop something bad, then pleasant stimuli are probably designed to keep you doing something good, yes?

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Re:Synonyms by Digital+Pizza · 2010-01-20 05:09 · Score: 1

He must be a lumberjack.

--
We apologize for the inconvenience.
Re:Synonyms by yurtinus · 2010-01-20 05:59 · Score: 1

Agreed, I haven't seen a troll this well done since Halberd the Elder on IRC back in '96

--
+1 Disagree
Re:Synonyms by ultranova · 2010-01-20 06:32 · Score: 1

Do some physical labor and what do you feel like the next day? That's right, you're in pain. Pain is your body's way of saying "stop that, you fool."

Actually, I usually feel better after physical labour than if I'd just sit down the whole day. It's my body's way of saying it likes having proper circulation for a while.

The runner "hits the wall" and gets a "runner's high" -- that high is the endorphins kicking in to combat the pain.

You only feel pain if you're running too fast so your cardiovascular system can't keep your muscles oxygenated. Alternatively, you could also feel pain if you're so fat your joints can't take the extra stress - but if you are, it's very likely your cv system is pathetic too.

Moderate exersize is ok; I like to walk. But if you do it until it hurts, it can't possibly be good for you.

This is correct. However, if it hurts just because you ran a few steps, you're out of shape and should excerzise more.

I go to "working man's" bars where construstion workers hang out. These guys spend all day in heavy exersize, and the ones ten years my junior look ten years older than me. If exersize is so good for you then why do I look so young while these guys look like they could be my dad?
On the other hand, my grandfather did stone carving all his life, and still looked like a statue made of granite wrapped in somewhat wrinkled skin at his deathbed at 85, so YMMV.

The notion that exersize, especially exersize that results in sore muscles is good for you is an excuse by drug addled jocks.

Yet amazingly these jocks do tend to be in good shape. How strange.

--
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Re:Synonyms by phantomfive · 2010-01-20 06:47 · Score: 1

I go to "working man's" bars where construstion workers hang out. These guys spend all day in heavy exersize, and the ones ten years my junior look ten years older than me. If exersize is so good for you then why do I look so young while these guys look like they could be my dad?
I worked in construction with these guys. There are lots of reason construction workers look older In construction work, you almost never get your heart rate up, so even though they get more exercise than a sedentary person, it doesn't mean they are getting good exercise. Secondly, construction work is often outside, and the sun will age you more than anything. Thirdly, have you paid attention to what construction workers eat? I know one guy who basically lives on canned soup and ramen. You're going to age pretty quick if your body doesn't have the nutrients it needs to rebuild itself.

You seem to have some weird irrational hatred of running. I'm going to say, if you are pushing yourself so hard that it hurts, you are doing something wrong. You DO need to distinguish between the pain of overcoming your laziness and the pain that says, "stop!" however. There's a big difference, but both hurt; learn to distinguish the two. I mean seriously, are you really going to deny all the scientific evidence that shows that running is good for you? Get on the same page as reality.

--
Qxe4
Re:Synonyms by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 09:27 · Score: 1

Even then, it's possible that you've won the genetic lottery
Actually it's likely. However, when my grandmother was 95 she advised me "I don't know why anybody wants to live to be a hundred. It ain't no fun bein' old." So it's the ones who keel over from a heart attack at age 50 who win the genetic lottery; the rest of us have to endure the loss of loved ones, along with arthritis and all the other ailments of old age. I've had arthritis since I was a teenager, and I can tell you the worse thing about it is that it's not fatal, it just hurts like hell.
Yoga is good therapy for it, as well as walking. Swimming is even better. I used to swim a lot, I never got sore from swimming. Oddly, I hardly ever suffer from arthritis symptoms any more, and I'm 57.
Running is bad for your knees, especially for women. Any high-impact activity like that is bad for you, which may be why swimming never left me with sore muscles no matter how much I swam.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Synonyms by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 09:31 · Score: 1

Actually, I usually feel better after physical labour than if I'd just sit down the whole day. It's my body's way of saying it likes having proper circulation for a while.

Same here; if I get engrossed at the computer my legs go to sleep. That can't be healthy. I try to get up and walk around for a while after an hour or so.
However, if it hurts just because you ran a few steps, you're out of shape and should excerzise more.

True. "All things in moderation."
Yet amazingly these jocks do tend to be in good shape.
Not when they reach my age. By then they're used up.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Synonyms by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 09:37 · Score: 1

You seem to have some weird irrational hatred of running.
I have a wierd irrational fear of running over some idiot that blindly runs from behind a parked truck right into the street direvctly in front of me because he's so hopped up on endorphins that he doesn't even realize that he almost became a statistic, nor heard the screeching tires, nor noticed that he came mere feet from being run over.
Moderate exersize is of course good, but the jocks say "no pain, no gain." IMO that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Synonyms by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 14:08 · Score: 0

That don't make it right.

What we need is... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 22:09 · Score: 0

...the exercise desk demonstrated by Woody Allen in the movie "Bananas".

Insurance? by onlysolution · 2010-01-19 22:10 · Score: 5, Insightful

I honestly can't help but wonder if this will eventually be used as an excuse to hike insurance/worker's comp rates for desk jockeys...

Re:Insurance? by JackieBrown · 2010-01-19 22:54 · Score: 2, Informative

I have been waiting for insurances to start charging more for people that have poor diet and exercises habits ever since they went after the smokers.
Unfortunetly, I fall into all of the above categories but have recently quit smoking. (I will swear by chantix for any smoker - assuming that smoker can handle the stomach sickness and nightmares that occur while on the medicine. I didn't have the nightmares but I did have more vivid dreams. It defintely made me sick, though.)
Re:Insurance? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:32 · Score: 5, Funny

The intense nightmares are what makes quitting smoking worthwhile. I don't crave cigarettes anymore, but damn do I miss my own personal holodeck.
Re:Insurance? by PaulSipot · 2010-01-19 23:45 · Score: 3, Informative

I tried quitting several times before and I usually experience vivid dreams when using nicotine patches (The strongest 24/7 ones), I love it! It makes me want to sleep all the time, but the effect wares off after a week or two :/.
Re:Insurance? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:42 · Score: 0

The insurance companies are not going to take a hit because of fat lazy people who years down the road are going to die younger. They take a hit from risky behavior that leads to health problems on short notice.
Re:Insurance? by John+Hasler · 2010-01-20 02:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

That would not be an excuse. It would be a reason.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Re:Insurance? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:31 · Score: 0

It only makes sense. If you do things which indicate you have a higher likelyhood of being in a car accident, the car insurance companies will raise your rates. Why shouldn't the health insurance companies do the same thing?
Re:Insurance? by pla · 2010-01-20 02:56 · Score: 1

I have been waiting for insurances to start charging more for people that have poor diet and exercises habits ever since they went after the smokers.

Except, the study in TFA has nothing to do with poor diet and exercise in general.

My line of work tends to have me sitting in front of a computer all day every day. Despite that (or perhaps, to make up for it), I engage in fairly strenuous recreational activities that keep me in decent shape. I also don't sit at the computer and munch chips all day, but prefer to have three or four protein-heavy meals a day.

So basically, this study says that even though I keep myself in good shape, I still end up screwed because of my career choice.

Thanks a heap, science... Perhaps next you can tell me that porn really will make me go blind.
Re:Insurance? by DrgnDancer · 2010-01-20 06:34 · Score: 1

Yeah, sometimes you'd almost rather not know.

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.

I'll stay in my sofa by Permutation+Citizen · 2010-01-19 22:15 · Score: 5, Funny

They can run any study they want, people get badly injured doing sports, not sitting on a sofa.

Re:I'll stay in my sofa by asquithea · 2010-01-19 22:34 · Score: 1, Insightful

This should be modded insightful, not funny. All the injuries I've ever had have come from sports, not idleness or walking for pleasure.
Sitting still too long might not be healthy, but the reality is that your diet will have a much greater impact on your health than exercise ever will.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 22:43 · Score: 0

This so many times.
Good diet will beat any exercise you do.
People get on perfectly fine till they are way up in the 80s-100s without overly-strenuous exercise through their life, simply due to good diet.
Now these days people suck on sugar straws (literally) and god knows what else.
A walk a day will keep the heart attack away.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by cerberusss · 2010-01-19 22:43 · Score: 1

Your subject:

I'll stay in my sofa
In your sofa? Is that an Americanism/Anglicism or do we now have LOLCATs posting on slashdot?

--
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Tom · 2010-01-19 22:57 · Score: 4, Insightful

Please don't mod parent "Funny".
He's actually pointing out a major cause for mankind's current crisis. No matter if it's financial, political or climate trouble, you can always look at it and find one root cause: All these are issues we are biologically ill-equipped to deal with. Long-term problems with no immediate danger. When the human brain evolved, it didn't have spare room for that kind of processing, except in the general "deal with all the other complicated stuff, if you feel like it" area we call reasoning. Our main problem was not being eaten today, finding a mate soon and getting the tribe to that other place by the end of the month. "Next year" was about as far as our ancestors ever needed to plan, so we don't have any brain matter specialized to doing it. "May hurt me in 10 years time" is a waste of energy to think about when your survival until next week is far from certain.

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Hurricane78 · 2010-01-19 23:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

Only on Slashdot...
Sorry dude, but EPIC FAIL!
How about you stop eating? Most diseases come from bad food (wrong long-term balance, etc).
How about you stop kissing and sex. You could get herpes. Oh, wait, we’re on Slashdot. ;)
You see how this makes no sense.
Think for a second, about, what human bodies are build for.
You know what the number one advantage of humans was, back in the hunter/gatherer times?
That we were able to “out-jog” and other life-form on the planet. We did just follow the animal, until it couldn’t walk any further. Nobody could walk as far as we did. Some native American tribes (in Mexico, I think) still are a testament to that. They walk hundrets of miles in one trip. In crappy shoes or barefoot. (After all, we’re built for it.) No problem.
And they never get sick. They have some of the best healths on the planet.
You should really stop making excuses, and think about, what hundreds of thousands of years of evolution optimized you for. Can’t get any better.

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Permutation+Citizen · 2010-01-19 23:15 · Score: 2, Informative

English is not my native language.
In french we say "Assis dans un fauteuil". This means literaly "sat in an armchair". Sorry for this french-ism.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Exitar · 2010-01-20 00:35 · Score: 2, Insightful

"And they never get sick. They have some of the best healths on the planet."
Citation needed.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by fuzzix · 2010-01-20 00:35 · Score: 2, Interesting

English is not my native language.
In french we say "Assis dans un fauteuil". This means literaly "sat in an armchair". Sorry for this french-ism.
Strange... I do sit in a chair, but I sit on a sofa. It's not a French-ism, it's just another of those wonderful quirks of the English language - even native speakers don't get it right a lot of the time.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 00:44 · Score: 0

Think for a second, about, what human bodies are build for.
Human bodies evolved during a time, and from predecessors, that had to fight every day to get enough calories to keep breathing and to avoid being calories for some other species. Or some other human. The activities for which the human body was built are now largely obsolete. It's very quaint that you'd like to keep chasing after pretend prey, having pretend combat, or fleeing from pretend predators, but it's really not necessary. Our sedentary brains figured out that we could plant food where it's easy to gather, build tools to gather prey or neutralize predators, and construct a whole world of luxury undreamed of by our 1000 year old ancestors (never mind our 100,000 year old ancestors). We need to rebuild our bodies for this environment - grow better brains, develop resistance to inactivity-related disorders, refine our dexterity for teleoperation.
I honestly can't think of the last time I had to run from a bear or run down an antelope. Maybe your world is different.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by codeButcher · 2010-01-20 01:08 · Score: 2, Funny

On the other hand, that equips people just fine for government jobs where I come from - although being able to plan to "the end of the month" might already be a big disqualifier in some departments.

--
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:09 · Score: 0

In short, we evolved to: eat, sleep, shit and fuck. Everything else is a waste of time.
I'm going back to bed.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Narpak · 2010-01-20 01:22 · Score: 1

..think about, what hundreds of thousands of years of evolution optimized you for. Can’t get any better.

That's were genetic engineering comes in. Bye bye evolution, hello Human 2.3 BETA.

--
The Long Now Foundation
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:28 · Score: 0

So, that would seem to indicate that we're built for slow jogging, or walking, not all out sprinting, or even worse, colliding into each other at full force. Then it would make sense that walking to slow jogging would be of greatest benefit, which I would agree with (provided you are at a healthy enough weight to jog without ruining your joints). All the sports I've been injured in have been either weight lifting, contact sports, or doing something where I'm really pushing it (sprinting, quick changes of direction). Jogging doesn't bother me that much, as long as my weight is down to a reasonable level.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:29 · Score: 0

How is the parent modded as insightful?
Saying your diet has greater impact on your health than exercise is nonsense.
http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/08/13/the-michael-phelps-diet-dont-try-it-at-home/
Of course, this is saying nothing of cholesterol, etc, but from personal experience I can tell you this; every doctor I've talked to has advocated working out and fixing diet. If you worked out regularly, "cheating" on the diet didn't matter so much.
In the end, they are so intertwined it's ridiculous to assume that you can do one without the other, but the idea that eating well will keep you in good health is hilarious.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by tenco · 2010-01-20 01:35 · Score: 1

We need to rebuild our bodies for this environment - grow better brains, develop resistance to inactivity-related disorders, refine our dexterity for teleoperation.
I think that's exactly the reason why humans may be an evolutionary dead end. Our (comparatively) big brains allow us to build tools with which we can adapt quickly to any change in our environment and to survive in environments we never would without these tools (clothing, houses, fire, stashes, ...). But our bodies won't adapt quickly enough to changed living environments created by our tools. We may be able to shape our bodies in a way that they are better suited for this living environment in the future (gen-therapy, etc.), but we wouldn't be human anymore after doing that.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:38 · Score: 0

how about you stop ranting in a textbox and go take a hike
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by kangsterizer · 2010-01-20 01:45 · Score: 1

thats mostly true
i mean, its definetly good to exercise but one must be very careful.
its so easy to hurt yourself, even when you think you're doing things right and all. i've a knee problem which certainly didn't come from sitting at my computer.
it was the running.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Mashiki · 2010-01-20 01:52 · Score: 2, Informative

Let me rebut: Epic fail on your post.
Back in October I was in the best shape of my life. 1.5mi run in ~9:45@31yrs old. 400m+ sprints, 60+situps and crunches, 40chinups and 68 pushups in 1min, I won't bore you with free weight stuff or anything, but so on and so forth. While I was doing situps as part of some testing, I popped the C5 in my spine. I've spent the last 3 odd months in a near state of constant pain, and complete muscle weakness in my left arm with weakness in my right wrist, with my upper back and upper spine messed up.
I probably have 3-4mo more of physiotherapy before I'll be able to get back to my prep training. This entire time I've spent strengthening and retaining muscles. And trying to rebuild strength, the biggest thing that sucks about this? 2-4hrs of sleep per day. I'm surprised I haven't gone insane yet.
One of the GP's are right. Most injuries come from sports or something related to it, you don't get seriously injured sitting on your ass. You simply degrade slowly over time.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:55 · Score: 0

To add to the randomness the Swedish prepositions are (equivalent of) "in a sofa" and "on a chair", doesn't make learning a second language any easier when different languages can't even decide on the proper way to mount a chair ;-)
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:59 · Score: 0

Endurance? I think emperor penguins and just about anything that migrates beats us for that.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:01 · Score: 0

too many times i've got injured after geting up from sofa, bed, chair,...
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by ethork · 2010-01-20 02:04 · Score: 5, Interesting

As an anthropologist, I have to say that this is basically a false picture of human development. As far as archaeologists can tell, even the earliest homo sapiens lived in complicated symbolic worlds oriented towards all kinds of social issues and conflicts. At least some anthropologists have suggested that hunter-gatherers were basically better off than contemporary workers -- obviously they consumed less, but also, so goes the argument, wanted less and wanted different things than we would want. And at the very least, the image of early homo sapiens living in a world that consisted of nothing but sex and hunger is false: these people lived in radically different symbolic worlds than us, and, if you want to judge by the huge monuments in Stonehenge or Easter Island, obviously put a ton of effort into keeping these worlds in motion. The human brain has always been more than mere instinct and reflex.
I agree, of course, that we deal with many current problems quite badly, but that seems more like a failure in our collective organization than a failure of our biological circuitry. Suppose we take the people in Haiti who have to dig their loved ones out of collapsed buildings with their bare hands, for lack of heavy equipment to work with. Is that a failure of evolution? No, just a failure of logistics (and politics and economics...) What, exactly, is insightful about complaining about our insufficient evolution in the face of problems that need much more local and immediate solutions?
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by steve-balt · 2010-01-20 02:07 · Score: 1

Spelling needed too.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:10 · Score: 0

Kangaroos just destroyed your argument.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by PopeRatzo · 2010-01-20 02:13 · Score: 1

We need to rebuild our bodies for this environment - grow better brains, develop resistance to inactivity-related disorders, refine our dexterity for teleoperation.
Ooo Ooh. And how about a second thumb? For PS3 controllers. Can you imagine what a badass you'd be at Army of Two if you had a second set of opposable thumbs?

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by icannotthinkofaname · 2010-01-20 02:16 · Score: 1

In the end, they are so intertwined it's ridiculous to assume that you can do one without the other, but the idea that eating well will keep you in good health is hilarious.
Hey, just how many calories does the average person use just to stay alive, even if in a sedentary environment? 'Cause the whole point of that link you posted is the calorie balance, and I think that the same could be scaled down to someone who sits at a desk and hacks away at source code all day. Figure out how many calories it takes to exist, and eat just that many (or less, if you're trying to lose weight).
Long as you make sure you balance nutrient intakes and such, wouldn't that be equally healthy? In other words, as long as you balance both nutrients and calories against your sedentary lifestyle, couldn't it be healthy to diet without exercising?

--
Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by jeffmeden · 2010-01-20 02:22 · Score: 1

What he meant to say was the ones that survive infancy (given the mortality rate is several times higher than in developed countries) *never get sick*. While I joke, the real story about what the OP mentioned is in "Born To Run" by Christopher McDougall. The difference is so huge between the bodies of people who train to run regularly and those that don't (as in, almost all westerners) that we might as well be from different planets.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 02:25 · Score: 1

Hundreds of thousands of years of evolution has sharpened the one organ in my body that outdoes all other species -- my brain. I don't need to run from a doberman if I have a couple of bricks in my hand. I don't need to chase a rabbit if I can trap him.
And BTW, how many mammal species can you outrun? The idea that running kept us from extinction is ludicrous. It's our brains, not our feet.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by MartinSchou · 2010-01-20 02:28 · Score: 1

Well, you also fly ON an air-plane and not in an air-plane, even though most of us would prefer to be inside one when travelling at a speed of 800 km/h at an altitude of 10 km ...
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by TapeCutter · 2010-01-20 02:29 · Score: 1

I ride in a car, I ride on a bus, I ride on a train. I don't know why, it just sounds right.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by memnock · 2010-01-20 02:47 · Score: 1

you probably got injured in sports because you didn't exercise regularly and thus weren't prepared for the sport. if not you, that happens to plenty of other people. so, no, it's not the sport. it's the lack of fitness that comes from sitting on the couch and then playing the sport.

--
"To stop the terrorists."
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:49 · Score: 0

I think he's talking Aztec or Inca descendants.
Most of the Native American tribes are still in the U.S.
Lots of us in OK.
But yeah, if you eat high volumes of low quality food, don't
exercise, and pollute your environment you're gonna be both fat and sick.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:55 · Score: 0

arguing 'in' vs 'on' about something that isnt' enclosed is also a wonderful quirk of english speaking people :)
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by radtea · 2010-01-20 02:59 · Score: 4, Informative

Some native American tribes (in Mexico, I think) still are a testament to that. They walk hundrets of miles in one trip. In crappy shoes or barefoot. (After all, we’re built for it.) No problem.
And they never get sick. They have some of the best healths on the planet.
Non-European population... check.
Very far away and hard to get to vaguely specified location... check.
Remarkable physical feets (as it were)... check.
Amazing health claims... check.
Ok! You win a "Jean-Jacques Rousseau Noble Savage Bullshit Prize"!
The people you're talking about are Taramuhara Mayans in Mexico. They've been moderately studied by one enthusiast. They run barefoot or very nearly and are very good at it, strongly suggesting a case can be made for minimalist running, much to the chagrin of the Running Shoe-Industrial Complex.
The claims that they "never get injuries" and keep running into their 80's and 90's are not exactly based on a formal review of treatment records at the local hospital. The claims that they "never get sick" are just the usual hyperbolic amplification that people pursuing the "Noble Savage Bullshit Prize" engage in, heedless of the terrible damage it does to their own brains and the brains of everyone around them.
You need to be more careful: we know that if a sufficient amount of Noble Savage Bullshit builds up in the world it can actually bring about the end of civilization.

--
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:10 · Score: 0

Average ages for many Native American groups were in the teens. Pre-civilization humanity had life expectancies under thirty years except in areas that were very hospitable (ie did not require extreme exercise). The idea that we are "built" for walking/jogging/running long distances does not take into account the wear and tear from such activities over 2.5x the life span we are "built" for.
My car was built to go 0-60 in X seconds, but doing so all the time would probably limit what it can do after 100,000 miles (it might need a new hip)...
I'm not saying that exercise is wholly unhealthy. To the contrary, if the only goal is extended life span then moderate exercise is extremely beneficial.
But advocating running a marathon every day is silly. Not to mention the fact that our knees are are not "built" for paved surfaces.
As for TFA... Funny how time sitting is inversely proportional to time spent exercising, and a person working 8 hours, sleeping 8 hours, with 1 hour of commuting and a few hours of chose might just have... 4 hours of free time! Note that they did not say that their findings were independent of exercise, and I don't think I will rush to assume causality here (though the author sounds to have).
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by vtcodger · 2010-01-20 03:40 · Score: 2, Informative

***Saying your diet has greater impact on your health than exercise is nonsense.***
A data point to support that. The traditional Japanese diet is basically starch and salt. Stuff with the same general nutrient-chemical mix from a vending machine would be alleged to be bad news if not almost instantly lethal. On average, the Japanese outlive just about everyone on the planet. (but they walk ... a lot).

--
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Waffle+Iron · 2010-01-20 03:44 · Score: 1

I would not, could not in a car.
I could not, would not on a bus.
I will not eat them on a train.
I do not eat green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by EvilAlphonso · 2010-01-20 03:45 · Score: 1

Sedentary lifestyle and healthy diet would probably lead to a skinny fat situation: not excessively fat looking but the fat/lean ratio too high. Also don't forget that your metabolism slows down when you age and that you automagically lose muscle mass over the year if you don't exercise enough to maintain it.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by operagost · 2010-01-20 04:01 · Score: 1

We don't need to outrun our prey; just outlast it. As far as defending against attackers, that's where the brain comes in.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by gkai · 2010-01-20 04:11 · Score: 1

Nope, as soon as you start practizing a sport competitively, you will get hurt. Professional athletes are followed by their own doctors, have tailored diets, and basically do little less than training. They get hurt. A lot. Basically, that's why I didn't said they train continuously: They can't, cause they also spend a lot of time in surgery and re-education. Then they have to stop around 40 at best, and, depending on the sport, are sometimes in bad health compared to general population in their 60...Care to check the average life expectancies for marathon runners? Bicycle champions? Not so great.
Basically, if you exercise only for your health, your doctors will advice walking/light running regularly, maybe 1h each day....and swimming, again long distance low intensity, and not in the sun and try to avoid chlorine....Yuck, booooooring!
I do sport (well, less so now, getting older ;-) ), but for fun....and I was injured a few times, mainly because falls and sometimes muscle injuries...
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Maxo-Texas · 2010-01-20 04:24 · Score: 1

Most injuries come from pushing too hard.
It is much safer to do 40 reps with 100 pounds than it is to do 10 reps with 200 pounds.
I'm impressed with your fitness. I spent an entire year and was only able to get to 5 pullups (of course I'm 6'5" and 270 pounds).
Your body can adapt to anything but it takes it years to fully adapt. Your tendons and ligaments and bones will not do well with sudden extreme changes (especially after 35).
However, in your case, it sounds like you were doing something extremely mild when your C5 went out. Did you try a chiropractor? Any particular reason your C5 went out that you know of?
I don't do situps. I use the pullup machine and it gave me a six pack and obliques for "free". (and lots of frolic'ing too!)
I still have to lose 20 pounds and it's being stubborn. Doc would actually like me to lose 30 pounds.

--
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Xaedalus · 2010-01-20 04:27 · Score: 1

This is interesting. I've always wondered what the downside is to working out hard and building up loads of muscle. I have to wonder: does the heart consider 100 excess pounds of fat and 100 excess pounds of muscle the same? I would think so, because it's the same amount of weight. Your story makes me wonder if we do as much harm to ourselves by pushing ourselves to the limit, as we do sitting on our asses. Perhaps moderation in exercise really is the key.

--
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Maxo-Texas · 2010-01-20 04:31 · Score: 1

I play ultimate frisbee.
The careful players could last a long time but the really competitive players followed a very similar pattern.
Play hard, bust a ligament.
Come back months later 20 pounds heavier and out of shape.
80% Disappear forever at that point. The rest put on a knee brace and play through the pain until they adapt.
My knee went (from stretching of all things!) at 43. I can play for about 40 minutes before it stiffens up. I can still ski so I don't play ultimate that much any more.
It's also a factor that the young kids are better trained these days so they have speed, good handling skills, and they can catch. The net result is also that they throw to each other a lot (sometimes the same set of 3 kids all night) which gets old and boring fast. I keep meaning to set up an "oldtimers" game. We played monthly until the university built a building over our night field and we always had fun since we all threw to each other.
Sports people who juice are killing themselves.
Football players and wrestlers have real problems with livespans.
These days I hit the gym for 10 minutes twice a day and walk for 10-20 minutes a day and sprint a couple times to get the heart rate up above 140.

--
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by smellsofbikes · 2010-01-20 04:38 · Score: 1

If you're interested in reading more about how quirks of the language might reflect the underlying structure of speech processing and language formation in the brain, Steven Pinker has written several good books on the subject. "The Language Instinct" is a good starter, but he specifically talks about quirks like these in "The Stuff Of Thought". His assertion is that it's not generally a quirk of language, but a quirk of how our brains form a representation of the world, that shows up consistently in all languages.

--
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by rainmaestro · 2010-01-20 04:42 · Score: 1

This is the situation I've found myself in after damaging my ankle last year. It put me out of commission for a significant amount of time, and I've been pretty much sedentary for the past 12 months. I'm not obviously fat, and in fact my weight has dropped as I've lost muscle mass (I'm thin to start with, making this weight loss a *bad* thing). I also eat healthy, so I'm not gaining a lot of fat, but my fat/lean ratio has definitely gotten worse.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by rainmaestro · 2010-01-20 05:01 · Score: 1

I used to play with an "oldtimers" group at the local Lockheed-Martin facility when I was in college. Playing with the younger crowd was always the same: long throw to the 6' 4" track star who chases it down to the end zone. Hammer throw to the 6' 5" basketball star who outjumps everyone else to make the grab. Repeat to 15. Much more physical, too. I've sprained ankles, cracked ribs, and broken my nose in those games.
The oldtimers game (mostly guys in their 40's and 50's, a couple wives/gfs, and a few of us young turks) was much more about timing and precision (you can't count on the guy in a knee brace chasing down your errant throw). More enjoyable, in my estimation. I'm still young (twenties), but I've done enough damage to my body in various sports to appreciate the value of a more laid-back game.
I take the same approach to weight training. More laid back (casual runs in the woods instead of intense sprints, a good bodyweight routine to maintain health instead of killing myself with heavy weights) and focused on health instead of looks. My body is what it is. I'd rather be healthy and skinny (my "natural" shape) than bulked up and falling apart.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by thepotoo · 2010-01-20 05:18 · Score: 2, Informative

GP is not saying society as a whole can't do impressive things (for ancient cultures religions like animism were able to bind people together to accomplish e.g. Stonehenge or Easter Island), as an anthropologist you know a lot more than I, the ignorant layman, do about that.
I believe what the GP was referring to was the inability of the individual to form cohesive, specific, long-term plans. This is pretty much the domain of the human pre-frontal cortex - not many other species evolved to have the types of planning seen there. The PFC integrates information from our environments and tries to make the best decision possible based on that information. But, being a new evolutionary development, there are still lots of bugs to work out. Advertisements, propaganda, and their ilk are able to trick the PFC into thinking that a decision is the "best" one, when it is in fact terrible.
Our failure to deal with collective problems is, likely a collective one, but our failure to deal with specific individual problems is a "failure" of our PFC. The classic case study for this is Phineas Gage, who decided to experiment with blasting power and iron rods. After he suffered PFC damage, he lacked the planning skills to lead a normal life, instead "living for the moment". It's an extreme case, but I suspect that the "failure of our biological circuitry" really is behind a lot of people's inability to plan 10 years ahead (note that "failure of our biological environment" may also play a pretty big role).

--
Obligatory Soundbite Catchphrase
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by jedidiah · 2010-01-20 05:19 · Score: 1

A little bit of intense activity goes a long way.
It is far less boring and is a lot more efficient.
I don't have to simulate being a hunter gatherer. I can use the technology
of the present to create the biggest gain with the least amount of effort
and time.
As far as this study goes... lump it in with the rest that contradict what you can observe yourself.
My formal exercise exists to keep certain parts of my body from suffering atrophy as I age and is designed to be as low impact as I can get away with.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by jedidiah · 2010-01-20 05:25 · Score: 1

We are a lot less likely to get heatstroke when the sun is out. This is a considerable competitive advantage. It sounds really strange to those of us with cushy western lifestyles but observations of actual hunter gatherers bear this out.
We can also adapt culturally.
Thats right all you aspergers poster boys: culture and socialization is the big human advantage.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Maxo-Texas · 2010-01-20 05:31 · Score: 1

Your comment: I've sprained ankles, cracked ribs, and broken my nose in those games.
shows there is an ongoing change in the play style. In 15 years of play back in 83-98, we had about 3 injuries of that type with 70-100 players passing through over the years. The non-contact sportsmanship aspect of the game used to be a lot more stressed. Lately, I have started seeing more basketball attitude ("What does it mean when I foul someone hard? It means I've got several more fouls left- so back off!")

--
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by jedidiah · 2010-01-20 05:32 · Score: 1

If you really think so then I challenge you to go live with the Bushmen.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by dave562 · 2010-01-20 05:32 · Score: 1

Moderation is key. Most of the injuries that I've seen people sustain happen when they are training with frequent intensity, and then they take a week or so off. After the time off, they come right back and try to train at the same intensity that they were at before they took the break. They make it through two or three days and then *pop*, something goes out or something gets pulled.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 06:02 · Score: 0

Well, if this is true I'm fucked anyway, might as well not exercise.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by phantomfive · 2010-01-20 06:12 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you look at his workout, it was extremely unbalanced (assuming that was his workout). He wasn't really doing anything to exercise his back, and he probably had weak erector spinae muscles (that run along the spine), which is a problem most people have when they get a slipped disc. Note that the erector spinae actually is connected to the glutaeus maximus, so if your legs aren't flexible, it can cause problems when you try to stretch your spine (like during situps). All it takes is a day when your muscles are stiff, or maybe you've been out drinking and you are tired, or you over-exercised, and your back-muscle weakness will cause a painful failure.

If you want to exercise your back muscles, I would suggest doing deadlift and squat, but some people like to do supermans. I can't stand them.

To get a well balanced body, you can do something like this:
Day 1: Deadlift
Day 2: Pullups
Day 3: Squat
Day 4: Dumbell standing back row

You should be able to do each of these in just 15 minutes, so if you want you can warm up with a nice run or something. Pay attention to your body, but normally you should rest at least two days a week.

To avoid injury doing these, the absolutely best thing you can do is get to know your body. Try to feel every fiber of muscle that flexes when you are lifting. Feel the pleasure of moving your body. Be aware of your limits.

Before you are aware of your limits, to protect yourself from injury, you can do something like this: for each exercise, do three sets. One set of 10 reps at 50% of your maximum weight, one set of 10 at 75% of your maximum weight, and one set of 2 or 3 at 90% of your maximum weight. And then, don't push your maximum weight up more than 5 pounds a month for a while. After you start to know your body, you can move up faster, but at first you're going to have some muscles that are stronger than others, and that will give your weaker muscles a chance to catch up, and it will give you a chance to get to know your body.

Also, get on youtube and watch the pros to see the technique they use. It is fluid and flowing, natural, almost like dancing. Even now I watch those guys sometimes to figure out how I can improve. Actually even in the gym I pay attention to almost everyone, I can learn from them; you can learn sometimes even from the people who do it completely wrong, and you never know when you'll run into someone who knows something you don't know. Also, if you are relaxed when you lift weights, it will automatically improve your flexibility.

--
Qxe4
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by neonKow · 2010-01-20 06:23 · Score: 1

...and people get sick by being alive. Better to be dead; corpses don't catch the flu.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Tom · 2010-01-20 06:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

Interesting remark. You and I are reading different books, it seems. I don't doubt that even early humans had a lot more than gathering, hunting and mating in their lives. My argument wasn't regarding the contents of their lives, but rather the timeframe and the closeness between effort and reward. From what I've learnt, it wasn't until agriculture and/or herding evolved that timelines of half a year or more between investment and payoff became common. Way too late in human development to have much of an influence on our genes.

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 07:13 · Score: 0

People who don't exercise get injured much more often than people who do. This is well known. If you don't exercise your muscles will be weak and your reaction times will be slow, so a simple thing like tripping on the sidewalk will cause you to fall and get injured, where a person who is in good shape will be able to catch himself before he falls. This becomes a much greater factor as you become old and your muscles and bones will start to deteriorate from age.
Also regular exercise helps keep your metabolism up, which has a direct impact on your health. It also reduces the rate at which your bones deteriorate and your joints lose flexibility.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by wormBait · 2010-01-20 07:22 · Score: 1

Keep in mind that there is most likely a very large selection bias (and thus a very big catch) with any group of people who are close to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Most adults might not get sick, but the majority of people don't live past adolescence. You know how in a typical workplace, there are a few people who are always getting sick and a few people who never get sick? With the hunter-gatherers, the always sick people (along with probably most of the populace who wears glasses) would probably be dead before they hit puberty. The average people who only occasionally get sick would be the ones who barely survive as hunter-gatherers and might manage to have a kid (who might not die before 2). Those people in the office who never get sick, even when they go out drinking all night and eat crap all day, would be the successful hunter-gatherers.
Our feet are like our eyesight (and many other aspects of our health): strong evolutionary selective pressure have provided us with amazingly refined engineering (like feet that can run barefoot for many miles daily and eyes that see 20/20). However, whenever we remove the selection (killing off everyone who has a bad trait and all their children), we allow enough variation that many people today can't see and just as many probably can't run.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by DrgnDancer · 2010-01-20 07:25 · Score: 1

I have to wonder: does the heart consider 100 excess pounds of fat and 100 excess pounds of muscle the same?
Yes and no. Think about it. As far as straight dead weight goes, yes, 100 pounds is 100 pounds. That means your body has to pump more blood to more tissue, your bones and joints get the same burden, etc. Any place where the question is purely one of weight or volume, the 100 pounds is more or the less the same either way. Having said that, in nearly every way that matters, the muscle is better.
In order to develop 100 pounds of extra fat, you did nothing but eat more, in fact, the less you did, the more likely you developed the fat. In order to develop the 100 pounds of extra muscle you exercised; which strengthened your cardiovascular system. If you did it right, and ran a balanced exercise program, it strengthened your cardiovascular system a lot. Even if you did primarily anaerobic weight lifting though, it helped. Similarly the added muscle mass is helping to support itself. Your bones and joints may be supporting the same weight, but they are doing so with the support of strong muscles that lessen the burden. Additionally, where added fat mass tends to slow down your metabolism (thus adding yet more fat), muscle mass tends to speed up your metabolism. The muscles require calories to maintain themselves even when not in active use, so you can consume more calories without adding unhealthy fat mass.
Now, it must be said that in a very few cases of extremely unbalanced workout regimes, people have built great deals of muscle mass without strengthening their cardiovascular systems enough. This is unusual in the extreme, and usually caused by body-builder workout routines that focus entirely on building huge amounts of muscle with no care for aerobic exercise. It has caused heart attacks and even death. A more common problem with incorrectly designed exercise programs (as someone mentioned in one of the above posts) is over strengthening one side of a pair of muscles, without working the other side to compensate. So, for instance, doing lots of crunches, getting really strong abs, but not doing anything to strengthen your back muscles. This can result in the stronger muscles injuring the weaker ones they are paired with. The trick to avoid all of this is a well balanced exercise program that builds muscles evenly, burns calories, and strengths your cardiovascular system.
Personally I like jogging and martial arts, but both are fairly high impact and risk injury, especially if you're not used to them. Find stuff you enjoy doing that will strengthen your whole body. Cycling and swimming are both really good.

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2010-01-20 09:27 · Score: 1

In Africa, some people still kill antelope (or something similar) by running them to exhaustion. Fur sucks when you're running under the sun. Not sure how important this was in our survival, but I'm not sure the idea is ludicrous, either. Besides, at some point we had to survive well enough to allow us to evolve those big brains.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by TapeCutter · 2010-01-20 16:06 · Score: 1

Best kids book ever! I used to read it to my kids who now read it to my grandkids :)

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 23:00 · Score: 0

"Supermans" are freaking awesome. Especially if you have those slightly hunched shoulders from sitting in front of a screen all day. I started doing them a month back (with 5kg dumbbells) and my posture has improved considerably.
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by mcgrew · 2010-01-21 02:12 · Score: 1

Besides, at some point we had to survive well enough to allow us to evolve those big brains
True, but those were protohumans, not humans.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Mashiki · 2010-01-21 04:26 · Score: 1

Yep this is generally true, most injuries do come from doing stuff too hard. Doesn't matter what, but that's it. Laying on your ass just grinds you down slowly.
The best way I found to do pullups was to use a negative resistance machine to start, that and work on my triceps every freaking day along with my core. Unless there was some reason I couldn't I was doing exercises to build up the proper groups.
It was mild, and everything is realigned now. I was doing negative spinal alignment which worked. As for why, not even the doctors could figure it out. Sadly they don't let you use machines for physical prep tests, gotta do it under your own power. But if you want the look that will work. If you've lost 20lbs that's good, just remember that you need to rescale based on the muscle mass gain vs fat loss to get a proper picture. Unless you were obese, a 30lbs loss is a bit extreme.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
Re:I'll stay in my sofa by Mashiki · 2010-01-21 04:28 · Score: 1

Between a fit and non-fit person the heart doesn't see a difference except in the amount of circulation and work that needs to be done. Someone that's 100lbs over weight will have a tougher time because their heart isn't used to the activity. I agree that moderation is the key, oddly my prep training was going along fine on a normalized workout until that happened. Sometimes all it takes is you do move wrong and kersnap.

--
Om, nomnomnom...

I have the solution by dushkin · 2010-01-19 22:20 · Score: 1

I have a portable keyboard (Typing of the Dead style) and I type all my emails while running marathons.

Just fyi.

--
o hai

Where's the part we can use? by 192939495969798999 · 2010-01-19 22:31 · Score: 3, Interesting

"5 minutes of break during sedentary work" is a good idea, but how often do we need 5 min breaks before the ill effects fo being "too sedentary" kick in?

--
stuff |

Re:Where's the part we can use? by Sycraft-fu · 2010-01-19 22:52 · Score: 1

I also wonder about the effect of a good ergonomic chair. I got one because I have RSI, but I've become a real believer in them overall. I'm talking things like the Steelcase Leap, the Humanscale Freedom and so on. The reason why I wonder is because one of their major features is that they are not rigid normally, the move around with the user. You lean back, it leans and provides support at whatever angle you stop at, you shift your legs around, the front moves down to accommodate them and so on. Basically they allow and encourage you to change your seating position as much as you like, without thinking about it.
What I'd wonder is it the sitting that is bad, or sitting still? The study seems to imply the problem isn't just lack of exercise. That being the case (though I'll say I have questions about its validity) is any and all sitting the problem, or only when you are frozen to one posture, as many chairs do?
Re:Where's the part we can use? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:05 · Score: 0

The article I read a couple of days ago reporting on this said 5 minutes standing up every 45 minutes.
Re:Where's the part we can use? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:53 · Score: 0

..how often do we need 5 min breaks...
A) One break for every 42 minutes of reading a Douglas Adams book.
B) The sum of network latency while playing WoW. For example, every 16.5min at 300ms, 50min at 100ms, 8.3hrs at 10ms. Because who wants to stop for a break when your latency is great?
C) At work, whenever the boss isn't looking.
Re:Where's the part we can use? by martin-boundary · 2010-01-20 11:59 · Score: 1

As few times as we can!
Do you think the early monkey hominids with opposable thumbs on their feet were thinking of their health when they started walking upright for hours and hours in the Kalahari desert? That must have hurt like hell, and let's not even think about their insurance premiums!
But they destroyed their health for us, so we can walk upright and lord it over the animal kingdom, dammit!
So I say: stay seated, man, even if it hurts. Eat the Cheetos, and drink the 'Dew, and give no thought to the health implications, because our descendants will thank us for it. And that's what makes it all worthwhile, or are you just some selfish bastard who wants to go back being a fish?

I exercise when sitting by Issarlk · 2010-01-19 22:31 · Score: 1

...with my stepper under the desk. Problem solved.

Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by c6gunner · 2010-01-19 22:33 · Score: 2, Insightful

EVERY hour spent sitting idle in front of the television raises the risk of premature death from heart disease by 18%, an
Australian study found.

*facepalm*

Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by XavidX · 2010-01-19 22:38 · Score: 2, Funny

Im done for. I sat in front of the TV at least 6 hours last week.
18% * 5 = 108%
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Xest · 2010-01-19 22:48 · Score: 5, Funny

That's quite impressive, it means that theoretically I should die before I finish typing out this respon
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by linhares · 2010-01-19 22:55 · Score: 1

That's quite impressive, it means that theoretically I should die before I finish typing out this respon
1. Somebody call 911? 2. Can I get his uid?
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:15 · Score: 0

No, that's not what it means. It means that the a priori risk of heart death of n% is now n+n*1.08 given the new information.
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by moonbender · 2010-01-20 01:01 · Score: 2, Funny

Wow. His head must have hit the Submit button falling down.

--
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by ccjx · 2010-01-20 01:17 · Score: 1

Wow. His head must have hit the Submit button falling down.
It always happens when people die halfway through a sentence.
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Demonantis · 2010-01-20 01:38 · Score: 1

This is a case of one of the most misleading abuses of statistics. If heart disease risk is 1% then an 18% increase means it is now 1.18%. Not as dire as it first sounds, but I still doubt that statistic. It sounds like the one where if you don't get 8 hours of sleep you lose brain cells. Someone that knows enough about one aspect of science is making conclusions of one they know nothing of.
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:14 · Score: 0

New risk = Current risk * (1.18)^(Number of hours sat in front of TV)
Assume current risk of heart attack is 20%.
New risk will be 20%*(1.18)^5=0.45%
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:16 · Score: 0

more importantly someone clicked submit - meaning they had to prise the mouse out of his cold dead hand!
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:24 · Score: 0

45% not 0.45%
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by xaxa · 2010-01-20 03:07 · Score: 1

Wow. His head must have hit the Submit button falling down.
It always happens when people die halfway through a sentence.
You only see the cases where it does. In fact, thousands of /.ers die every day just for these jokes, and don't fall on "Submit".
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:50 · Score: 0

So if you sit down just 1 hour a week. In a year your risk is... 20% * (1.18)^52 = 109400 %
nasty...
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 04:40 · Score: 0

Nah, that's wrong. It should be:
(1.18)^5 = 2.28775776
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by mcrbids · 2010-01-20 04:59 · Score: 1

EVERY hour spent sitting idle in front of the television raises the risk of premature death from heart disease by 18%, an
Australian study found.
*facepalm*
My thought too - this summary is AWFUL! You'd think that everybody would die in a 5 hour TV stretch!
But they're not talking about LITERAL hours, they're talking about AVERAGE hours spent per day. And when you look at it that way, it makes a load of sense.

--
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by omnichad · 2010-01-20 05:19 · Score: 1

No. That would at least be:
New risk = Current risk + Current risk * (.18)^(Number of hours sat in front of TV)
It doesn't increase risk 118% for each hour.
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by DarkMage0707077 · 2010-01-20 05:28 · Score: 1

HAHAHA Stop making me laugh you're going to give me a heart atta
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 06:34 · Score: 0

If your baseline risk of death from heart disease is 1 in a million, 24 hours of TV watching raises that to 0.000001 * (1.18^24) = 0.000053. So, 1 in 19,000.
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by The+Wild+Norseman · 2010-01-20 07:14 · Score: 1

And when you look at it that way, it makes a load of sense.
Well, how much of a load are we talking about? If I attempted to lift it, could I throw my back out?

--
"A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Vohar · 2010-01-20 10:17 · Score: 1

Perhaps he was dictating it?
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by ep32g79 · 2010-01-20 10:27 · Score: 1

New risk = Current risk + Current risk * (.18)^(Number of hours sat in front of TV)
So your saying that the more hours I am parked in front of the tv the lower my risk is?
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by omnichad · 2010-01-20 10:34 · Score: 1

Took me about 20 minutes after I posted it to realize that this was an exponent and not a *. Oops!
Re:Medical Advice from the Economic Times? by Lunzo · 2010-01-20 14:51 · Score: 1

Why do you want his uid? I class low uids as those with 4 digits or less. ~900,000 isn't that impressive.

A bit of disagreement. by Jane+Q.+Public · 2010-01-19 22:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

TFA actually does not make conclusions anything like what is written in OP. The differences may seem slight at first glance, but they are actually very major.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by BenevolentP · 2010-01-19 22:36 · Score: 3, Funny

It IS news since the genereal (and imo true) belief is that you can make up for hours behind your desk by exercising when you're not. From the article: "Avoid sitting for prolonged periods and keep in mind to move more, more often." I think Ill increase my smoke break frequency from now on.

Couch Potatoe vs Office Workers by XavidX · 2010-01-19 22:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sitting down on the sofa is different then sitting by a computer. Even the activities are different. I would like to see the study geered towards office workers who sit all day.

I get plenty of exercise... by Khyber · 2010-01-19 22:37 · Score: 1

... raging at people, I swear I've got enough typing finger strength to tap so hard on a fretboard as to leave my fingerprints in the wood!

--
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.

Re:I get plenty of exercise... by yurtinus · 2010-01-20 07:09 · Score: 1

Do you think nerd rage could be classified as a practical cardiovascular workout?

--
+1 Disagree
Re:I get plenty of exercise... by Khyber · 2010-01-20 07:24 · Score: 1

Only until their heart explodes from the stress. :)

--
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.

More to the point... by Jane+Q.+Public · 2010-01-19 22:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

TFA is obviously mistaken on at least one point. They say that every hour spent watching TV increases your risk of premature death by heart attack by 18%... which means that if you spend 8 hours watching TV, you will likely have died 1.44 times. I know that they meant "daily" but even so. The numbers do not add up.

Re:More to the point... by mrjb · 2010-01-19 22:46 · Score: 1

Also, they're comparing apples and oranges: "Australians and Britons watch television for an average of three hours a day. In the US, where two-thirds of all adults are overweight or obese, viewing time is as much as eight hours, Dunstan said. "

So what's the maximum Australians and Britons watch per day? What's the average in the US? (I don't buy that 8 hours of TV is the daily average).

--
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
Re:More to the point... by Clarious · 2010-01-19 22:49 · Score: 5, Informative

No, you are wrong, if the normal chance of dying due to heart attack is 0.0001%, then watching TV 8 hours per day will make it 0.000001*(1+0.18*8)= 0.000244%
Re:More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:14 · Score: 0

Or 1.18^8
Re:More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:22 · Score: 0

Sadly, I don't buy that 8 hours is the US. maximum either.
Re:More to the point... by L4t3r4lu5 · 2010-01-19 23:22 · Score: 1

Don't go comparing AU / UK to US TV viewing habits with comparing Apples and Oranges!

That's like comparing apples and oranges!

--
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Re:More to the point... by wall0159 · 2010-01-19 23:43 · Score: 1

Err... no. an increase of risk of 100% means you're doubling your chances of premature death, not that you have a 100% chance of dying instantly.
Basic stats, people!
(Having said that, the claim as stated sounds dubious. Perhaps it's been misreported, and the actual claim is "every hour of _daily_ TV watching increases the risk by 18%" -- which is believable)
Re:More to the point... by Malc · 2010-01-19 23:50 · Score: 2, Funny

Is basic maths not your strong point?
Re:More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 00:05 · Score: 0

I think your are doing your math wrong. If the initial risk is of of 1%, one more hour of TV increases it to 1.18% (1% + 18% of 1%), not to 19%, and so on.
Re:More to the point... by KeithJM · 2010-01-20 01:14 · Score: 1

They say that every hour spent watching TV increases your risk of premature death by heart attack by 18%... which means that if you spend 8 hours watching TV, you will likely have died 1.44 times
No, if true it means that your odds of dieing from a heart attack would be 144% higher. If your odds were .001%, now they are .00244% Another example would be that standing on a golf course holding up a metal stick might double your odds of getting struck by lightning (increase your chances by 100%). That doesn't mean you're guaranteed to get struck by lightning every time you lift a stick in the air, just that you're twice as likely as a guy standing between tall buildings and NOT holding a metal stick up in the air.
Re:More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:47 · Score: 0

TFA is obviously mistaken on at least one point. They say that every hour spent watching TV increases your risk of premature death by heart attack by 18%... which means that if you spend 8 hours watching TV, you will likely have died 1.44 times. I know that they meant "daily" but even so. The numbers do not add up.
Wow, good job with the simple arithmetic there. The only one who is "obviously mistaken" is you and the other dozen cretins who posted this same "objection".
Re:More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:01 · Score: 0

which means that if you spend 8 hours watching TV, you will likely have died 1.44 times
What? If I increase the chance that I will win the lottery by 100% (by, say, buying 2 tickets instead of 1) it still doesn't mean that I'll have won it already.
Re:More to the point... by TapeCutter · 2010-01-20 02:44 · Score: 1

The best way to avoid being struck by lightning is to fly a kite during a thunderstorm.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:More to the point... by nine-times · 2010-01-20 02:59 · Score: 1

Also maybe it increases your chances of death by heart attack so much because it also drastically decreases your chances of dying from anything else. For every hour you're sitting at home watching TV, that's an hour that you won't be in a car accident, aren't involved in a gunfight, and won't catch an STD from unprotected sex.
Re:More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:03 · Score: 0

/facepalm
I don't know what is stupider, your post, or the mods who modded it up.
Unless this was a really subtle jab at articles that use referential arguments without establishing the baseline (in this case, the risk of premature death by heart attack in a non-sedentary individual).
Re:More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 05:12 · Score: 0

0.0001% * 1.18^8 = 0.000376%
Re:More to the point... by CopaceticOpus · 2010-01-20 06:38 · Score: 1

The article starts with saying "Every hour spent sitting idle in front of the television raises the risk of premature death from heart disease by 18%". Notice that they didn't say "per day."
If your risk of death due to heart attack is 0.0001%, and you watch 8 hours of TV per day, when does death become a certainty?
0.0001 * (1.18)^(8 * N) = 1
According to Wolfram Alpha, N = 6.95584. Watch too much TV, and you'll be dead in a week!
Re:More to the point... by T+Murphy · 2010-01-20 06:43 · Score: 1

The people pointing out you are missing the base risk are correct, but if we go with your assumption that it means you have an 18% chance of dying, your math is still wrong. 18% chance of dying after an hour means a 82% chance of survival. .82^8 = 20.4% chance of living after 8 hours. If you flip a coin there's a 50% chance of heads, but after two flips you have only a 75% chance of getting at least one head, not a 100% chance.

--
My webcomic
Re:More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 12:34 · Score: 0

No, you are wrong too.
The correct calculation is: 0.0001*(1.18^8) = 0.00037588592
Re:More to the point... by Jane+Q.+Public · 2010-01-20 18:32 · Score: 1

In answer to the replies of this sort, I admit that it is not linear, as I originally stated, but I argue that these arguments only have practical value if your risk is low to start with.

If, for example, you were already at 80% risk, then a mere two hours daily would put you well over "100% risk", whatever that means.

It was indeed a silly error in basic statistics, but I still question that 18% figure.
Re:More to the point... by Jane+Q.+Public · 2010-01-20 18:37 · Score: 1

But you are assuming an initial risk that is very low. That might be reasonable in most cases, but not all. It would be perfectly possible for someone to already have a probability of 0.6 or 0.7, as opposed to your figure of 0.001% (which is a probability of 0.0001).

In that case, an increase of 18% is quite significant, and according to OP could actually go above 1 (which of course is not actually possible).

Conclusion? by ardor · 2010-01-19 22:38 · Score: 1

Ehm, what is the conclusion of this? Abolish sitting altogether? What about office work? Sitting for 8 hours is pretty common, you know..

--
This sig does not contain any SCO code.

Re:Conclusion? by MichaelSmith · 2010-01-19 22:48 · Score: 1

Maybe. Stand at your workstation. Move around a lot. Break up teams spatially, so you have to move around. Might be healthier in the long run.

--
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Re:Conclusion? by JamesTRexx · 2010-01-20 01:25 · Score: 1

Might be healthier in the long run

If not healthier, it makes me feel better at the end of the day.
I tend to get up and walk over to coworkers instead of messenging/calling them, sometimes print on the printer one floor up just to have an excuse to walk up and down the stairs. I take any good reason to get away from the desk for a few minutes because I can really feel the difference when I've been stuck in the chair for a couple of hours.

--
home
Re:Conclusion? by TapeCutter · 2010-01-20 02:49 · Score: 1

I worked with a guy who physically couldn't sit for very long, he had his PC on top of a box placed on his desk and stood up all day. It looked a bit strange but he seemed happy with the arrangement.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:Conclusion? by natehoy · 2010-01-20 03:19 · Score: 1

My company offers sit/stand workstations as one of the options for configuring our cubicles. The stations are placed at a height were it's fairly comfortable to stand (and we get fatigue mats if we want) and we are also issued a tall chair. I tend to sit most of the time anyway, but I occasionally stand for a half day or so.
I find it less clausorphobic than sitting down in the cubicle. There are a half-dozen of us who have chosen sit/stands, and despite the loss of privacy we all like them.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:Conclusion? by TapeCutter · 2010-01-20 16:13 · Score: 1

I hate cubicles for the same reason. Fortuately I have a windows seat in a spacious open plan office.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.

4 hours increases the risk 80% by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 22:39 · Score: 0

My wife knows what a lazy bum I am, and how much I love coffee. She made me promise to fetch coffee more often when I'm working.

It's an australian group who has made these findings, and sitting for 4 hours increases the risk somewhere around 80%. You can observe the effects with lower times as well. I try to get up once every hour for coffee.

As for those claiming you can't possibly be fit if you sit at a desk every day: sure you can, it's a question about what you do with your spare time. But this is besides the point, even if you never do anything healthy while outside of work you should still not sit for 4 hours straight.

Re:4 hours increases the risk 80% by boneglorious · 2010-01-19 22:54 · Score: 1

Well really, how often do people sit for four hours without getting up at all? I'd be willing to bet a dollar that most people get up every hour anyway.

--
Can I mod something +1 Scary if it's true but I wish it weren't?
Re:4 hours increases the risk 80% by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 22:59 · Score: 0

At my former workplace, if you got up every hour or so people started to get suspicious that you were slacking off. I can think of a few times that I would have gone 3 or so hours without moving.
Re:4 hours increases the risk 80% by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:22 · Score: 0

Last summer I didn't leave my bed except for bathroom breaks for days at a time.
Of course, I'm weird.
Re:4 hours increases the risk 80% by codeButcher · 2010-01-20 01:11 · Score: 1

Do you know how many people die in beds?????

--
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
Re:4 hours increases the risk 80% by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:32 · Score: 0

Hope you didn't wait too long before quitting such a shitty workplace.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by xaxa · 2010-01-19 22:40 · Score: 2, Interesting

Secondly, if you are sitting for hours at a desk each day, you are not fit.

Why not? I have a desk job, and I sit here for ~7 hours a day, but a few months back (for a completely unrelated issue) I wasted four hours in a hospital waiting for tests and results, before the doctor said "I'm worried about your heart rate, it's unusually low, but we can't find anything wrong with you. Do you do much exercise?" "Yes, I cycle fast for half an hour every morning and evening." "Oh. You've got nothing to worry about then, feel free to leave."

Current advice suggests what I do (cycle to work, sit a lot, cycle home) is sufficient exercise. If the sitting a lot is itself harmful then I'd like to know.

The study says "Climbing stairs rather than using elevators and escalators, 5 minutes of break during sedentary work, or walking to the store rather than taking the car will be as important as exercise.", which is good to know -- I don't own a car and take the stairs whenever practical anyway, so maybe I should take more breaks at work.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by ZeroExistenZ · 2010-01-19 22:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

Secondly, if you are sitting for hours at a desk each day, you are not fit.

I work as a software consultant and alot of my work is sitting.

Every 2-3 days, however, I swim about 2 km or 1.2 miles to clear my mind, overthink business and personal goals or issues.
I'd like to think I'm somewhat fit, even though I sit for most of the day.

--
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 22:42 · Score: 0

Well, firstly, I thought that anyone who (was) is sitting at a desk for hours each day would intuitively know that. So much for the news.

Science is based on empirical evidence. Anecdotes or "Hey, everyone knows that" may be suggest what should be tested but should not be accepted as fact.

Secondly, if you are sitting for hours at a desk each day, you are not fit.

Well, you could have a massive upper body with a piece of crap lower body if you lift weights or something while sitting.

But I am sure that the vast majority indeed needs expert advice to realize the obvious.

The "Obvious" is debatable. What's obvious to a health care nut or a nutritionist isn't obvious to Joe Schmo. You can argue that hey, everyone should inherently know that red wine is good for you. Except...no it isn't?

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/red-wine/HB00089

Neither the American Heart Association nor the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute recommend that you start drinking alcohol just to prevent heart disease. Alcohol can be addictive and is associated with other health issues.

What about smokers ? by f0rk · 2010-01-19 22:43 · Score: 4, Funny

I go and take a smoke every 1-2h, and walk up and down 3 stories of stairs every time. Am i in risk ?
I KNEW there were good sides of smoking !!

Re:What about smokers ? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:27 · Score: 0

Am i in risk ?
You're at risk for falling down the stairs.
When I was going to college, I'd walk the length of the building sometimes during the 15min breaks, to get to the designated smoking area, or my car.

I go and take a smoke every 1-2h
I wish somebody explained this to me years ago: There are spitless, smokeless tobacco products that don't taste like rotten shoe. Swedish Snus is steamed, not fermented, and it's cheaper than nicotine gum, or patches. Most gas stations have Camel snus, which is the kind I typically buy. The mellow type tastes like a mix between cinnamon gum and a cigar.
There are probably some draconian policies about no chewing tobacco where you are, but this stuff doesn't require spitting, doesn't smell foul, and using "regular portion" is basically undetectable.
Re:What about smokers ? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:08 · Score: 0

Good news, you don't have to worry about dieing from a heart-attack.

junk summary and blog, maybe study by dltaylor · 2010-01-19 22:43 · Score: 2, Interesting

The blog misquotes the LA Times article (which originally misquoted the study), and the summary parrots the blog.

May be a bit of junk science, too, but it's hard to tell since I can't find the original study.

If the quotes in the corrected LA Times article are accurate, then the researchers are simply full of it. They describe an 46% increased risk of death by all causes, which is patent nonsense. Everyone's risk (unless there's a secret medical facility I can't access) of death from all causes is 100%.

I'm not saying that there definitely is not a correlation, perhaps even a causal relationship, between sitting for too long in front of the tube and some decrease in life expectancy. However, there may be a step function here where at four hours of sitting the body makes metabolic changes that don't happen at 3.5 (or 2.9, or some such).

What about sitting at the symphony, ballet, office, or while reading books (or journals)? Why specifically call out the "telly time"? Even then, is there any difference between consistently watching sports (football vs cricket?), drama, comedy (laughter is good for you, remember), game shows, and soaps? Maybe too much passive watching (of any or all TV programming) simply rots some part of your brain and that signals your body to quit wasting time and space.

What about meal and "euphemism" breaks? How is that figured into the study?

Re:junk summary and blog, maybe study by praksys · 2010-01-19 22:52 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure the mortality risk is 'per year' rather than 'lifetime'. So, for example, if an average 40 year old has a 1% chance of dying in the next year, and one who watches 8 hours of TV a day has a 1.46% chance of dying, then that would be a 46% increase in risk of death from all causes.
Re:junk summary and blog, maybe study by linhares · 2010-01-19 22:58 · Score: 2, Informative

May be a bit of junk science, too, but it's hard to tell since I can't find the original study.
Here:http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.894824v1

RLS? by srothroc · 2010-01-19 22:47 · Score: 1

If there's anything to be believed here, I wonder if RLS makes any difference.

--
http://www.tenjou.net/

Increased risk. by onion2k · 2010-01-19 22:48 · Score: 1

Getting heart disease is risk, obviously, but it's a relatively small one unless you're very unhealthy or you have a history of it in your family. If you increase said risk by 18% per hour you're not actually much more likely to die. For example, if you're facing a 1% chance of heart disease then an hour of telly every day changes that to a 1.18% risk. That's probably within any margin of error anyway.

18% is the "scary tabloid statistic". The reality is that it's not really a big deal.

--
http://twitter.com/onion2k

I for one am not convinced by linhares · 2010-01-19 22:48 · Score: 3, Insightful

so they stamp out an 8-page paper with more authors than pages, in a journal called "Circulation" from the American Heart Association , whose slogan is Learn and Live. (Bias anyone?)

Here is the papirus: http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.894824v1

I'm not too convinced here. Besides the obvious Duh! factor in TFP, I feel there's much more to the story and until lots and lots of follow-up studies are done I'm not convinced. Hell, these dudes are saying that you can be lean and mean (totally fit) and still have a much higher chance of death if you rest watching the F'n TV. And the numbers are STAGGERING.

I think it was Carl Sagan that used to say "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"; correct me if I'm wrong; but one study in a journal with an obvious bias just isn't enough to scare me. Now if you'll excuse me I'll watch that rerun of last tango in paris.

Re:I for one am not convinced by Ihmhi · 2010-01-19 23:50 · Score: 2, Funny

No, no, think of the greater good. Let the papers slide. Maybe OSHA will read them and require having comfy recliners on every job site as a safety requirement.

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:I for one am not convinced by sonnejw0 · 2010-01-20 02:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

What obvious bias? It would be a bias if the authors were board members of the YMCA. They're not. That's a perfectly reasonable amount of authors, funded by well known national grant institution. And these claims are far from extraordinary: not using glucose stores (i.e. muscular inactivity) increases your blood glucose? No shit.

You don't read scientific papers very often, do you?
Re:I for one am not convinced by jeffmeden · 2010-01-20 02:16 · Score: 2, Funny

so they stamp out an 8-page paper with more authors than pages, in a journal called "Circulation" from the American Heart Association , whose slogan is Learn and Live. (Bias anyone?)
Not only that, the study was done on AUSTRALIANS! As everyone knows, things happen south of the equator in exactly the opposite way they happen north of the equator. Being a resident of North America, I need to turn this paper upside down and read it backwards to arrive at the proper statistics that apply to me.
Re:I for one am not convinced by zacronos · 2010-01-20 02:18 · Score: 1

No, no, think of the greater good. Let the papers slide. Maybe OSHA will read them and require having comfy recliners on every job site as a safety requirement.
Granted, I didn't RTFP, but I would think OSHA would be more likely to prohibit any form of comfy sitting furniture -- they would pose a "safety hazard" by encouraging people to sit for long periods. In contrast, the at-first-not-too-but-the-longer-you-sit-in-them-the-more-uncomfortable-they-get chairs often present in cafes and other restaurants would encourage people to get up and walk around, so maybe OSHA would require all comfy desk chairs be replaced with those as a "safety requirement".
Re:I for one am not convinced by Ihmhi · 2010-01-20 02:21 · Score: 1

All jokes aside, there's plenty of jobs that involving stuff that isn't healthy or safe for you. Working on tall buildings, dealing with toxic chemicals, etc.
OSHA's job is to make them safe. Wouldn't a comfortable chair make sitting safer? d:
Actually, knowing government bureaucracy, they'd probably make a chair that forces you to stand up every 15 minutes.

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:I for one am not convinced by DuckDodgers · 2010-01-20 02:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

The American Heart Association does not profit from this news, and it is not trying to sell anything with the results. If there was a particular medicine, exercise, food, or other product implicit in their recommendations I would be dubious. I don't think your accusation of bias is justified.

On the other hand, I am personally troubled by the results. Between work and leisure I spend 50-60 hours per week in front of a monitor, and if the study is accurate than I would guess that most of the negative results of television watching transfer to computer use. I may resort to something absurd like an alert system every hour to force me to take a walk.
Re:I for one am not convinced by Skal+Tura · 2010-01-20 03:16 · Score: 1

Same here ... Infront of computer very long days.
"thank god i'm a smoker" (lol, like that wouldn't be a reeeeaaally bad habit health wise) i take a break every 1½-2hrs usually, and sometimes even take the stairs to go for a smoke (office at 4th floor)

--
Pulsed Media Seedboxes
Re:I for one am not convinced by vtcodger · 2010-01-20 03:21 · Score: 1

One of the charming things about "medical science" is that like economics, you can publish just about anything you want to and it will be treated as if it were credible. This particular study is not obvious nonsense, but you need to keep in mind that the standards for "proof" in this discipline are extremely loose and that the next "study" you encounter may say that a "sedentary lifestyle" (whatever the hell that is) will add decades to your life and greatly reduce the risk of arthritis, lower back pain, headaches and skin diseases.
If this study is accurate, our Rat Terrier is doomed.

--
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Re:I for one am not convinced by uncledrax · 2010-01-20 03:44 · Score: 1

nah.. forget OSHA.. take this to the airlines :]
They need to make some room on the Dreamliner for a 'romper room' so all passengers can get some time to move around.

--
----- The internet has given everyone the ability to have their voice heard equally as loud.. even if they shouldn't be
Re:I for one am not convinced by woozlewuzzle · 2010-01-20 03:57 · Score: 2, Funny

And, as everyone knows, Australia is entirely populated by criminals.
Re:I for one am not convinced by krotkruton · 2010-01-20 04:34 · Score: 1

Careful about taking those walks outside, you know the sun gives you cancer right?

Then again, make sure you get enough sunlight or else wind up with vitamin D deficiency among other things.

Make sure you eat healthy foods like eggs and get enough salt or you can have serious health problems.

Avoid eggs and salt as they cause serious health problems.

Coffee is good for you

No it's not.

There's a study for everything. You could worry about all this stuff and spend lots of time trying to prolong your life, and then die in a car accident. You could get lung cancer without ever smoking tobacco or other carcinogens. Stop worrying about all this and enjoy your life, but remember one bit of common sense: moderation. Who knows what will kill us tomorrow, but if you're not doing too much of any one things, odds are in your favor that you won't be the first on the list to go. (And I was totally going to get links for all those studies I listed, then I didn't care anymore)
Re:I for one am not convinced by linhares · 2010-01-20 04:49 · Score: 1

I read and write them for a living, to answer your petty ad hominem. A journal with the slogan "Learn and Live" is telling you "Don't read this shit or die". The journal is intended to publish papers with CVD. Do you find that people that dance the macarena once a month have a significantly smaller chance of cardiovascular death? Then don't try to publish that in "Circulation"; my bet is that they'd simply reject outright. While other journals might take it. The problem is that the journal *stands on* these types of health problems. One day, a scaremonger paper will be published without the real backing up evidence. Circulation is probably a great journal, but yes sir, it does have a bias and it likes these types of health hazards. Here are some good comments touching on the same issue I do. http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1516896&cid=30832218 http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1516896&cid=30833478
Re:I for one am not convinced by CaptSlaq · 2010-01-20 05:06 · Score: 1

So *clearly* I cannot choose the glass in front of me...
Re:I for one am not convinced by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 08:13 · Score: 0

"I read and write them for a living, to answer your petty ad hominem."
No, liar, you don't.
Re:I for one am not convinced by psithurism · 2010-01-20 09:19 · Score: 1

I think medical science explores what it can like any other science. You have to publish papers with only moderate evidence to encourage others to explore the phenomenon.
It's just that papers like this, every average Joe reporter can get the gist of it and write a story on it. What better headline than: "An activity you are doing right now IS KILLING YOU! Stay tuned for more..."
Next every average Joe (read me) is affected by it so of course takes interest in it. Then he goes around talking like he knows something about it because he read about a paper on it one time without really worrying how much backing there was to it, because, as in this case, an extra walk probably doesn't hurt anyone.
Re:I for one am not convinced by psithurism · 2010-01-20 09:28 · Score: 1

The conclusion I meant to add there was that you don't get that out of other sciences like say quantum mechanics, because it is hard to find someone to translate those theories into something the layman can understand and even when he does, it doesn't have much effect on him, so there is little reason for them to take interest in premature discoveries.
Re:I for one am not convinced by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 11:43 · Score: 0

I understand the point you are trying to make, but the point should be that you should pay attention to what the study actually says (and only if it is well done) and not the headlines that result from it.
With regard to salt specifically, I don't recall there being anything about not getting enough salt as being something to worry about, not that it wouldn't be an issue if you failed to get enough salt, just that it is quite difficult to avoid salt to the degree where you don't get enough so you shouldn't worry about it, however with modern processed foods it is far too easy to get too much.
Re:I for one am not convinced by DuckDodgers · 2010-01-21 03:04 · Score: 1

Good point, good point. For example you can find a dozen different diet recommendations, each with ten medical studies backing their particular nutrient mix. As to which is actually healthiest, who knows?

nuke this "story" by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 22:49 · Score: 0

who approved this fart?

average vs. maximum by boneglorious · 2010-01-19 22:50 · Score: 1

I notice they give the average television watching time for the British versus "as much as" time for Americans. Biased much?

--
Can I mod something +1 Scary if it's true but I wish it weren't?

"Exercise experts"? by Rogerborg · 2010-01-19 22:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

What's that? The bastard offspring of sports "scientists" and holistic medicine "professionals"?

The published and presumably peer reviewed raw data? Yes, OK, let's discuss that. Advice from people who couldn't get jobs teaching high school gym, and instead have to write about what they would teach, if they could teach? Not so much.

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by GigaplexNZ · 2010-01-19 22:52 · Score: 1

I think Ill increase my smoke break frequency from now on.

And the cigarettes will surely undo any minor benefits gained from walking outside.

Typing problem by Wowsers · 2010-01-19 22:52 · Score: 1

The problem is if you stand up, it's harder to type anything in reply to a Slashdot posting.

--
Take Nobody's Word For It.

Scare tactics... by blahplusplus · 2010-01-19 22:56 · Score: 1

... what about the disabled in wheelchairs or those that are completely bedridden? Seriously we've had these people around for years and many of them seem just fine. I am a bit skeptical IMHO, I'd like to see a study done on people that are disabled and compare them against those that are not.

Re:Scare tactics... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:40 · Score: 0

Does it really come as a surprise to you that bedridden people have increased health risks?
Re:Scare tactics... by John+Hasler · 2010-01-20 03:47 · Score: 1

> I'd like to see a study done on people that are disabled and compare them
> against those that are not.
A bit of googling indicates that being wheelchair-bound takes about ten years off the lifespan.
Of course, many able-bodied Americans might as well be wheelchair-bound given the amount of walking they do.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.

We're not there yet by cerberusss · 2010-01-19 22:57 · Score: 1

At the moment, a lot of people are nothing more than doing glorified data entry, and making the occasional judgement call. You really enjoy this when you go to your bank, or dentist, or whatever. You go and sit at their desk, they ask your name and start to enter your visit into the PC, while you wait. Then you state your business, which they again enter while you wait some more. Then they'll give a solution, or send you to someone else, or something, and ask you to wait while they again enter it into the PC.

This whole business could be done by computer, just listening in to the conversation and keeping a record of what's going on. But the technology isn't there, yet.

--
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?

Simple solution: by Max+Romantschuk · 2010-01-19 22:59 · Score: 1

Make it a point to get up from your desk multiple times during your workday, even if it's only to walk back and fourth across the room a few times.

I keep my smoking co-workers company outside every now and then, just for the get-up-and-get-the-blood-flowing -factor. I'm betting any second hand smoke I inhale will be less of a risk than the benefits of moving about a bit. (Not that I ever would enter a smoking room, but fortunately there are none at our office.)

Besides, it's a proven fact that coders need breaks to be productive. It's a net gain for management too! ;)

--
.: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/

Re:Simple solution: by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 04:05 · Score: 1

Make it a point to get up from your desk multiple times during your workday
In many states now (Illinois is one) you can't smoke in the workplace. So the answer is... start smoking! Who* would have thought that smoking could be good for you?
* Besides Woodie Allen's science fiction movie sleepers, that is.

--
Free Martian Whores!

One reason why not moving is making you sick: by Hurricane78 · 2010-01-19 23:01 · Score: 5, Interesting

One thing really got stuck in my mind:

The circulatory system got a heart to pump around the blood.
But the lymphatic system, hasn’t got a heart. Instead, it relies on the movements of your muscles, to get the immune cells around the body.

Which makes it pretty clear, that not moving is not very healthy for you.

I also found, that there are two types of tiredness. The brain one, and the body one.
Brain-wise I can be completely drained, while still having too much energy in my body, to be able to sleep well.
Strangely, the opposite is not analogue. Instead, I found that my brain is much fitter in the morning, after being tired, body-wise, the evening before.

I all in all, making sport, made me come up with better ideas, being able to wrap my head around bigger things, etc. Because I slept better. What really hits it for me, is swimming. You get reeally chilly after it. And sleep like a baby. And in the summer, if nothing else, at least you see some hot girls in bikinis. ;)

We geeks have a hard time with sports. But I got a little mind-twist for you: How about you see your body as this extremely advanced machine that it is. And you want to tune it, hack it, and keep it running nicely, just like do with your (really much much more primitive computer). Use the same motivation and ways to overcome your previous associations. Remember: You can change your views, whenever you like. Do it for the fun. You don’t have to. But there is this cool thing that you wanna try... ;)

I should sell stickers, saying “My other computer... is my body!”. ;)

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.

Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:35 · Score: 0

Can't, we just patented it. Thanks for the idea though... we were fresh out.
-IBM
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by indiechild · 2010-01-20 00:02 · Score: 1

Nice post, you've provided me with inspiration!
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 00:13 · Score: 0

Everyone should be required to read the Hacker's Diet.
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by weicco · 2010-01-20 01:15 · Score: 2, Informative

You are absolutely right. I just add one thing. Artery system works with heart pulse. Venous system (I'm not sure if that's the right worm, I'm not native English speaker) uses muscles like lymphatic system. That's why they instruct you to exercise your legs on long flights so you won't get thromboses (again, I'm not sure if that's the right term) on your legs. Or at least that's what they told me in elementary school some 20 years ago :)

--
You don't know what you don't know.
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by Acer500 · 2010-01-20 01:41 · Score: 1

Thanks for the post... I like being reminded about this stuff - I hope it's the nudge I need to actually start using the health club I'm paying for :P (I get home totally wasted after 12+ hs work, but probably only brain-wise, but I can't bring myself to go exercise).

--
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by eallanjr · 2010-01-20 01:50 · Score: 1

"Venous system" definitely isn't the right worm :)

But I guess in this case worm = word + term, so, close enough!
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by agentultra · 2010-01-20 02:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

Working from home, it's natural for me to spend 10+ hours in front of a computer some days. It used to be anyways. It's the exception now; I generally can't stand sitting in front of a computer for more than a couple hours at a time. And more than 8 hours behind the desk? Forget it!
Three or four years ago I joined a martial arts club. Then when we moved to an office I started cycling to work. Ever since I've become a rather physical geek. I need exercise and often crave it throughout the day. I'm back to working at home again and I can't tell you how important it is.
We are made of meat after all.
I'm not a doctor by any stretch, but getting fit and training hard has definitely improved my life and work. I get back pain less often, I can think more clearly (especially after a good workout), and I feel more motivated in the mornings. The only thing I don't like is that programming isn't a physical endeavor.
Or could it be? Punching bag keyboard anyone?
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 03:43 · Score: 1

I should sell stickers, saying "My other computer... is my body!". ;)

No, your body is your robot. Your brain is its computer.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:51 · Score: 0

can i get a free license if i work at IBM?
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by DarkMage0707077 · 2010-01-20 05:45 · Score: 1

We geeks have a hard time with sports. But I got a little mind-twist for you: How about you see your body as this extremely advanced machine that it is. And you want to tune it, hack it, and keep it running nicely, just like do with your (really much much more primitive computer).
Great idea! I'll just treat it like I'm upgrading my computer! Quick, someone give me a hacksaw, I want to swap out my arms for the "Chiseled Weight Lifter" models...!
In all seriousness, this idea fails because of the time difference. For someone who knows what they're doing, it takes about a day or two at most to build/upgrade a typical PC (faster if you just go buy a pre-made one). For someone to get from "flabby" to "fantastic" (or even just "fit") it would take at least a month, possibly more depending on how bad off they are. Someone using this mindset would probably be put into a short-term perspective on working out, and would then likely be disappointed later when it doesn't happen.

I should sell stickers, saying “My other computer... is my body!”. ;)
Not bad, actually. Might appeal to the small-but-growing Bodybuilding Geek demographic.
Re:One reason why not moving is making you sick: by weicco · 2010-01-20 07:51 · Score: 2, Funny

You took the worms right out of my mouth :D

--
You don't know what you don't know.

Night by Tachys · 2010-01-19 23:10 · Score: 1

Oh I'm awful about this

I am "excessively sedentary" for 8 hours every night

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by jamesh · 2010-01-19 23:11 · Score: 0, Redundant

That bugged me when I first read it too... does it mean that if I sit down for 5 minutes a day then it doesn't matter how much exercise i'm doing for the rest of the 86395 minutes in the day?

I haven't bothered, but I think that once you untangle all the crap from the article and resolve the contradictions the message is basically "get off your bum and go for a walk". I also expect you'd find a reference to chewbacca and wookies too... it just doesn't make sense.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:12 · Score: 1, Insightful

Why not? Smokers get breaks all the time.

But by rossdee · 2010-01-19 23:15 · Score: 1

Standing up too long is also bad for you - especialy for your feet.
But what is even worse for you is being unemployed (so you don't have to sit at a desk or work in a factory type job all day (or other shift)) since you then can't afford health insurance etc.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by L4t3r4lu5 · 2010-01-19 23:18 · Score: 1

You ride a bicycle? That requires sitting on the saddle!

My god, man! Your doctors are clearly wrong, as this stufy proves you're dangerously close to death!

--
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/

It's OK... by denzacar · 2010-01-19 23:20 · Score: 1

That only counts if you live in the Southern Hemisphere.
Cause obviously, we are not about 51684%* dead here up in the Northern part of the globe. Yet.

* Assuming that an average slashdotter has sat for at least** 6 hours a day in front of a screen or behind a desk for the last 20 years. **Yes, yes, I know. 6 hours is way too optimistic for the slashdot crowd. That is why I said "at least".

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by xaxa · 2010-01-19 23:22 · Score: 1

Why not? Smokers get breaks all the time.

I tend to read Slashdot instead...

It is the statistics by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:23 · Score: 1, Funny

Most causes for increased mortality come from statistical studies. Ergo, it is the statistics that are the main cause, not the thing they make statistics of. If those pesky researchers would just stop making so many statistics, we all would live longer and happier!

Chicken&Egg issue? by Fotograf · 2010-01-19 23:27 · Score: 1

yea but they are not really healthy, are they?

--
God's gift to chicks

Thanks:junk summary and blog, maybe study by dltaylor · 2010-01-19 23:33 · Score: 1

To provide a URL, it's a bit cleaner to use:

http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.894824v1

maintain the course... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-19 23:41 · Score: 0

...until nanotechnology creates an automatic lymphatic pump -- please!

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by xtracto · 2010-01-19 23:42 · Score: 1

Just a comment about the sitting.

I have a sitting job similar to yours (sitting form 9 to 2 and then from 3 to 6).

My job also requires me to fly a bit. Almost every year I make 12 hour flights. Last year I bought one of those "compression socks" at Charles de Gaulle Airport (15 Euro IIRC) before my long flight.

The compression socks did provide a nice relief during the flight, and according to a bit I have been reading they are good for circulation.

After my flight I thought that they may be useful for my everyday office work. I have been using them since the beginning of the year and they seem nice.

--
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'

In other news, traveling uses gas even if you walk by WSOGMM · 2010-01-19 23:45 · Score: 1

Did they even read the articles? All of the data there is referencing time spent watching TV, not just 'sitting'. TV watching comes with a different lifestyle than just sitting. The title is misleading.

Statistical Peril by cherokee158 · 2010-01-19 23:58 · Score: 1

OK, I found this article, which had actual numbers:

http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/newsstory.aspx?docID=634816

I was able to do the math and figure out what an 18% increase in your chance of dying per hour of TV viewing really meant: The number of people who died during the course of the study was about 3 percent of the participants over a six year period. That means that every hour of TV viewing actually increased their chance of dying by about half a percent in any given year. So if you watch TV eight hours a day, your chances of dying in any given year go up about 4 percent.

Interestingly, more people died of cancer in the study than heart disease.

I know what sedentary time is!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 00:14 · Score: 0

Sedentary time??!? I know that!!! It's when I get high as hell from smoking weed!!!..It's sedentary time!!!

Anyone else think this?

Secret to life by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · 2010-01-20 00:16 · Score: 2, Insightful

Alright, here's a little secret for all of you:

Everyone dies, once.

I rather live enjoying my time on my seat and sofa than force myself to write emails standing up.

--

eTrade SUCKS

Re:Secret to life by Taibhsear · 2010-01-20 02:30 · Score: 1

Alright, here's a little secret for all of you:
Everyone dies, once.
Depends on your definition of 'death.'
Re:Secret to life by Just+Some+Guy · 2010-01-20 05:10 · Score: 1

I rather live enjoying my time on my seat and sofa than force myself to write emails standing up.
How do you know this? I thought I'd hate a standing desk until I tried it.

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Re:Secret to life by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 06:43 · Score: 0

I guess it depends on what you consider enjoyable. Personally, I think being out of shape is enormously limiting, plus which your later years tend to suck if you haven't been taking care of your body. Exercise helps me think more clearly and feel better. And let's face it, to a large segment of the world, physical appearance matters; personally I think it's a bit shallow, but you might as well use evolutionary biology to your advantage.
Your mileage may vary, of course. But the idea of sitting on the couch for huge segments of the day makes me shudder with dread. I like being active.
Re:Secret to life by Memroid · 2010-01-20 14:11 · Score: 1

How do you know this? I thought I'd hate a standing desk until I tried it.
I thought I'd like a standing desk until I tried it.
Re:Secret to life by Lunzo · 2010-01-20 14:59 · Score: 1

I rather live enjoying my time on my seat and sofa than force myself to write emails standing up.

I don't have a chair thanks to cost cutting you insensitive clod!
Re:Secret to life by Just+Some+Guy · 2010-01-20 16:02 · Score: 1

Fair enough, but at least you know now, right?

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?

Too much is bad for you by professorguy · 2010-01-20 00:17 · Score: 1

I love stories that tell you that "too much" is bad for you. Too much sitting? Bad for you!

Maybe it's because THE DEFINITION OF "TOO MUCH" IS "THE AMOUNT THAT'S BAD FOR YOU."

Fer chrissakes, "too much" water is bad for you, because you've only had "too much" once you've drowned.

Re:Too much is bad for you by arndawg · 2010-01-20 01:46 · Score: 1

Partially agree. Perhaps the term should be "surprisingly little amount of can kill you". Drinking 4 liters of water in 2 hours doesn't really SOUND like too much, but it is. Having said that, I think most people recognize this intuitively.
Re:Too much is bad for you by mcgrew · 2010-01-20 03:31 · Score: 1

"All things in moderation." Drinking a glass or two of wine every day extends lifespan. Drink a bottle or two every day and you'll ruin your liver. And not only can you drown, but you can die from drinking too much water at a time; just last year (maybe the one before last) there was an outcry about a radio contest to win a wii where the person who drank the most water won. The winner died, the radio station was sued, and the people responsible were fired.
Eat too much and you'll die. Eat too little and you'll die.
Hell, even having too many years will kill you.

--
Free Martian Whores!

Not all geeks by Viol8 · 2010-01-20 00:18 · Score: 0, Flamebait

"We geeks have a hard time with sports"

Speak for yourself mate. I'm as geeky as the next nerd when it comes to computers but I still go to the gym 4 times a week and run.

Its not an either or thing with brain vs body - you can have both fit and healthy you know.

Obligatory xkcd reference by jonaskoelker · 2010-01-20 00:32 · Score: 3, Funny

You forgot this one: http://xkcd.com/189/

I'm currently working on my STR score (push-ups, sit-ups, biceps curl, etc.) and my base attack bonus (fencing). I might also get Proficiency: Martial Weapon (Foil).

All that exercise spills over into my INT score as well ;)

Irrelevant! by djpretzel · 2010-01-20 00:38 · Score: 1

Look, Ray Kurzweil promised me that in ten years we'll all just be brains in jars hooked up to virtual intarwebs of nanomachines, so this whole exercise thing is moot; the singularity is sedentary.

Statistics... by gratuitous_arp · 2010-01-20 00:40 · Score: 1

The study says that, after 6 years, they found people who sat around watching TV for 4 hours a day had greater risk than those who sat around watching TV for 2 hours a day. And this "proves" that sitting increases your chances of death by X%.

Did they try having the two groups switch their behavior after 3 years, to see if NOT sitting actually changed things? Or is this effect natural and irreversible? Did EVERYONE in the study exhibit the same results, or were some people affected less or more than others?

They addressed issues such as smoking, but what about other lifestyle differences? How many of the people who watched TV for 4 hours a day also sat at a computer at work for 8 hours a day -- skewing their reported results? Or how many had higher stress jobs that might cause the same effect for different reasons?

Just things I wonder about when reading something like this.

So the Romans weren't "lazy" ? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 00:47 · Score: 0

If this article is true (I am kinda sceptical) it does make me wonder how advanced the ancient Romans actually were. While they had seats like we have it was a very common thing to lie down on bigger social gatherings. In the therms, at the royal courts, in certain taverns, etc. Did they already know about this or were they simply lazy? ;-)

Re:So the Romans weren't "lazy" ? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:55 · Score: 0

No, it's just that the Romans and the Greeks often had large orgies while doing those things.. and lying down for that sorta thing is more natural then sitting up. (so I hear.. )
Also, they hadn't invented foam padding yet to cushion their marble thrones... so really who would want to sit on that?
I guess you could say we'd sit less if we had more uncomfortable seating..

This means... by pforce · 2010-01-20 00:52 · Score: 1

I can never sleep again!

Great news by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 00:57 · Score: 0

I should be dead in no time by these figures. Who wants to be alive to serve in the FEMA slave camps in twenty or thirty years anyway?

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 00:59 · Score: 2, Funny

My job also requires me to fly a bit. Almost every year I make 12 hour flights. Last year I bought one of those "compression socks" at Charles de Gaulle Airport (15 Euro IIRC) before my long flight.
The compression socks did provide a nice relief during the flight, and according to a bit I have been reading they are good for circulation.

I just continously kick the seat in front of me, it is also good for the circulation.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:03 · Score: 0

Whoosh!

Treadmill desk by Richard+W.M.+Jones · 2010-01-20 01:10 · Score: 1

I've just started using a treadmill desk. Unfortunately I haven't got the level quite right yet, so it's triggering my RSI, but once I get that fixed it does seem to be a good solution to the exercise problem.

I've learned a lot about radio frequency interference from cheap treadmills too ...

Rich.

--
libguestfs - tools for accessing and modifying virtual machine disk images

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Sobrique · 2010-01-20 01:16 · Score: 1

I think that would largely be the point of the article though - that sitting at a desk 8 hours a day is actively counterproductive.

I've found the solution! by Pingmaster · 2010-01-20 01:20 · Score: 1

http://www.thinkgeek.com/computing/bags/a988/

No Win Situation by spikesahead · 2010-01-20 01:28 · Score: 1

Thanks science, I go to the gym at your advice and now I'm -still- going to die?

I have long since stopped giving a shit about most health risks and have instead upped my life insurance to the max. It has long since passed the point where I can make a realistic change to my lifestyle that would still leave my life enjoyable.

--
bend like the reed

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by mspohr · 2010-01-20 01:31 · Score: 1

Current advice suggests what I do (cycle to work, sit a lot, cycle home) is sufficient exercise. If the sitting a lot is itself harmful then I'd like to know.

I think this article IS saying that sitting a lot is itself harmful. Even if you are otherwise in good shape, just sitting for a long time (7 hours a day) is bad for you. Get up every hour and climb a flight of stairs.

Furthermore, relative to those watching less television (2 h/d), there was a 46% increased risk of all-cause and an 80% increased risk of CVD mortality in those watching 4 hours of television per day, which were independent of traditional risk factors such as smoking, blood pressure, cholesterol, and diet, as well as leisure-time exercise and waist circumference.

--
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?

If it wasn't for inactivity... by Old+Sparky · 2010-01-20 01:34 · Score: 1

...I wouldn't have any activity at all!

Well to bad... by wisnoskij · 2010-01-20 01:37 · Score: 1

Well to bad that pretty much every school on the planet forces you to sit for numerous hours every day to learn and quite a few jobs also require that you sit.

For me my school and job requires that I sit and most of my hobbies do as well.

--
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by tenco · 2010-01-20 01:43 · Score: 1

More healthy solution I can think of right now: if you're equipment consists of a computer, move the "search information" (machine S) and "enter information" (machine E) function to two spatially separated machines (two consoles a meter or two away from each other). Connect only S to the net but connect E to S in a way, that found information can easily be displayed on E.

I can vouch for that by hesaigo999ca · 2010-01-20 01:47 · Score: 1

Being a hardcore bodybuilder, I can vouch for this tidbit. The early part of my life was very physical, and I had a job in construction, also working out. Then in my early 30s, I decided to trade careers and go for computer programming. I never stopped working out, and still do with enough energy and intensity to make everybody at the gym scared of working out with me, however, I have noticed that

a) my body type has changed...the way I sit all day at the computer makes for a hip stress that is totally different, and has slowly changed my hip structure over the years.... as well my overall physical performance has changed somewhat, even though I can still lift the same weights, and yes age is also a factor here, but I noticed that my wrists are not as strong as they used to be, because of the prolonged typing.

b)my cardio has slowly decreased over the years, yes I can still run 45 minutes although with difficulty, at a high level on the treadmill, I noticed that my waning cardio makes it hard to work out like I used to, I still push past it, but notice that it takes more out of me.

Again, yes old age comes and gives you these gifts for free , but I am not that old, and know others at the same level, same age, same diet, same exercise regiment that have none of the signs I have, is it also their overall environment, and gene pool...maybe, but when I get up from sitting too long, and feel it in my hips and knees....not that I complain about it, just that I notice it....i realize the importance of keeping your body in motion.

The hip area that I talked about seems to have changed in many ways, size , tilt, and even stress points. I am certain that when I was at the beginning of my computer career, I would still take a lot of walks everywhere, because I had to, so sitting was complimented by standing and walking, but now I have this job where I have all I need at my desk, and no need to walk, I sometimes have to find excuses to take one....

just my observations..

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by tenco · 2010-01-20 01:49 · Score: 1

Sounds familiar. I also don't own a car, i live 3rd floor without an elevator in the building, i usually cycle to university (20min) or walk in winter (45min). Taking the bus would take 40min, so there's really no incentive for taking it. Bad weather? I got good clothing.

What about wheelchair bound people by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:50 · Score: 0

I have a spinal cord injury you insensitive clod!

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Kjella · 2010-01-20 01:54 · Score: 1

If you literally sit in that chair for 7 hours, no meetings, no lunch break, no coffee breaks (with or without coffee), no toilet breaks then no it's not healthy. That's like those really long flights they also worry about, except every day. Just get up once every two hours minimum, take a minute to walk to the water cooler and back. It's not for the exercise, but it is good for the body anyway.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings

sit & watch by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 01:56 · Score: 0

Just use one of these to watch tv:

http://www.amazon.com/Gaiam-Balance-Ball-Chair-Black/dp/B0007VB4NE

The older I get the better I was... by TapeCutter · 2010-01-20 01:56 · Score: 1

I'm old and fat now but in my early 20's I had a job that basically required me to jog for most of the day and it felt fucking great to be alive. Persistence hunters never cease to amaze me but the reason they don't appear to get sick is the same reason wild animals don't appear to get sick, when they do they die.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.

Television solves the overpopulation problem. by John+Hasler · 2010-01-20 02:00 · Score: 1

> ...every hour spent watching television was associated with an 18% greater
> risk of dying from cardiovascular disease, an 11% greater risk of all causes
> of death, and a 9% increased risk of death from cancer.

According to these numbers you're all dead and have been for decades!

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.

I would finish this post by SolarStorm · 2010-01-20 02:00 · Score: 1

But I have to go outside and play now

Re:I would finish this post by instagib · 2010-01-20 02:53 · Score: 1

Not absolutely necessary. If you as a nerd value effectiveness, you procure that the percentage of your pr0n collection which is unused (i.e. not yet wanked off to) does not rise above 99%. Therefore, just play with yourself, which enables the possibility of sitting at your computer without being sedentary.

Re:Better get alot of the slashdotters moving by PopeRatzo · 2010-01-20 02:07 · Score: 1

with each person wearing a mask with their Slashdot number on it.

And a rubber ball gag.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

No causal link by Thaddeus · 2010-01-20 02:14 · Score: 1

I hate reading about studies only in mass media outlets because of the lack of critical evaluation. Unfortunately the real study isn't showing up in the Circulation journal's past three issues and they never did give the complete title.

However, even the LA Times article states "researchers found a statistical relationship between long hours of TV viewing and a shortened life span, but the study did not go so far as to find a direct cause".

This means the results are interesting and the subject should be further evaluated in a controlled study, but are useless for practical purposes. We don't know if it was the sedentary behavior or something else, like the potato chips and soda that often go with watching TV. It may be that their conclusion is correct, but it's impossible to know from this type of study.

--
^X^S ^X^C

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by xaxa · 2010-01-20 02:14 · Score: 1

I don't sit for 7 hours straight -- I fetch drinks from the kitchen (2 floors down), use the toilet (2 floors down), take lunch for an hour (5 minutes walk away) and have 3-4 meetings a week (2-10 minutes walk/cycle away).

However, I should still take more short breaks. No one is stopping me from doing so, I just forget or don't bother.

I'm gonna live forever... by flyingfsck · 2010-01-20 02:20 · Score: 1

Fortunately I don't watch TV at all, since I read Slashdot all day...

--
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!

Re:I'm gonna live forever... by John+Hasler · 2010-01-20 03:37 · Score: 1

> Fortunately I don't watch TV at all, since I read Slashdot all day...
I'm not alone!

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.

The corporate workers do have an advantage. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:27 · Score: 0

They can only see to the end of the next quarter, but that is still longer than a single month!

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Sobrique · 2010-01-20 02:32 · Score: 1

Core problem though is that 'good for you' is not a binary state toggle. And we seem to keep wanting to pretend that it is. Or at least, that's what the market droids might want you to think. Which is kinda the problem - there is nothing that's unambigiously 'good for you' - the red wine you cite, is a good example - it has ways in which it's good for you, and ways in which it's bad for you, both at the same time.

"Too Long Is Bad" by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 02:39 · Score: 0

"Too Long Is Bad"....Isn't that the defintion of Too Long....

Indeed by ThinkDifferently · 2010-01-20 02:42 · Score: 1

I wondered the exact same thing, how those who bounce their legs regularly, sometimes called "bouncy legs", "restless legs" or "restless legs syndrome" for those who are bothered by it, figures into this?

If you are one to stay seated or sedentary a lot, but bounce your legs constantly, isn't that a kind of physical activity? I for one have never been bothered by my "bouncy legs", and I certainly don't consider it a syndrome. I tend to think of it more as a sign of a high metabolism (I sometimes tell people I have the metabolism of a hummingbird). My body knows it has a lot of calories to burn, and it habitually urges me to move my legs as a way of doing that. I wonder how many calories I burn by constantly (and sometimes rapidly) bouncing my legs, all day long.

...and in case you're wondering, I have a very high calorie diet, I stay seated just about all day due to my job and my lifestyle, I don't otherwise exercise, but I stay at a very consistent weight of 175 (I'm 6'2" tall). I haven't gained or lost more than 5 pounds in over 20 years. ...except one time I had a very nasty flu, and I dropped to 160 -- I called it the flu diet. I'm the type that tends to eat very large portions, like a whole box of mac & cheese (which is 4-5 servings), an entire soup bowl full of ice cream (I'm sure it's 5 servings at least), I eat the same size portion at dinner that my wife and 2 kids combined eat, and so on. But, I never gain weight.

Twitchy legs by phorm · 2010-01-20 02:56 · Score: 1

I know many people that have a "twitchy leg" etc, when sitting for overly long, myself included at various times.
So do people with a nervous twitch have more "activity" and are thus a little bit healthier? When you're working at the keyboard your hands/arms are probably moving at least a bit, and if your leg(s) are twitching then a good portion of your body is still moving.

Healthy or non?

Why the hell do you link to the PRINT THIS PAGE? by Snaller · 2010-01-20 03:00 · Score: 1

Besides, what was god thinking - its boring to move...

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating

Re:I'm writing this while standing up by newdsfornerds · 2010-01-20 03:23 · Score: 1

GOLD!

--
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.

Sucks if you must use a wheelchair by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:35 · Score: 0

Some people must use a wheelchair. I guess being who they are is bad for them? What next?

Really...it can be life threatening by Solo-Malee · 2010-01-20 03:40 · Score: 1

To all those laughing and making jokes about this... Two years ago I got a DVT as a result of too long sitting down. This is a potentially life threating problem if not spotted (As well as being very painful!) If you get a feeling of cramp in your calf muscle that doesn't go away and is even worse when walking that you can't put down to sport or a muscle strain, go see a doctor immediately! I suffered for nearly 10 days with this and then had the complication of a lung embolism as a result (That's the life threatening part). I ended up in hospital for a week hardly able to breathe and on morphine for the lung pain. I then had to spend 6 months off work recovering. And watch out, I found that some doctors are not good at identifying this problem. Take this seriously...it is not a joke. Now get up and walk around!

--
"If it's lost, it'll turn up. Things always do" "I love it when a plan comes together"

The bad "too" by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:40 · Score: 0

Sitting down too long is bad...

Maybe it's stupid, but these sentences always disturb my logic-processor. Of course it's bad.. because you used the word "too". Standing up too long is also bad, otherwise it wouldn't be too long.. Or am I missing something?

Min/Max your workout! by twoallbeefpatties · 2010-01-20 03:43 · Score: 1

When I first decided to start working out again, I just went to the gym, just did the usual stuff. Did one chest exercise, one back exercise, etc., kept doing the same stuff twice a week or so. Then after about a year of that, I started reading weightlifting forums a bit, learning about "split routines" where you only do one muscle group a day, spent a bunch of time trying to decide which individual exercises I could do in my little gym at the apartment complex, how to space them apart and when to do them, how to watch my time, when to have a couple of protein shakes, things like that. I told friends that my compulsion toward planning out talent specs in WoW had spilled over into a compulsion to plan out my workout.

But man, it's worked. When I pull out my workout log... and believe me, you want a log. It's great to just be able to see that you did 6 reps of an exercise last week but you're doing 7 reps this week. It's feedback that what you're doing actually works. When I pull out my log, when I started about three months ago, I was doing 115 lbs. on the incline bench press machine, 4 sets, 6 reps each. Last Saturday, I did 175 lbs., 4 sets, 6 reps each. The improvement shows.

Seriously, take half the energy that you put into designing your last D&D character and put that into putting together a workout plan. You might be amazed to see that skill cross over a little into a skillset that geeks supposedly have no ability to take part in.

--
Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.

Something fishy by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 03:44 · Score: 0

How is resting in a comfortable armchair different from sleeping in a bed? If I fall asleep in front of the TV am I at risk all night?
This study sounds like bullshit to me.

Re:Something fishy by digitalaudiorock · 2010-01-20 05:52 · Score: 1

How is resting in a comfortable armchair different from sleeping in a bed? If I fall asleep in front of the TV am I at risk all night? This study sounds like bullshit to me.
+1000. I was just going to say the same thing...you can't get any more "sedentary" than when you sleep. I happen to be somewhat of a fitness fanatic...56 years old and like 9.5% body fat. However I don't shy away from sitting/laying in front of the tube either. I call BS on this one for sure. For me, "sedentary" will continue to mean "not exercising".

Re:apostrophe usage by newdsfornerds · 2010-01-20 03:54 · Score: 1

The plural of Swede is Swedes. The plural of dynamo is dynamos.
Duh.

--
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.

Ok, so what are we supposed to do now? by jr76 · 2010-01-20 03:59 · Score: 2, Insightful

I exercise, and just like most Americans who work in an office, am stuck on my chair for 8 hours a day behind a computer. It's not like I can work while playing basketball or whatever. Are we supposed to either be doing manual labor all day or die?

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 04:11 · Score: 0

Current advice suggests what I do (cycle to work, sit a lot, cycle home) is sufficient exercise. If the sitting a lot is itself harmful then I'd like to know.

This article is about how cycling twice a day is *not* sufficient exercise, and that sitting a lot itself is harmful.

Life, it's bad fer ya by celtic_hackr · 2010-01-20 04:21 · Score: 1

Life, it's bad fer ya.
Might as well kill yourself now and get it over with.

Or do what I do. Live every day as if you're going to die today,
and try to die doing what you love.

Tarahumara Indians by Xaedalus · 2010-01-20 04:24 · Score: 3, Interesting

They're the ones who can outrun a horse (in distance only) and can run up to fifty miles a day, if not more. Men's Health did an article on them about three years back or so? Unbelievable fuckers. Only thing is, they eat and drink a grain/vegetable mash, and that's ALL they eat and drink (for kicks, they ferment it).

--
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.

I'm fidgety by OldSoldier · 2010-01-20 04:40 · Score: 2, Interesting

I'm more fidgety than my co-workers (but less fidgety than some I know who regularly wear out chairs). I used to think this behavior was good for my back... but now it seems it may also be good for my heart?

Re:I'm fidgety by yurtinus · 2010-01-20 05:49 · Score: 1

That much caffeine can't be particularly good for your heart! ;)

--
+1 Disagree

Smaller cubes by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 04:48 · Score: 0

Just what the PHB was looking for to justify removing chairs the the cube farm. If the grunts have to stand he can cut down on the floor space and put more cubes per square foot.

Keep your legs elevated by p51d007 · 2010-01-20 05:03 · Score: 1

I'm just a "tad" overweight, and I'm on my feet 8-10 hours a day, but when I'm home, I try to keep my legs elevated as much as possible, to keep the blood from pooling in the legs. I know that you hear a lot (and I still wonder if that is what led to the death of the Meet the Press guy) that he had some sort of deep vein thrombosis issue and something broke loose and caused problems. You hear it happening to people on long airline flights, where they are sitting a long time.

More practical? by Gage+With+Union · 2010-01-20 05:24 · Score: 1

Exercise isn't the only way to accomplish this; I'm considering getting a standing desk. I spend a lot of time sitting down programming and am often tired, and I've heard many positive stories from people who've made the switch.

Just because we do sit down quite a bit doesn't mean we were designed for it. Compare, for instance, the incidence rates of hemorrhoids in countries with sit vs. squat toilets...

junk science by bcrowell · 2010-01-20 05:49 · Score: 0, Troll

If you take a look at the paper, which is online and not paywalled, it's obvious junk science. They claim a correlation between mortality and sitting, and the abstract states that the variables they controlled for were "age, sex, waist circumference, and exercise." Well, watching eight hours a day of TV is probably negatively correlated with a lot of other variables, including general health, education, income, intelligence, and employment. And I would guess that mortality is probably also strongly negatively correlated with general health (duh), education, income, intelligence, and employment. On the second page of the paper, they say that they surveyed the participants for "demographic attributes" including education, but note that education is *not* listed in the abstract as one of the variables they controlled for. Look at table 1, and they show a clear anticorrelation between education and television viewing. On p. 387 they talk about how they tried to minimize the effect of the anticorrelations involving general health, but their method is pretty crude.

--
Find free books.

Study from University of Missouri by notjonny · 2010-01-20 05:53 · Score: 1

An actual study here http://munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2007/1115-hamilton-inactivity.php explaining why standing is important. ...and I've been standing at my desk for a while now. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonsphotos/2255538445/

Stick a Treadmill in that Cubicle by aaaantoine · 2010-01-20 05:57 · Score: 1

Stick a treadmill in that cubicle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treadmill_Desk

Where is correlation is not causation? by edraven · 2010-01-20 06:03 · Score: 1

C'mon, one of us might have forgotten!

Stand up desk by PPH · 2010-01-20 06:10 · Score: 1

Also known as a drafting table.

Even if you use a chair or stool most of the time, standing up for an hour or so (cumulatively) a day keeps the leg muscles working.

--
Have gnu, will travel.

Re:Stand up desk by colleesu · 2010-01-21 01:17 · Score: 1

Exactly! Sitting is our enemy (of our backs, anyway). In a culture where most of us sit at our jobs, we need more desk options. The drafting table set up is perfect. The height allows you to stand or sit (in a higher chair), and adjust the table to suit your body.

Well, yes obviously by gowen · 2010-01-20 06:11 · Score: 1

sitting down too much is not good for you,

Well of course it is.

Because that is what "TOO MUCH" means. If you do something a lot, but its not detrimental, its not "too much". When it becomes detrimental, thats when we say its "TOO MUCH".

Fuckitty Fuck McFuck. English, motherfucking slashdot editors. Learn to fucking speak it.

--
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Rick17JJ · 2010-01-20 06:41 · Score: 1

Perhaps a treadmill desk might be a possible solution for some people who spend many hours sitting in front of a computer or TV at home or at work. The person could then spend part of their time walking in front of their computer or TV. Presumably, they would only need to do that all the time, and could also sit down for much of each hour instead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treadmill_Desk

A treadmill desk would not actually be necessary where I work. I spend about half of my time standing at a counter dealing with customers when someone is in the office. Between customers, I can sometimes just sit down and drink coffee while reading the newspaper. In those quiet moments, I sometimes do some stretching exercises or occasionally even some heavyhands calisthenics using hand weights. There is also an expensive exercise bicycle sitting unused in one corner of the office, which I could be using between customers.

It would be quite possible for me to do about 5 or 10 minutes of exercise per hour, whenever no customers are in the office. Since this is a small family business, owned by my parents, no one would object to my doing that, when I do not have anything else to do anyway.

Almost every day, either before or after work, I usually do a 1 hour walk while raising and lowering heavyhand hand weights from below my waist to above my head. I am a slightly overweight guy in my mid-50s. Over the last several years, I have gradually worked up to using 9-lb weights continuously for the hour walk. On some stretches of my walk, I switch to doing a double ski poling movement to improve the aerobic and strength fitness of my back and hips, as well. Perhaps I should also squeeze in at least some exercise during the day or evening. For me that is doable.

http://www.heavyhandsfitness.com/content.aspx?idx=54

Just TV, or... by used2win32 · 2010-01-20 06:46 · Score: 1

The article focused on television, but what about other sedentary activities like reading? Is turning the page in a book more exercise than using a remote control? What about sitting in a classroom?

--
Procrastination; I'll think of a sig tomorrow.

What bullshit by Latinhypercube · 2010-01-20 06:50 · Score: 0

Yeah, we age whether we stand or sit. How can being idle be harmful. Such bullshit.

citation here by ShadowXOmega · 2010-01-20 07:00 · Score: 0

there is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarahumara

rearrange work stations into a gym facility model by ffflala · 2010-01-20 07:32 · Score: 1

Companies with a lot of sedentary work, if they could find it profitable to encourage the physical health of their employees (through insurance costs and lost productivity), should abandon the strictly desk/chair office model with various kinds of workstations that can provide for exercise. (Liability would be an issue, but then it always is.)

The geek cycle concept isn't particularly new: http://lifehacker.com/203760/exercise-while-you-work-with-the-geek+a+cycle-tm

Standing workstations, reading stations for cardio, appropriate alternatives for the disabled for fairness's sake, and company shower/laundry facilities could reintegrate physical aspects into what has become mostly intellectual activity. I find that my focus for certain tasks is enhanced if I'm exercising during it --particularly reading challenging material while on the treadmill.

Gym currently don't seem the most conducive to work, but they are often designed with tons of distractions --blaring music to get you "pumped", treadmills with monitors playing only brain candy entertainment fare, lighting too poor for reading, etc. Put a cardio machine into an office setting and it takes on a different character.

the tarahumara-s by ShadowXOmega · 2010-01-20 08:07 · Score: 0

the tarahumara's are one of the best examples of that "out-jog"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarahumara

Just the motivation I needed! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 08:45 · Score: 0

This article motivated me to get up out of my chair and go get a candy bar.

Ju Jitsu by MrKaos · 2010-01-20 09:39 · Score: 1

I do Ju jitsu, even competed recently. There is a real strategy to fighting this way and it is really good if you are a coder. The results of my training are that I sleep very well and can focus on the IT tasks I have to do. My colleagues are often amazed at how laid back and relaxed I am and it does wonders for your confidence.

I find that it's hard to sit around all the time and my body forces me to get up walk and stretch when I am working. It's a great way to make new friends to.

--
My ism, it's full of beliefs.

Re:Misinformation && Contradictions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-20 11:55 · Score: 0

And he was responding to a comment stating that a person who sat at a desk all day wouldn't be fit.

Let's hear those righties cry by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-21 03:01 · Score: 0

They still have no power in any part of the government and will finally be able to force a stalemate, preventing any ridiculous spending by either side! Finally. Both sides suck, this is not about "us or them" it's about rich vs poor. The parent to this post is poor, everyone that posts here is poor compared to the people that run this country, wallstreet, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, etc. Stop with the left vs right BS and start fighting to keep all men equal. America, fuck yeah!

anonymous coward by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-23 04:00 · Score: 0

Has anybody tried using a standing desk, or a "desk cycle" so you can do some kind of muscular activity while you sit at your desk all day? Shoot me an amazon url...

Slashdot Mirror

Sitting Down Too Long Is Bad Even If You Exercise

376 comments