Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No kidding. That is what I have been saying. The healthiest groups---those with much less chronic disease incidences---have lifestyles that require them to continuously move throughout the day. No running unless they have to, and no gyms. People with no chronic disease, or much less than Americans, are not routinely eating junk foods.
The professor in the video says pre-modern humans spend a lot of time sitting, like many other mammals. But he says primitive hunter gathers get up and move around every 15 minutes or so. But they are NOT constantly exercising all day.
I don't know if people who do hard physical labor all day are likely to be healthy or not. Maybe all that arduous work can wear out the body.
Hunting and gathering is NOT generally strenuous, except for when men are chasing big prey. But that isn't most of the time. The women walk to gather plants, but it doesn't take all day every day. They actually worked much less than modern people, according to anthropologists.
What I think I found is optimal for me is about 2 hours every day of fast walking. Which is probably more than what is needed for health. I have been doing less since it got cold this year though.
Anyway, it works for me because I never got injured from walking. My feet and back, etc., stayed strong, and I never got metabolic syndrome.
I tried running for a while when I was young but got a foot injury because I didn't have expensive running shoes. I decided walking would be safer, and it is. You don't have to worry about doing it exactly right -- although of course you can learn to walk better with practice. But you won't get hurt from not being perfect, or from not having great shoes.
I think the best walking shoes are cheap flip flops, because they have thin flat soles and don't restrict the toes. But not in cold weather.
All that is in the video, if you really want it, I don't have it all memorized.
I watched the video, but I don't remember that. But, what someone says is not the samething as the scientific study. You should not believe things uncritically, but demand to read the study if you want to believe it.
That is what I said. Modern American lifestyles are more sedentary and they either overeat or eat low-nutrient diets by replacing high-nutrient foods with junk foods (low-nutrient foods), or both.
It's not the only way as evidenced by healthier groups in the world that don't do it. The point and the topic of this thread is that humans don't have to do that to experience much less chronic disease than Americans do.
No, not something I imagined. The healthiest and longest-living groups in Blue Zones ARE living relatively primitive lifestyles if primitive means they are walking everywhere, AND raising their own food or acquiring it from local sources. None are traveling great distances on foot.
No kidding. That is what I have been saying. The healthiest groups---those with much less chronic disease incidences---have lifestyles that require them to continuously move throughout the day. No running unless they have to, and no gyms. People with no chronic disease, or much less than Americans, are not routinely eating junk foods.
The Japanese are now seeing rising obesity and chronic illness...because some people are abandoning their traditonal lifestyles and traditional diets in favor of low-nutrient Western junk and fast foods. It has been happening in many countries.
You made it sound like going for a walk is healthier than going to the gym, and you used people in "Blue Zones" as evidence and contrasted with Americans. My point was that Americans are not unhealthy because of abundant gyms. Go to a gym, does the average gym goer look unhealthy? It's the average American who doesn't even go to the gym that is unhealthy.
....No kidding. That is what I have been saying. The healthiest groups---those with much less chronic disease incidences---have lifestyles that require them to continuously move throughout the day. No running unless they have to, and no gyms. People with no chronic disease, or much less than Americans, are not routinely eating junk foods...
Blue zone people also have a 95% plant based diet.
For those living a lifestyle not requiring, or allowing, movement continuously through the day, running and gyms are excellent alternatives. Many studies have shown vigorous exercise is superior to moderate exercise for health benefits, so arguably they're superior if all other factors are equal.
Or you could do both. Those would be the 20,000+ step days.
I watched the video, but I don't remember that. But, what someone says is not the samething as the scientific study. You should not believe things uncritically, but demand to read the study if you want to believe it.
I never believe anything uncritically. It was in the video, you just don't remember. I am not watching the whole thing again just to prove something to you.
Blue zone people also have a 95% plant based diet.
For those living a lifestyle not requiring, or allowing, movement continuously through the day, running and gyms are excellent alternatives. Many studies have shown vigorous exercise is superior to moderate exercise for health benefits, so arguably they're superior if all other factors are equal.
Or you could do both. Those would be the 20,000+ step days.
I never heard of studies showing that. And the video doesn't say that. A certain amount of exercise is optimal, and more and more doesn't make a big difference. Moderate exercise that doesn't cause injuries, and feels good, is probably the best.
If you love working out at the gym that's great. But the thought of it discourages many from even trying to get healthy.
I never believe anything uncritically. It was in the video, you just don't remember. I am not watching the whole thing again just to prove something to you.
You're believing it uncritically if you haven't read the scientific study behind the claim. How do you know he interpreted correctly or you interpreted it correctly?
The only reason I'm asking because claiming 10,000 steps a day is "optimal" is absurd on its face. There is no optimal for anybody. And I'm pretty sure neither he said that nor a scientific study exists that show that it is optimal. But if you think otherwise, cite the study. Telling me to re-watch the video will just tell me you have nothing.
I never heard of studies showing that. And the video doesn't say that. A certain amount of exercise is optimal, and more and more doesn't make a big difference. Moderate exercise that doesn't cause injuries, and feels good, is probably the best.
If you love working out at the gym that's great. But the thought of it discourages many from even trying to get healthy.
Just be honest, how many scientific studies have you read on this topic? 0,1, 5, 10....100? A video is not a scientific study, it should prompt you to get his book and dig up the references.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
