Skip to main content

Your desk job still dangerous


By: Maria Masters

Regardless of how often or how hard you work out, there's still a good chance that you're sitting your life away

Do you lead an active lifestyle or a sedentary one? The question is simple, but the answer may not be as obvious as you think. Let's say, for example, you're a busy guy who works 60 hours a week at a desk job but who still manages to find time for five 45-minute bouts of exercise. Most experts would label you as active. But Marc Hamilton, Ph.D., has another name for you: couch potato.

Perhaps "exercising couch potato" would be more accurate, but Hamilton, a physiologist and professor at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, would still classify you as sedentary. "People tend to view physical activity on a single continuum," he says. "On the far side, you have a person who exercises a lot; on the other, a person who doesn't exercise at all. However, they're not necessarily polar opposites."

Hamilton's take, which is supported by a growing body of research, is that the amount of time you exercise and the amount of time you spend on your butt are completely separate factors for heart-disease risk. New evidence suggests, in fact, that the more hours a day you sit, the greater your likelihood of dying an earlier death regardless of how much you exercise or how lean you are. That's right: Even a sculpted six-pack can't protect you from your chair.

But it's not just your heart that's at risk from too much sitting; your hips, spine, and shoulders could also suffer. In fact, it's not a leap to say that a chair-potato lifestyle can ruin you from head to toe.

Statistically speaking, we're working out as much as we were 30 years ago. (Another problem: Plenty of people aren't doing the best type of workout for fat loss.) It's just that we're leading more sedentary lives overall. A 2006 University of Minnesota study found that from 1980 to 2000, the percentage of people who reported exercising regularly remained the same--but the amount of time people spent sitting rose by 8 percent.

Now consider how much we sit today compared with, say, 160 years ago. In a clever study, Dutch researchers created a sort of historical theme park and recruited actors to play 1850s Australian settlers for a week. The men did everything from chop wood to forage for food, and the scientists compared their activity levels with those of modern office workers. The result: The actors did the equivalent of walking 3 to 8 miles more a day than the deskbound men. That kind of activity is perhaps even more needed in today's fast-food nation than it was in the 1800s, but not just because it boosts calorie burn.

A 2010 study in the Journal of Applied Physiology found that when healthy men limited their number of footsteps by 85 percent for 2 weeks, they experienced a 17 percent decrease in insulin sensitivity, raising their diabetes risk. "We've done a lot to keep people alive longer, but that doesn't mean we're healthier," says Hamilton.

Today's death rate is about 43 percent lower than it was in 1960, but back then, less than 1 percent of Americans had diabetes and only 13 percent were obese. Compare that with now, when 6 percent are diagnosed with diabetes and 35 percent are obese.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FBI plans large hiring blitz of agents, experts

By James Vicini James Vicini – Mon Jan 5, 5:15 pm ET WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Wanted by the FBI: agents, language specialists, computer experts, intelligence analysts and finance experts. The FBI said on Monday it had launched one of the largest hiring blitzes in its 100-year history involving 2,100 professional staff vacancies and 850 special agents aimed at filling its most critical vacancies. The agency, which seeks to protect the United States from terrorist attack, fight crime and catch spies, among other duties, said it currently has more than 12,800 agents and about 18,400 other employees. Since the Sept 11, 2001, attacks, the FBI has been criticized for not having enough employees fluent in foreign languages and for not moving fast enough to upgrade its computer system. FBI Assistant Director John Raucci of the Human Resources division said the federal law enforcement agency is seeking to bring more people on board with skills in critical areas, especially language fluency and ...

Anti-cancer foods

Posted by: Zap Mon, Sep 29, 2008, 1:44 pm PDT Source: Yahoo Health It turns out that a healthy diet can help to override any cancer-prone genes you might have at work in your body. "Nutrition has a bigger influence on cancer than inherited genes, which means you could significantly reduce your odds of the disease through diet alone," explains Joel Fuhrman, M.D., author of Eat for Health (Gift of Health Press). OK, OK. I know what you're thinking right about now: She's going to tell me I have to eat kale at every meal. Not so! I mean, for the record, you should always eat as many fruits and veggies as possible, because they will dramatically lower your odds of ever hearing the dreaded diagnosis. But there are many other, less rabbity ways to eat away at your cancer risk. Add whole grains to your diet. My two faves, aside from a thick piece of freshly baked whole-grain bread? Oatmeal with a pinch of cinnamon for breakfast, or brown rice with a chicken and veggie stir-f...

Why Disasters Are Getting Worse?

By: AMANDA RIPLEY Thu Sep 4, 12:40 PM ET In the space of two weeks, Hurricane Gustav has caused an estimated $3 billion in losses in the U.S. and killed about 110 people in the U.S. and the Caribbean, catastrophic floods in northern India have left a million people homeless, and a 6.2-magnitude earthquake has rocked China's southwest, smashing over 400,000 homes. If it seems like disasters are getting more common, it's because they are. But some disasters do seem to be affecting us worse - and not for the reasons you may think. Floods and storms have led to most of the excess damage. The number of flood and storm disasters has gone up by 7.4% every year in recent decades, according to the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. (Between 2000 and 2007, the growth was even faster - with an average annual rate of increase of 8.4%.) Of the total 197 million people affected by disasters in 2007, 164 million were affected by floods. It is tempting to look at the line-u...