Listen to this PodcastMore 60-Second Health
A little exercise each week can lead to big gains in life expectancy. And that’s true regardless of your current weight, according to a new review study that included more than 650,000 people.
The World Health Organization recommends two-and-a-half to five hours of brisk walking per week, or less time spent at a more vigorous activity. People who got the full recommended amount of exercise saw an average 3.4-year gain in life expectancy. People who got half as much exercise still lived an average 1.8 years longer. The findings are in the journal PLoS Medicine. [Steven C. Moore et al., Leisure Time Physical Activity of Moderate to Vigorous Intensity and Mortality: A large pooled cohort analysis]
In fact, exercise was a bigger factor than body weight in many cases. People who were normal weight but were inactive actually lived an average of 3.1 fewer years than obese people who kept up high levels of activity.
Finding time to exercise can be tough. Maybe look at it this way. There are almost 9,000 hours in a year. Five hours a week is 260 hours a year—to get an extra 30,000 hours of life. Do the math. While you take a walk.
—Katherine Harmon
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
See what we're tweeting about
3 Comments
Add CommentOkay, let's do the real math. Out of 24 hours a day, I am supposed to spend 8 hours of it sleeping in order to stay healthy (so says Scientific American in an earlier article). Subtract another hour to shower, get ready, and have breakfast, and another 2 hours for later meals throughout the day. And another hour for cleaning up after myself in various ways. These are all activities that I will be thankful not to have to do anymore when I am dead.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat leaves 12 hours a day which means 3 or 4 years of added life expectancy gets me between 13000 and 17000 additional hours.
Now take your 260 hours of exercise a year, and multiply it by the 40 years or so of remaining life expectancy I have, adding up to 10400.
So I am sacrificing 10400 hours of mostly prime-of-my-life time in order to get as little as 13000 extra hours of senile, end-of-my-life time. Doesn't seem like that great a trade. And that's not even taking into account 8 hours of day of labour and drudgery to support myself -- this is all assuming I am independently wealthy and don't have to work!
If you actually really do the *real* math, this study is not a great reason to exercise. A much better reason for me to exercise is that it improves my energy and mental acuity (also proven by studies) and thus greatly improves the quality of every single one of my (hopefully) remaining 175,000-odd waking, non-eating hours!
Agree 110%
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this30 minutes of exercise might require an hour of time, since you have to find your gym kit, get to the gym, get changed, wait for machines, get unchanged, shower, get back, have a drink, rest, wash the gym kit.
All in all it's looking like a break-even proposition at best. The conclusion should therefore be that life is short and you should find an activity you enjoy.
(Only pulling your leg about the 110%)
I agree with Laroquod. My belief that exercise will help me to remain more vigorous in my later years is what motivates me. To me the quality of my life is paramount.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this