The framing that sticks for me here is "inactivity isn't a neutral baseline." That is the part most people miss: a normal panel in a sedentary person is not reassurance, it is a test answering a narrower question than the patient thinks it is.
I lived the more dramatic version of that gap, an 80% RCA lesion at 44 with lipids that were only borderline on paper, so the idea of a bioenergetic signal moving years before the labs do lands hard for me. However - in the gym my focus was more on the mirror and resistance training rather than VO2 max. A habit that’s changed post stent!
My one methodologist's caution: submaximal lactate and fat oxidation are still markers, and the San-Millan phenotype is cross-sectional, so the open question is whether those thresholds are causal or just tracking fitness.
Have you seen anything longitudinal tying a fat-ox or lactate cutoff to hard outcomes, rather than to VO2max itself?
I left weights for about 35 minutes four days a week. I do cardio about 35 to 45 minutes every day three or four days a week on the elliptical machine three or four days running outside. But the rest of the day I am pretty much sedentary. So my question is how much activity or how much movement physical movement? Should I be engaging in the rest of the day so that I am not suffering from the ill of being sedentary. It’s gonna be difficult I think to engage in as much movement as a hunter gathers do. Or as our ancestors did anywhere from let’s say 80,000 years to go to 7 million years ago. What’s the answer?
Also have a slight pessmitic read of "unless you're already fit, you will suffer _a lot_ exercising, and have veru little results (eg. in terms of fat burn)". Mother nature really hates us for stopping movement :)
A not surprising result. 150 minutes per week is 20 minutes per day. This does not seem like very much to me which first suggests a little goes a long way. The next thought is where do the Physiologically Speaking readers fall?
I'll give you my data point. Running 9 hours. Core work 1.5 hours. Strength Training 2 hours. 12.5 hours or 750 minutes per week over decades. This isn't a peak number, its an average number. This is a lifestyle number.
Great read! Thanks for the article! It's surprising to see that GLUT4 was the same between the two. I would assume that GLUT4 would be higher in active people vs sedentary people.
Interesting study. Great breakdown at what's at stake for our health. Sedentary isn't neutral. It's a slow leak. The MPC1 finding is interesting: half the doorway, half the capacity to actually use fuel. Explains why "just move more" advice undersells what's really at stake.
The framing that sticks for me here is "inactivity isn't a neutral baseline." That is the part most people miss: a normal panel in a sedentary person is not reassurance, it is a test answering a narrower question than the patient thinks it is.
I lived the more dramatic version of that gap, an 80% RCA lesion at 44 with lipids that were only borderline on paper, so the idea of a bioenergetic signal moving years before the labs do lands hard for me. However - in the gym my focus was more on the mirror and resistance training rather than VO2 max. A habit that’s changed post stent!
My one methodologist's caution: submaximal lactate and fat oxidation are still markers, and the San-Millan phenotype is cross-sectional, so the open question is whether those thresholds are causal or just tracking fitness.
Have you seen anything longitudinal tying a fat-ox or lactate cutoff to hard outcomes, rather than to VO2max itself?
I left weights for about 35 minutes four days a week. I do cardio about 35 to 45 minutes every day three or four days a week on the elliptical machine three or four days running outside. But the rest of the day I am pretty much sedentary. So my question is how much activity or how much movement physical movement? Should I be engaging in the rest of the day so that I am not suffering from the ill of being sedentary. It’s gonna be difficult I think to engage in as much movement as a hunter gathers do. Or as our ancestors did anywhere from let’s say 80,000 years to go to 7 million years ago. What’s the answer?
These in-depth translations of a scientific paper are so good Brady, love when you do these types of articles. Thank you.
Appreciate you, Michael!
Also have a slight pessmitic read of "unless you're already fit, you will suffer _a lot_ exercising, and have veru little results (eg. in terms of fat burn)". Mother nature really hates us for stopping movement :)
A not surprising result. 150 minutes per week is 20 minutes per day. This does not seem like very much to me which first suggests a little goes a long way. The next thought is where do the Physiologically Speaking readers fall?
I’ve gotta run a study…!
I'll give you my data point. Running 9 hours. Core work 1.5 hours. Strength Training 2 hours. 12.5 hours or 750 minutes per week over decades. This isn't a peak number, its an average number. This is a lifestyle number.
Great read! Thanks for the article! It's surprising to see that GLUT4 was the same between the two. I would assume that GLUT4 would be higher in active people vs sedentary people.
Interesting study. Great breakdown at what's at stake for our health. Sedentary isn't neutral. It's a slow leak. The MPC1 finding is interesting: half the doorway, half the capacity to actually use fuel. Explains why "just move more" advice undersells what's really at stake.