Does exercising really make you live longer?

[Yousif]

On 3/10/2024 at 11:30 PM, Jason Actualization said:

You make a good point. For me, I sleep and exercise to be a high testosterone man which renders a qualitative experience that I'm partial to. I do not do these things for the sake of themselves, but rather, the life experience they afford me.

I agree, I would not see the point in that. Personally, I love sleeping like a rock and waking up as hard as one, lol. I also love picking up heavy things and putting them down.

For the average person though, exercise is quite overrated and I believe nutrition is far more important for quality and duration of live.

The healthiest form of exercise is honestly just walking.

Lol, I myself am a gym rat ( lift weights about 2 hours for 5 days a week )and I get around 10k steps a day, do I feel great physically mentally,emotionally, yes, but I don’t really buy the idea that it it will make me live longer, for one I require way more sleep than the average person to recover, also the insane appetite you’ll have if you’re this active which means more calories will be consumed and I’ve seen documentaries and research saying how consuming less calories in one’s life will allow you to live longer,  which is why I say that being active and healthy doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll live longer.

 

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/02/10/health/restricting-calories-longevity-wellness/index.html

I don’t really know if those studies are true, but intuitively I know that calories and being extremely active will not make you live longer, although I don’t have any empirical/ scientific method sorta proof to show you.

[Yousif]

On 3/11/2024 at 9:59 AM, Princess Arabia said:

Yeah, but you didn't say they hated their lives only that they hated exercising and being healthy. Maybe they enjoy other aspects.

I got off topic there, but I said they were doing it to live longer which I don’t think the gym will necessarily do that for you.

[Jason Actualization]

29 minutes ago, Yousif said:

I don’t really know if those studies are true, but intuitively I know that calories and being extremely active will not make you live longer, although I don’t have any empirical/ scientific method sorta proof to show you.

The candle that burns twice as bright burns for half as long. Extreme activity is at odds with longevity, yes.

[Yousif]

9 minutes ago, Jason Actualization said:

The candle that burns twice as bright burns for half as long. Extreme activity is at odds with longevity, yes.

This is the exact point I was trying to make when I made this post.

Edited March 13 by Yousif

[Jason Actualization]

34 minutes ago, Yousif said:

This is the exact point I was trying to make when I made this post.

I agree with your overall position. For longevity, nothing beats low intensity steady state cardio, i.e., walking.

My philosophy is to prioritize food first. I believe that when one's diet is truly dialed in, exercise nearly becomes obsolete to maximize one's health (which is not to be conflated with physical fitness, as these are separate entities that, at their extremes, are indeed at odds with one another).

[Shawn Philips]

On 6/3/2024 at 11:42 AM, undeather said:

The answer is unequivocally - YES! 
Longevity, both through lifespan and healthspan, is impacted more through exercise than any of the other behavioural variable we have.

Your comparisons are flawed. There is (at least) one huge difference between machines and the human body - and that's the wonder of hormesis in adaptive or complex systems. While you car breaks down due to a buildup of mechanical strains over a long period of time - the biological organism has the propensity to build itself back stronger once challenged in a meaningful way. Your immune system get's more resistant  and more capable once it comes into contact a wide variety of pathogens. Children who grow up in rural-regions with a wider variety of microbe-density tend get less autoimmune issues and a more specific immune-response once invaded with a novel pathogen. Lifting weights or combat sports will increase bone-density and musculo-fascial integrity - therefore making the person more reistant to mechanical injuries. Muscle muss increases by damaging your tissue first - which then will adaptively get build back stronger - more muscle-mass means more compensation for blood sugar control. By raising your pulse & blood pressure through exercise, your arteries will increase their compensatory threshhold through a better NO2-signaling and many other mechanisms. Your heart muscles efficiency will improve. Your blood will improve it's capacity to carry oxygen and....and...and!

Do you see what I am hinting at?
Your comparison between lions and turtles also does not work. You just can't compare 2 species with a completely different genetic make-up. The bowhead whale who basically swims around all day gets up to 200 years old, while sloth who chills out usually only gets around 20 years. It doesn't make sense.  

The more exercise the more muscular damage. Every time a muscle cell tears it has to multiply so the more times a cell multiplies more DNA (telomere) damage. 

[TheSelf]

The organs in the body has potential to repair and adaptation, how can you compare an organ like heart to a mechanical thing like a car engine?

 

But obviously over exercising if not recovered well lead to age and die faster this makes sense

[Javfly33]

It depends. Light moderate exercise Will almost certainly make you Live longer and healthier. But if you take It too much It probably shorten your Life span. Precisely if you are a gym rat and you are eating a lot that Will create harm in the body long term.

Too much food is no good, too much stress on the system.

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Javfly33 said:

It depends. Light moderate exercise Will almost certainly make you Live longer and healthier. But if you take It too much It probably shorten your Life span. Precisely if you are a gym rat and you are eating a lot that Will create harm in the body long term.

Too much food is no good, too much stress on the system.

Define light moderate exercise.

[Carl-Richard]

On 13.3.2024 at 2:33 AM, Yousif said:

You’re mistaken living longer with being healthy.

My points above weren’t about whether or not exercise will make you stronger or healthier, it was whether or not it’s the best strategy to make you live as long as possible 

you can be too healthy and lively for your own good, which may results in you actually living less.

That's if you have a wacky definition of health. If you define health as optimal functioning, then health and longevity are virtually synonymous. If you define health as having big muscles and fucking a lot of bitches (reproductive fitness), then sure, that definition of health might not be synonymous with longevity.

Sure, if you manage to keep your resting heart rate below 50 or so, if you have no musculoskeletal issues and you cope well with your daily life, and if at the same time you happen to be working out less than someone else, then sure, working out more might not help you that much in terms of longevity. But I'll assure you that in virtually all cases, getting to those levels requires some amount of working out (or just general physical exercise); whether it would be considered light or extreme exercise, whether it's intentional or accidental; that's beside the point.

Edited March 19 by Carl-Richard

[Danioover9000]

@Yousif

On 2024-03-06 at 9:22 AM, Yousif said:

I’ve been meditating more than usual, so I’m more awake on a daily basis, I also am a gym rat and I workout 5 times a week, so today as I’ve arrived at my gym I remembered how a lot of scientists and even doctors tell you that if you stay active you’ll be healthier and live longer, 

Now I don’t have an issue with “ being healthier “ even tho that claim is still up for furthering questioning, but live longer????!!!

 

I mean think about it logically, how does overusing a think makes it last longer? 
 

To better see this picture clearly, just think of any living or non-living thing that lasts longer and ask yourself how is it that this thing is able to be preserved for that long?? 
 

here’s an example in which I typed in a hurry because I gotta finish my workout 😆😂

   Yes and no. The no part comes when the person keeps getting burn out and damage onset muscle soreness, and over exercises. Just look at Bruce Lee, he really worked so hard on his body that he died from stroke early on in his life. Some say he died due to Triad hit, but I ain't going down that rabbit hole.

   I'll still suggest to you to do some martial arts training, maybe chi gong, some western exercises old school like flexing and isometrics way more than the body building programs that cause much more stress than necessary.

[UnbornTao]

I mean, the alternative doesn't.

[Danioover9000]

@UnbornTao

10 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

I mean, the alternative doesn't.

   I think the OP's intuition is in the right direction, that too much exercises and unmanaged stress causes earlier deaths on way or another. DOMs is an internal stress the body has to deal with, and these body building western programs are just causing unnecessary higher stress on the system. Good balance of western and eastern training, martial arts, chi gong, tai chi, stretching, massaging, and irregular breaks in the cycle gives your body a chance to manage it's stress levels. Less cortisol leads to longer lifespan, not to mention more cortisol leads to DNA degeneration long term, leading to not just shorter life spans but birth defects and imperfections if one wants to become a parent. 

[Carl-Richard]

I think one thing that happens with some people when they think about working out is that they have a negative cognitive frame of it as something difficult and hard. According to Cognitive Activation Theory of Stress, this frame ("stimulus expectancy" and "outcome expectancy") is largely what causes the "stress" (the "bad" stress; chronic, sustained stress). Once you're able to mentally cope with the challenges associated with working out, it's not a source of "bad" stress — it's "training", unless you overdo it and it becomes a sustained stress response ("strain").

 

Quote

3. The translational leap to humans – the parachutist study (1978)

The next question was whether these data transfer to humans. What happens in humans, faced with a frightening and potentially dangerous task, when the proper behaviour is established? If similar conditions exist for humans, this would have important consequences for the general and popular beliefs that somehow ‘‘stress’’ is bad for you. Ursin et al. (1978) tested this position in an experiment with parachutists. In a training tower situation, the subjectively reported fear, and the vegetative and endocrine responses to the jump, was reduced after the first training sessions, long before their performance had reached any acceptable level. It was not the performance, or the feedback from evaluation of the performance, that mattered, it was the subjective feeling of being able to perform that reduced the stress responses.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763409000232?via%3Dihub

 

And if you want to counter this by saying "but what about the non-cognitive part of the stress? Isn't that inherently tearing on the system?". No. Again, it only becomes a problem when it's prolonged and sustained. Literally anything you do; any action, any thought, any movement; initiates the stress response to some degree. It's an ingrained part of your functioning. The optimal way it works is that you activate the stress response, you do the work, solve the problem, and then you rest. The problem only arises if you don't solve the problem and don't get to rest, and that is when the response gets prolonged and you experience the "bad" stress. 

Now, how trained you are will determine what that point is for you. The reason why working out is generally healthy is because for some people, that point is reached in everyday life, even while not working out, simply by trying to do everyday activities, for example work, or just merely moving your body. Working out decreases the likelihood of ever hitting the point where bad stress occurs in your life, and it's the bad stress that decreases functioning and has the strongest negative impact on longevity.

As for the argument that short-term stress increases resource consumption, increases calorie-intake, bodily strain, requires more rest, and that this reduces longevity; while this is strictly true in isolation, as somebody mentioned earlier, you have to look at it in context: if you never get into situations of high short-term stress, you'll avoid that, but you'll also experience a severe increase in prolonged stress, and the former is quantitatively AND qualitatively incomparable to the latter. It's qualitatively different because, in line with the CATS model, it's really easy to mentally cope with a workout, while any constant and prolonged stress from life you'll most likely experience as outside your control and therefore has a much worse profile of mental coping (e.g. "hopelessness" and "helplessness" in the CATS paper). And now, I'll make the quantitative case (which someone else also made earlier):

A proper high-intensity workout lasts maximum 90 minutes. You're awake for 16 hours (960 minutes) a day. If you could choose between 90 minutes of high-intensity "stress" (which is not "bad" stress) say 3 times a week, which is "stress" you can rest and recover from, and 960 minutes of prolonged/actually-bad stress 7 times a week, which you cannot rest and recover from; if you know basic arithmetic and if you know anything vaguely theoretical about how the human body works and if you have ever experienced the intense negative side effects of going from a period of regular exercise to no exercise; you would have to be psychotic to choose no exercise. The question shouldn't be "exercise: yes or no?", it should be "how much and what kind?".

Edited March 19 by Carl-Richard

[Danioover9000]

@Carl-Richard

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

I think one thing that happens with some people when they think about working out is that they have a negative cognitive frame of it as something difficult and hard. According to Cognitive Activation Theory of stress, this frame ("stimulus expectancy" and "outcome expectancy") is largely what causes the "stress" (the "bad" stress; chronic, sustained stress). Once you're able to mentally cope with the challenges associated with working out, it's not a source of "bad" stress — it's "training", unless you overdo it and it becomes a sustained stress response ("strain").

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763409000232?via%3Dihub

 

And if you want to counter this by saying "but what about the non-cognitive part of the stress? Isn't that inherently tearing on the system?". No. Again, it only becomes a problem when it's prolonged and sustained. Literally anything you do; any action, any thought, any movement; initiates the stress response to some degree. It's an ingrained part of your functioning. The question is just if you overdo it or not, and how trained you are will determine what that point is for you. The reason working out is generally healthy is because for some people, that point is reached in everyday life, even while not working out, simply by trying to do everyday activities, for example work, or just merely moving your body. So working out decreases the likelihood of ever hitting the point where bad stress occurs in your life, and that is why it's generally healthy and why it generally increases longevity.

   Generally speaking, it's important to balance work loads with relaxation. Typically the western kinds of exercises and programs while are good stress inducers, can have the person accumulate stress over time, like with body building programs. Sometimes it's important to cycle in lighter exercises or just take random breaks when there's too much physical, emotional and mental stress the body/mind has to sort out.

[Carl-Richard]

55 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

Typically the western kinds of exercises and programs while are good stress inducers, can have the person accumulate stress over time, like with body building programs.

Only if you don't know what you're doing and you over-exert yourself (or if you intentionally over-exert yourself despite knowing the negative consequences).

[Yousif]

On 3/17/2024 at 3:36 PM, TheSelf said:

The organs in the body has potential to repair and adaptation, how can you compare an organ like heart to a mechanical thing like a car engine?

 

But obviously over exercising if not recovered well lead to age and die faster this makes sense

How does it make sense that over using something ( the heart ) make it live longer?

being athletic will make you as active as a monkey which means your heart rate will be elevated regularly.

 

[Yousif]

On 3/19/2024 at 4:26 AM, Javfly33 said:

It depends. Light moderate exercise Will almost certainly make you Live longer and healthier. But if you take It too much It probably shorten your Life span. Precisely if you are a gym rat and you are eating a lot that Will create harm in the body long term.

Too much food is no good, too much stress on the system.

I agree, moderate activity seems ideal for longevity.

[Yousif]

On 3/19/2024 at 7:10 AM, Carl-Richard said:

That's if you have a wacky definition of health. If you define health as optimal functioning, then health and longevity are virtually synonymous. If you define health as having big muscles and fucking a lot of bitches (reproductive fitness), then sure, that definition of health might not be synonymous with longevity.

Sure, if you manage to keep your resting heart rate below 50 or so, if you have no musculoskeletal issues and you cope well with your daily life, and if at the same time you happen to be working out less than someone else, then sure, working out more might not help you that much in terms of longevity. But I'll assure you that in virtually all cases, getting to those levels requires some amount of working out (or just general physical exercise); whether it would be considered light or extreme exercise, whether it's intentional or accidental; that's beside the point.

Optimal functioning does not equal longevity, like I said above you’re looking at the issue linearly, being healthy and fit makes you as active as a monkey, not only your heart will be working harder ( even if your resting heart rate goes to 40 ) the only reason your resting heart rate will go this low is because you’re extremely fit and active, and to maintain that you’re gonna  be a working out your heart day in and day out, not to mention the troubles you can get into for being active and fit, with loads of testosterone, compared to a lazy person.

I had friends that died because they were healthy and fit kids that like to go outside. 
 

While I was the fat lazy kid that plays video games all day that had survived.

[Yousif]

On 3/19/2024 at 7:19 AM, Danioover9000 said:

@Yousif

   Yes and no. The no part comes when the person keeps getting burn out and damage onset muscle soreness, and over exercises. Just look at Bruce Lee, he really worked so hard on his body that he died from stroke early on in his life. Some say he died due to Triad hit, but I ain't going down that rabbit hole.

   I'll still suggest to you to do some martial arts training, maybe chi gong, some western exercises old school like flexing and isometrics way more than the body building programs that cause much more stress than necessary.

I thinks if you got your diet and supplements down, get your blood work regularly done, and if you already get some walking in from house chores or work, have sex a few times a week, if you don’t smoke or drink,and overall just not be lazy would be optimal for longevity, 

 

there are plenty of other factors that can affect longevity that has nothing to do with the body like:- 

- where you live, is it safe? 
- how risky is your occupation?

- your attitude towards safety precautions like, do you wear your seat belt? Do you speed when driving? Are you grounded and not provoked as easily by others ( like road rage or street fights that can be deadly )

These are just a few.