A new study shows that working out regularly increases your lifespan. Finally, the kind of solid, explicit evidence we need to show everyone that it's important to stay in shape. Here's the money quote: People who engaged in moderate activity -- the equivalent of walking for 30 minutes a day for five days a week -- lived about 1.3 to 1.5 years longer than those who were less active. Those who took on more intense exercise -- the equivalent of running half an hour a day five days every week -- extended their lives by about 3.5 to 3.7 years, the researchers found.
The doctors who conducted the study are very proud of the results: "Being more physically active can give you more time. ... This should encourage people to be more active -- to take a more active role in their own health and not just sit and wait for a pill to prevent this or that or save your life." And they observes that even a little makes a difference: Adding just a little activity to the daily routine can have major benefits. "What we're talking about is small changes," Hill said. "We're telling people to get out and walk more. Fifteen, 20 or 30 minutes of walking each day is probably enough."
Well that's great news. But wait.. so 30 minutes of vigorous exercise 5 days a week can save me 3.6 years? How much time am I spending on that exercise anyway? Add in time for changing/showering etc, and let's call it 5 hours a week. That's about 3% of my time. If I live to be 72, 3% of my time adds up to about 2.2 years. So my net gain from all that vigorous exercise? About 15 months. Of course, I'm buying that 3.6 extra years of being old with hours of being young. Is that a good deal? Doesn't sound like it. The deal is even worse if you listen to what they say about "moderate activity". Let's say that 30 minutes of walking only costs you 30 minutes, so about 1.5% of your week. 1.5% of your 72 years is a little over a year, so your net gain is a measly 3 months. I wouldn't give up a lollipop for three months of being 72. And, of course, this is all assuming the study is actually correct. Say there's an 80% chance the study is right; which would you rather have, half an hour now, or an 80% probability of 45 minutes in 40 years? (Assuming you aren't hit by a car first; if you assume some chance of getting hit by a car, being in a plane crash, or being shot by your mistress's jealous husband, the value of sacrificing now for possible future gain becomes even lower.)
Of course, the doctors also say that there are many other gains to exercise, which there are (though they're more vague about how valuable those gains are). And yet they seem sort of cutely bewildered that people won't exercise. The explanation the doctors find for this is apparently that people are stupid or, more charitably, ignorant. But maybe people are just capable of doing some cost/benefit analysis (unlike doctors, apparently). Oh, I don't deny the benefits of exercise. It's a good idea for many, or most, people. But really, it's less about vague threats of vague future costs than about the effects right now. If they want to sell exercise, maybe they should focus on how it improves your life now. And for god's sake, stop treating people like they are idiots.
But one thing I did learn from the study: if you're going to spend the time to exercise, do it right. It's just about a net waste to diddle around with a little walking here and there. Run a marathon or something.
Categories: being
TrackBack