Re: Re: How 'little' exercise is benficial

February 11, 2009

Hey BillIt does not mean they are "meaning-less" "per see" and I dont think anyone is saying that 100%. Like the CRON study, it has value. But it is a detail that is important to know and it is just putting it in perspective. Remember, CRON is an experiment, and no one is saying it is proven in humans at all let alone how best to do it.But a study done on 25 healthy fit young males does not exactly extrapolate well to the general sedentary overweight population and I think that is what Francesca meant.And, you are right. those same limitations apply to the CRON data and I dont know anyone here who is denying that. Is it me, or do you seem to have a bone to pick of late with the list?ThanksJeff--- On Wed, 2/11/09, bill4cr <bill4cr@...>

wrote:From: bill4cr <bill4cr@...>Subject: [ ] Re: How 'little' exercise is benficial Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 10:54 AM

The interesting part of the study is they were all very young men

(early 20's), yet brief exercise still improved their glucose and

insulin. I'd think 20 yrs old would have good control values yet

exercise resulted in even greater improvement in these biomarkers. I

think that's significant finding.

"Only" 25? THIS study had less (PMID: 15096581) is it also

'meaningless" on this basis?

> > From: bill4cr <bill4cr@... >

> > Subject: [ ] How 'little' exercise is benficial

> >

> > Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:16 AM

> >

> > Just 7 minutes per week can help! But the exercise must be vigorous.

> >

> > http://www.reuters. com/article/ healthNews/ idUSTRE50R0BH200

90128?feedType=

> > RSS & feedName= healthNews

> >

<http://www.reuters. com/article/ healthNews/ idUSTRE50R0BH200 90128?feedType= RSS &

> > amp;feedName= healthNews>

> >

>

February 11, 2009

If it were the lone study, yes, it would be meaningless. But your PUBMED reference: Long-term calorie restriction is highly effective in reducing the risk for atherosclerosis in humans, which is a study of only 18 subjects, is an entirely different case That’s because hundreds, if not thousands of such studies with thousands of subjects, exist to verify the findings. Many of these studies are in our files. If it were the lone study, yes, it would be meaningless.

Study our rules for posting, check your ego at the door, and when you’re changing the subject to avoid attention when wrong, at least make it something useful. This is not the kind of list where we encourage superfluous posting.

From: bill4cr <bill4cr@...>

Reply-< >

Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:54:26 -0000

< >

Subject: [ ] Re: How 'little' exercise is benficial

The interesting part of the study is they were all very young men

(early 20's), yet brief exercise still improved their glucose and

insulin. I'd think 20 yrs old would have good control values yet

exercise resulted in even greater improvement in these biomarkers. I

think that's significant finding.

" Only " 25? THIS study had less (PMID: 15096581) is it also

'meaningless " on this basis?

> > From: bill4cr <bill4cr@...>

> > Subject: [ ] How 'little' exercise is benficial

> > <mailto: %40>

> > Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:16 AM

> >

> > Just 7 minutes per week can help! But the exercise must be vigorous.

> >

> > http://www.reuters. com/article/ healthNews/ idUSTRE50R0BH200

90128?feedType=

> > RSS & feedName= healthNews

> >

<http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE50R0BH20090128?feedType=RSS & <http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE50R0BH20090128?feedType=RSS & amp;>

> > amp;feedName=healthNews>

> >

>

February 11, 2009

After re-reading the thread, i wanted to add a few additional comments to clarify my first response.While one may say there are many studies on exercise, this study on exercise was only the third of its type using this protocol. It is a very extreme protocol. It is not reflective of any knd of typical exercise and it is a protocol that is unattainable by most Americans who are cautioned against it. This was the very first time ever it was applied to a health measure like diabetes and about how it might help improve their blood sugar, glucose and insulin levels. The results were fairly specific for those who are overweight with type 2 diabetes. The other 2 studies using this protocol were about improving anerobic and aerobic capacity in already trained athletes. The CRON study was also small but was part of a lineage of 74

years of studies on the effects of CRON and a continuation of the recent studies on the effects on humans. While it only had 18 subject, there is a larger WUSTL study that I beleive has 4000 that is ongoing. So, this could be considered a subgroup. CRON is applicable to most any human anywhere and most importantly, to this group.So, in regard to how each one applies to this specific group, I would say the first one is interesting but not that important and the second one is a very important piece of our growing body of evidence.RegardsJeffFrom: Francesca Skelton <fskelton@...>Subject: Re: [ ] Re: How 'little' exercise is benficial"support group"

< >Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:20 AM

If it were the lone study, yes, it would be meaningless. But your PUBMED reference: Long-term calorie restriction is highly effective in reducing the risk for atherosclerosis in humans, which is a study of only 18 subjects, is an entirely different case That¢s because hundreds, if not thousands of such studies with thousands of subjects, exist to verify the findings. Many of these studies are in our files. If it were the lone study, yes, it would be meaningless.

Study our rules for posting, check your ego at the door, and when you¢re changing the subject to avoid attention when wrong, at least make it something useful. This is not the kind of list where we encourage superfluous posting.

From: bill4cr <bill4cr (DOT) com>

Reply-< >

Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:54:26 -0000

< >

Subject: [ ] Re: How 'little' exercise is benficial

The interesting part of the study is they were all very young men

(early 20's), yet brief exercise still improved their glucose and

insulin. I'd think 20 yrs old would have good control values yet

exercise resulted in even greater improvement in these biomarkers. I

think that's significant finding.

"Only" 25? THIS study had less (PMID: 15096581) is it also

'meaningless" on this basis?

> > From: bill4cr <bill4cr@...>

> > Subject: [ ] How 'little' exercise is benficial

> > <mailto:CRsupportgro up%40groups .com>

> > Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:16 AM

> >

> > Just 7 minutes per week can help! But the exercise must be vigorous.

> >

> > http://www.reuters. com/article/ healthNews/ idUSTRE50R0BH200

90128?feedType=

> > RSS & feedName= healthNews

> >

<http://www.reuters. com/article/ healthNews/ idUSTRE50R0BH200 90128?feedType= RSS & <http://www.reuters. com/article/ healthNews/ idUSTRE50R0BH200 90128?feedType= RSS & amp;>

> > amp;feedName= healthNews>

> >

>

February 11, 2009

>As an ex-oarsman, I spend some time each week on the very excellent

>and widely available Concept II rowing ergometers that we have in

>our Wellness Center. The study suggests to me that my time there

>might be well spent by rowing all out for 30 s at a time, then

>recovering, and repeating. I usually just row at max sustainable

>aerobic speed for the time that I do, so with a low-impact mechanism

>for which I am already well trained (like rowing or in-place

>cycling, but not running [high impact]), this might be a useful

>modification for me.

Maco

February 11, 2009

I agree with your comments and incorporate then principle myself.. BTW, If you check the files on How Much Exercise, under CRON Sciene, Rodney put together a document, which included recommendations about intervals, based on the original Tabata studies..The above said, thoroughly healthy people can likely obtain these

benefits in a simple program that consists of aerobic exercise for 20

minutes two to three times a week (or intervals for 10 minutes two to

three times a week), along with strength training at an appropriate

intensity for ten to twenty minutes twice weekly.

Thanks!JeffFrom: Maco <mstewart@...> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:04:52 PMSubject: Re: [ ] Re: How 'little' exercise is benficial