Re: Re: Super centenarians

[Guest guest]

As far as I understand from the research, is that less exercise is more.. Exercise increases oxidative damage and stress to the cells and tissues. Additionally, I believe Walford (or was it R. Weindruch?) showed in an experiment that the well exercised rodents croked much earlier than the sedentary CR'd rodents.. AND the CR's and exercised group died early.. (Someone please correct me if mistaken) Exercise requires more calories, so you will be more hungry, therfore expending more energy. It makes sense, because remember that oxygen is a double-edged sword.. we need it, but it ages (oxidizes) us :\ Nevertheless, all research states that some exercise is absolultely crucial. I find the occasional walk or bike to work just enough for me.. This we already know: CR vs. Exercise (alone) "Researchers from the Washington University in St. Louis Medical Center found that calorie restriction is better than endurance exercise in slowing the aging process as opposed to previous studies. Calorie restriction (CR) decreases the circulating concentration of a powerful inflammatory molecule, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF). The combination of lower T3 levels and reduced inflammation may slow that aging process by reducing the body's metabolic rate and the oxidative damage to cells and tissues " http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/05/060531164818.htm Rodney <perspect1111@...> wrote: Hi folks:IIRC, in those two videos, all the subjects were in wheel chairs.Since we can reasonably hope that a few of us will live to a truly great age, you might say that those videos argue quite strongly for the need to maintain our strength, agility and flexibility if we want to enjoy life to the full after 110!And it does seem that the best way to achieve that may be through 'appropriate' exercise. Unless someone has a better idea?Would anyone care to define 'appropriate exercise for CRON'? Preferably with some evidence to support the view. Rodney.>> Hi All,> > Super centenarians are super. See:> > Part 1> http://tinyurl.com/lnc94> > Part2> http://tinyurl.com/p2co6> > -- Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...> > __________________________________________________>

[Guest guest]

See our file called: " How much exercise? "

on 7/17/2006 3:39 AM, D. H. at d7882001@... wrote:

As far as I understand from the research, is that less exercise is more..

Exercise increases oxidative damage and stress to the cells and tissues.

Additionally, I believe Walford (or was it R. Weindruch?) showed in an experiment that the well exercised rodents croked much earlier than the sedentary CR'd rodents..

AND the CR's and exercised group died early.. (Someone please correct me if mistaken)

Exercise requires more calories, so you will be more hungry, therfore expending more energy.

It makes sense, because remember that oxygen is a double-edged sword.. we need it, but it ages (oxidizes) us :\

Nevertheless, all research states that some exercise is absolultely crucial.

I find the occasional walk or bike to work just enough for me..

[Guest guest]

>>>Would anyone care to define 'appropriate exercise for CRON'? Preferably with some evidence to support the view. How about without evidence?? From Message 15110 10/04From my personal view...The other point I tried to make is that there seems to be some level ofactivity, including endurance, strength and range of motion (which Ithink is more important than flexibility) that we need to have tosurvive. Granted our modern day society has made it so we don't needthose as much to survive and can even get by without them.I think both of the above add to the confusion in the data and theapparent conflicts.My own PERSONAL interpretation (and this is stictly personal) of all Ihave read and discussed... (which could be individualized to anyone elsepersonal lifestyle) is we get the most benefit (without theconsequences

of overdoing it) by- the "equivalent" of a 30-60 minutes brisk walk most days of a week (briskmeans walking as if you had somewhere to go and were running late)- the equivalent of 2-3 strength training sessions a week of around15-30 minutes- the equivalent of some brief but very high intensity endurancesessions (ie 5-10 fast sprints of 10-15 seconds each 1-3x a week)- 5-15 minutes of ROM exercises daily if possible, which are basicallyjust simple calisthenics in which you move all your body parts throughtheir full Range-Of-Motion a few times each. Doing this will preventthe loss of flexibility as we age.All of this can be accomplished in 60 minutes or less a day.If you get all this in the course of your normal life, than you don'tneed to add in.If you get some of it but not others, just formally add in the parts youare missing.Except for the brief sprints, none of this is

strenous, most of it canbe fun, and can be fit in simply. And the brief sprints, are actuallyinvigorating as they are intense, but brief and not done often, so notdraining.And I say "equivalent" cause for endurance, it can be walking, biking orwhatever. For strength it could be weights, machines, dumbells, bodyweight exercises etc, Whatever you prefer.