What's the optimum amount of exercise for healthy living?

[dusty]

What I mean to ask is, how much exercise per week can you do before additional exercise would yield little to no health benefit? I'm not talking about building strength or endurance, just staying in shape so I don't get any heart attacks.

 

[ken]

Off the top of my head, I believe the recommended amount is 20 minutes 3 times a week of elevated heart rate... maybe 4.

 

[Gradstudent78]

Originally Posted by dusty

What I mean to ask is, how much exercise per week can you do before additional exercise would yield little to no health benefit? I'm not talking about building strength or endurance, just staying in shape so I don't get any heart attacks.

It's really going to depend on the person, their current level of fitness, and what you consider acceptable for being in shape. It's also going to depend on the type of diet you have.

In general I would say for general health it would be good to shoot for at least two days of lifting and three days of cardio (30 minutes each). If you want to see large body composition changes or are hoping to show large strength or cardiovascular increases your probably going to have to do more. Like I said though, your diet and personal physiology is going to play a factor as well.

 

[quevola]

The Surgeon General recommends a minimum of 30 minutes of moderately vigorous exercise on most days of the week (5-7 days per week) for adults and 60 minutes for children. But WTF does he know?

 

[greg_atlanta]

Diet is more important. A lot of exercise is wasted for people who eat too much. It's not necessary to "exercise" (go to gym, run, sports, etc) to maintain a healthy body. Everyday activities like walking, climbing stairs, doing yardwork/housework are fine, esp. past a certain age. Too much exercise can lead to injuries (wear and tear).

 

[Eason]

Originally Posted by quevola

The Surgeon General recommends a minimum of 30 minutes of moderately vigorous exercise on most days of the week (5-7 days per week) for adults and 60 minutes for children. But WTF does he know?

It's "moderate to vigorous" but the sad thing is that for improved health benefits, the numbers are actually about twice that (duration). They have been hesitant to adopt that as a new standard because so few people already meet the minimum levels of activity that they worry people might just give up altogether instead of reaching for a higher goal.

 

[Eason]

According to ACSM's guidelines for exercise testing and prescription, which I would take over the surgeon general's recommendation, is the following:

Cardiorespiratory training: 3-5 days at 40%/50-85% Heart Rate Reserve for 20-60 minutes. Activity should include large muscle groups and be dynamic.

Resistance training: 2-3 days per week, to volitional fatigue (19/20 RPE) or stopping 2-3 reps before volitional fatigue. Duration of 1 set of 3-20 repetitions (RM max) (3-5 power/strength, 8-10 strength/hypertrophy, 12-15 endurance) And should bee 8-10 exercises including all major muscle groups.

Flexability training should be 2-3 days a week minimum, ideally 5-7 days a week. Stretch to tightness at the end of the range of motion but not to pain, holding each stretch for 15-30 seconds, 2-4 times per muscle.

As you can see, this is far too a general a question for this kind of subject.

 

[whacked]

Originally Posted by greg_atlanta

Diet is more important. A lot of exercise is wasted for people who eat too much. It's not necessary to "exercise" (go to gym, run, sports, etc) to maintain a healthy body. Everyday activities like walking, climbing stairs, doing yardwork/housework are fine, esp. past a certain age. Too much exercise can lead to injuries (wear and tear).

A lot of bandwidth is (utterly) wasted on this post, just as well.

 

[Eason]

That part of his post wasn't really that bad, the rest, especially

It's not necessary to "exercise" (go to gym, run, sports, etc) to maintain a healthy body. Everyday activities like walking, climbing stairs, doing yardwork/housework are fine, esp. past a certain age.

is almost criminally negligent to post as well as WRONG WRONG WRONG

 

[dusty]

What does resistance training have to do with heart disease?

 

[Eason]

Originally Posted by dusty

What does resistance training have to do with heart disease?
It helps lower your risk of getting it. Specifically, it reduces the chances of accumulating many of it's risk factors.

 

[dusty]

Source? Would the time not be better spent on more cardio?

 

[Eason]

Originally Posted by dusty

Source?
Any innumerable number of studies correlating resistance training with treating insulin resistance, lowering blood pressure, raising HDL levels, and of course, simply not being sedentary removes one risk factor.

Originally Posted by dusty

Source? Would the time not be better spent on more cardio?
Ahh, a better question! In the case of treating and preventing CVD, yes, cardio has been shown to be more effective than resistance training alone. However, resistance training has many benefits that cardio does not (and in the case of older women, building bone density, it is very important) and both cardio, resistance training, AND flexibility training should all be in any exercise program for someone looking to achieve their best health.

 

[dusty]

Originally Posted by Eason

simply not being sedentary removes one risk factor.

That's what I'm asking. Why is strength + cardio preferable to cardio + cardio?

 

[Gradstudent78]

This article discusses some of the benefits and recommendation.

http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/cont...circulationaha