Perhaps most people do not think that daily activities–including cooking or sweetening food–have an effect on their long-term health. Nonetheless, new research shows that many of these physical activities with a high light strength raising the cardiovascular risk.
Light physical exercise accounts for the majority of individuals with their daily physical activities. Nevertheless, government guidelines rely on mild to vigorous physical activity nearly exclusively. This disconnection is explained largely by the difficulty of measuring a person’s physical intensity of light.
Light physical activity can not be calculated by way of a questionnaire. The amount of physical exercise with light intensity an individual thinks they did is almost unlike what they did. Therefore, the impact of physical activity with light intensity on long-term health are difficult to study.
The new study, reported in the JAMA Network Open, was able to measure light physical activity best in about 6,000 older women with a 7 days accelerometer. Within 5 years these people were 46 percent less likely to have a heart attack or die of a heart attack (six hours or more a day). When contrast to those people who had the least amount of light exercise–three or fewer hours a day–they were 26 percent less likely to be affected by cardiovascular events (stroke, extreme angina).
A dose-response association is evident: the more time people spend light exercises, the more they reduce their risk of cardiovascular disease. The risk of heart attack decreased by about 15 percent for an additional three hours of light activity. Even with the physical activity of higher intensity, light-intensity exercise seemed significant.
Unpicking cause and effect
One of the study’s drawbacks is that it is cross-sectional (a snapshot of time) and can never demonstrate the course of the examined interaction. There can be a sign of good health rather than good health if the ability to conduct a lot of light energy tasks is a factor. Therefore, we must carry out interventional studies that aim to increase physical lightness and to see if cardiovascular disease levels can be reduced.
Significance of light activity for the long term is still apparent in smaller laboratory studies. Light physical exercise, for instance, is an essential part of the overall energy consumption of physical activity and has consequences for the body weight and body composition. Also effective is the regular breakdown of long sitting periods with short activity in light intensity, which reduces glucose, insulin and fat following a meal.
On the other side, it contributes to a rapid decline in aerobic fitness and lean muscle mass and to an increase in body weight, and blood glucose, and insulin.
Is it enough?
Does this research imply that we should encourage people to rely on enhanced light activity? I would argue not as a physiologist. Low-intensity exercise may well play a role, but for different reasons, there are many other physical activity measurements considered to be significant.
Of starters, cardiorespiratory exercise can only enhance normal, relatively active physical activity. Only frequent exercise of resistance, for example lifting weight, can maintain or improve muscle mass and strength as we age.
Total physical activity including mild, moderate, vigorous intensities and fidgeting is the main consideration of the body structure because this describes in large part the variations in the overall energy a person uses every day.
A person can make a good mark on one type of physical activity but on another poorly. Thought of the bureaucrat, who stays on a monitor for a large part of the day but gets out for a 30-minute moderate-intensity run two times per week (beneficial).
Any physical activity is good for general wellbeing, even stronger. They have to motivate people to move more (increased physical exercise with moderate and medium intensities) and walk more often (long sitting interruptions). And then seek to include two to three more regular workouts a week to boost the strength of cardiovascular muscles.
One of the major public health goals of the 21st century is to create a social, economic, community and developed environment that encourages everyone to be more involved.