Mood:  a-ok

Sometimes the best solutions are the most simple. This appears to be the case with walking, arguably the simplest form of exercise. Walking is gentle on the body and takes no special equipment to perform, making it also a very accessible way to exercise. There has been quite a bit of research done on the effectiveness of walking and the results are staggering.

Decreased pain and disability

Walking appears to make the body stronger and more resilient in addition to being therapeutic. When people suffering from knee arthritis walked for only three hours a week, their pain and disability went down by nearly half. Walking for only four hours per week decreased the risk of hip fracture in post-menopausal women by over 40 percent.

Walking and mental health

Though physical activity and mental health are not always put in the same breath, walking also appears to have a significant impact on our happiness levels. In one study, nearly a third of the depressed patients reported feeling better after only a small dose of walking. When that small dose was increased, the number of depressed patients who were feeling better jumped to about half. Similarly, walking has been shown to reduce anxiety in about half of all patients who implement it into their routine.

Decreased illness and disease

The risk of disease and illness also seems to be significantly cut down when walking is added to the picture. Some research has found that walking can decrease the risk of heart disease by as much as 50 percent. Older patients who started a walking routine were able to reduce their progression of dementia and Alzheimer's by about half as well. In one study of patients at a high risk for diabetes, walking was combined with other lifestyle interventions and almost 60 percent of patients reduced the progression to frank diabetes.

Walking and lower mortality

All of these benefits point to a lower mortality rate as well. A Harvard alumni study followed graduates for a dozen years and found that people who walked had a 23 percent lower rate of death than those who did not walk. Cardiorespiratory fitness, something walking can influence, has also been pointed to as the best mortality predictor.

Though walking may never become a fitness fad, its benefits are undeniable. In fact, if a pill could produce effects similar to the statistics cited above, it would be the bestselling drug in the world. Until then the rest of us will be making strides naturally, one step at a time.

by: Ben Hirshberg

Learn more: naturalnews.com

Posted by Neil Bartlett DHyp M.A.E.P.H at 00:01 MEST

Updated: Monday, 26 August 2013 01:53 MEST

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  cheeky

Breaking a sweat with weights in an effort for the perfect six pack might be a waste of time.

 As a new study has found that the best way to burn belly fat is through aerobic exercise.

When researchers monitored people who did aerobics for eight months, compared to those who did just weight lifting, the former group lost almost 20 times as much fat around their stomachs.

Full Story from dailymail.co.uk

Posted by Neil Bartlett DHyp M.A.E.P.H at 17:10 MEST

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  hungry

From Butt Blasters to Thigh Masters, to 10-minute workouts, we are constantly being promised the quick fix to fitness! This fast-twitch, always on the run, texting and twittering society leads to the desire for instant gratification -- an extremely unfortunate byproduct of our increasingly impatient lives!

Can you really become slender AND get rock hard abs in just 10 minutes a day? For most people the honest answer is NO. Achieving optimal fitness like they show in these promotions (ideal body weight, body fat percentage, and a six-pack) is going to take a lot more than that.

In my experience, people can work out for an hour 5 times a week, and still not come close to that picture, and that's even with the help of a good trainer who has designed a good program. Do these trainers selling exercise devices/programs know something I don't?  No they do not. 

Look at the fine print -- all of these programs come with a diet you need to follow, and they also state that the results they show on TV are "not typical." That means the vast majority of people will not look like the people on TV at the end of the 6 or 12 weeks, or whatever it is.

The truth is, genuine fitness, good health, and weight regulation require good, old-fashioned time and effort. Certainly short-bout exercise does have some benefits as many Total Health Breakthroughs articles have discussed, and we have learned that high intensity interval training is MUCH more effective for weight loss than those hours and hours we used to spend doing aerobics.

But what is a realistic amount of time to spend on your fitness program? What will accomplish your goals, but not make you have to "live in the gym?"

To be quite honest, the answer is it will be different for everyone.  Numerous studies have identified that the amount of time needed to achieve fitness was anywhere from a few months to a year, depending upon several factors like how de-conditioned you are when starting out, your age, whether you eat a healthy diet or not, and the amount of time you are willing to devote to exercise.1

Even your gender heavily influences how long it will take you to get fit.  And let's not forget genetics -- this too plays a role.

These factors are why each and every person, conditioned or not, progresses at a different rate even if they are doing the same workout with the same effort!

One of the most interesting studies to date evaluated a program based on a claim seen on TV that people could get fit in just 6 weeks, exercising 3 times a week. This study had unfit sedentary people try to do just that.   One group did cardiovascular exercise and the other did strength training.

In six weeks, the cardio exercisers lost almost one pound and a little body fat. The strength-training group actually gained a little weight, but did lose a little body fat -- but very little, .05%. So exercise, even at that moderate level, was effective, and that was without any dietary changes. The control group who did no exercise, gained both weight and body fat. 

This study is spot on with what I see with my clients -- by six weeks into a program we start to see some muscle building and some fat loss, and by the end of the year, we see about 8 or 10 pounds of weight loss, with moderate exercise only.

If you step up your exercise intensity and frequency and you cut out refined carbs, the weight loss and fitness achieved is even greater.  (If people are NOT seeing at least modest results by 12 or 16 weeks, most likely they have some sort of metabolic disruption.)

So in looking at the promises behind many of these programs and products, just be realistic, because if you are expecting optimal fitness in a just a few weeks, you could get discouraged and want to quit. 

If you are very overweight, haven't worked out in a while, if ever, and your diet still leaves a lot to be desired, you are probably looking at about a year of dieting and exercise to achieve something close to that "optimal" picture. That's realistic, and it would be a great accomplishment.

So really, the headlines should say, Just Think, in Only One Year You Can Reverse Years of Bad Diet and No Exercise!

References
Geraro, Jim (2009), Fitness Ace Matters.15, 4, 11-12.
Tarnopolsky, Mark A. Med Sci Sports & Exerc. 40(4):648-654, April 2008.
Anderson ML, et al. J Strength and Cond Res. 2004:18(2), 255-59.

[Ed. Note: Melissa Hawthorne, RN, BSN, CSCS is the owner of Priority Fitness Personal Training and Wellness.  She is a Master Trainer for the Resist-a-ball Company, ISCA Personal Training, Kick-boxing, and Beamfit.   Melissa serves as a fitness consultant for the LaValle Metabolic Institute.  To learn more, click here.]

"This article appears courtesy of Early to Rise's Total Health Breakthroughs, offering alternative solutions for mind, body and soul.  For a complimentary subscription,
visit http://www.totalhealthbreakthroughs.com"

Posted by Neil Bartlett DHyp M.A.E.P.H at 13:35 MEST

Updated: Monday, 7 September 2009 13:42 MEST

Share This Post

Post Comment | View Comments (1) | Permalink