Should You Exercise to Live Longer?
I’m not a medical professional, but this is what I understand.
Walking for thirty minutes a day is helpful. It promotes health and trims our waists. I’m amazed we can have happier and longer lives from something as simple as a thirty minute daily stroll.
If moderate exercise is good, then is more even better? Are there additional longevity benefits to vigorous and longer workouts?
The textbook answer is yes, more exercise tends to give a longer life. There is a famous study from Dr. Ralph Paffenbarger of Stanford University. It was based on questionnaires sent to almost 17,000 Harvard alumni to asses the effect of exercise on longevity. It was determined more exercise was better.
Dr. Paffenbarger practiced what he preached. According to the New York Times, he changed from a sedentary lifestyle at age 45 to running marathons, and even completing a grueling 100-mile race.
What motivated him?
Here’s the trend from the study as pictured in the Harvard Heart Letter in July 2004:
That answer would settle the matter for most people, but you see, I’m rarely satisfied with these textbook answers. I think textbook answers are for exams and Jeopardy.
The practical question is whether it’s worth it to exercise more. Exercise costs us time now for the promise of time later. If I had to give up 10 hours now for 10 hours at the end of my life, I would definitely not make the trade.
It turns out that’s pretty much the tradeoff we face. In that sense, it is probably not worthwhile to exercise more just to live longer.
Dr. Dean Ornish’s Analysis
This analysis comes from Dr. Dean Ornish’s Program for Reversing Heart Disease, page 327. Regarding the Paffenbarger study, Ornish writes:
The problem is that over the course of your adult life, you would need to spend about one and a half years running to live one to two years longer.
How does this break down? I’ll paraphrase the subsequent calculations from the book.
To exercise enough, you’ll have to spend about 300 hours a year. Half that time is spent running, and the other half is spent getting to the track or in showering and dressing.
Then, you will need to keep that routine for the 45 years of adult life (ages thirty to seventy-five). All told, you will have to spend 13,500 hours in exercise activities.
How much is that? If you assume a 16 hour waking day, then there are 5,840 waking hours in a year [the book says 7,940 which I don’t understand]. That means the time you spend exercising consumes the possible benefit—it’s almost a one for one tradeoff.
Dr. Ornish says exercise more if you really enjoy it, but not because you want to live longer. For most people, walking 30 minutes a day is probably good enough.
So here’s my own, non-medical take on the whole matter:
A Closing Tangent
Seeing people’s reactions is part of the fun of writing. Often, the most off-topic comments are the most entertaining.
On that note, I already anticipate one off-topic remark: “Presh, why is a young and healthy person like you reading a book on reversing heart disease?”
For one, it was recommended to me. I eventually read most books people recommend to me, so it was on my list, and I am ready to tackle it.
But there’s a more important reason. I want to learn about health and nutrition, and I figured a nice place would be to learn about a big killer in America.
Most young people I know are worried about saving for retirement and buying a house. I don’t worry much, but when I do, it’s not about getting money. It’s about not being able to enjoy it. It’d be nice to make good decisions everywhere, but there are priorities. I’d much rather have my broker yelling at me than my doctor. As the old saying goes, health is wealth.
26 Responses to “Should You Exercise to Live Longer?”
Interesting article! The main point certainly seems valid: don’t exercise simply for the purpose of living longer. You’ll be trading time from the prime of your life for time in its twilight.
Of course, there are probably very few people who exercise for that reason alone.
Some exercise because they actually enjoy the process (I hate these people). Others want to look more attractive or have more energy. For these people, regular exercise may be a very profitable enterprise. Almost everyone who exercises receives a myriad of benefits, of which longevity may be the least. Empirical measurements of the total benefits of exercise would be incredibly difficult.
By Eric on Apr 10, 2008
Eric: I wholeheartedly agree: “Empirical measurements of the total benefits of exercise would be incredibly difficult.” It’s hard to measure looking good or feeling good, or the thrill of beating someone in a sport.
By Presh Talwalkar on Apr 10, 2008
I think you’ve missed a fundamental point - you’ve considered “exercise time” as wasted time; For example I do about 45 minutes every other day on a spin bike (or a real bike if the Scottish weather is ever nice enough for it) - whilst I’m on the spin bike I catch up with any TV Shows or podcasts that I’ve missed, or use the time for quiet reflection.
I find if you think of exercise time in this way it makes it a much more enjoyable activity - and of course, as Eric points out, longevity is one of the numerous benefits of exercise.
By Jamie on Apr 10, 2008
Jamie: Spin bikes are great for multi-tasking–I did overlook that and I like them a lot. On the down side, I never work up much of an exercise, so it would not qualify for the vigorous exercise required by the Harvard study, which is burning 2,000 calories a week. But yes, I do use them because they are fun.
By Presh Talwalkar on Apr 10, 2008
Presh,
Very enjoyable post. Although the whole idea does sound logical and attractive (because it encourages me to reduce exercise time) it is very flawed at the core and ignores the implicit benefits of increased exercise time, like improvement in health (which can lead to lots of saved misery, time and costs in healthcare later in life).
But I loved it nevertheless.
Thank you,
Pankaj
By Pankaj on Apr 10, 2008
Pankaj: Thanks for the positive comment. I definitely agree exercising improves quality of life, which is a more important reason to do it.
By Presh Talwalkar on Apr 10, 2008
The previous comments alluded to it a little bit, but I think we shouldn’t exercise to increase length of life (the numbers pretty clearly show it’s a wash), but instead we should consider improvements in Quality of life due to exercise. I’d rather spend a little time exercising in exchange for living the last few years of my life (whatever age that may be) without spending time in a hospital or doctor’s office with a bunch of mostly preventable medical problems.
By Kevin on Apr 10, 2008
Interesting article! With better weather upon us (at least here in the north east), I should at least strive for the 30 min/day.
By Sujatha on Apr 10, 2008
I think I might have recommended it before, but I highly suggest reading In Defense of Food. Not only does it delve deeply into health and nutrition, but is also chock full of scientific skepticism.
By Mike on Apr 10, 2008
I definately would not trade a year of my 20-something life for an extra year in an older body.
I would subjectively say, however, that the quality of life of someone who exercises now is significantly higher than someone who does not. After all, how much TV can you watch? The time I spend exercising now makes me feel better, so I end up enjoying the rest of my life more as well.
By Joe P on Apr 10, 2008
Kevin: I agree. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Sujatha: Yes, doing is harder than knowing. I find myself slacking off too when the weather is not great.
Mike: That book does seem great. It’s on my list, so you know I’ll get around to it
Joe P: True, exercise is a good thing. I guess the point is that for us non-marathon runners, we don’t have to feel like slackers.
By Presh Talwalkar on Apr 10, 2008
The question was “Should you exercise to live longer?” And you answered it very well. I’m curious about your specific workout habits. In my opinion walking 30 mins everyday is not advice geared towards my demographic.
By Joon on Apr 11, 2008
Does not the candle which burns brightest burn the shortest?
Its amusing to see what people are willing to do to cheat death, and I like your analysis Presh, if you really hate exercise and you’re also afraid of dying young, it seems like the best solution is to avoid exercise and focus on living your life doing things you really enjoy.
I also bet stress plays a huge role in all this, and while exercise might be strenuous, it can be a great way to mentally relax.
By RohoMech on Apr 11, 2008
For me exercising isn’t so much about feeling better at the end of my life, although I have no doubt that it will be an improvement over the life faced by some who have been totally sedentary. Exercising also makes me feel good now. And that’s both while I’m actually exercising (most of the time) and when I’m done.
By Michael Henreckson on Apr 11, 2008
Joon: Per my habits, I enjoy playing sports like basketball, so I incorporate some weight training to improve strength. I mix between walking and running as well.
I would never try to advise what someone should do. Some people want bulky muscles. Some people care about being paper thin. 30 minutes of walking would be terrible advice for those goals. My point is we obsess about goals that are often unhealthy or pursued inappropriately. This article suggests crazy exercise for longevity is such an example.
RohoMech: I would have to disagree. Avoiding exercise completely will likely worsen the quality of your life and the length of it. It’s somewhat telling that many of us are busy that a 30 minute stroll is hard to fit in.
Michael Henreckson: Yes, exercise impacts you more than the time you spend in it–that’s a good point.
By Presh Talwalkar on Apr 11, 2008
It figures that a Stanford alumnus would put a big cardinal “X” over a Crimson graphic.
Anyhow, you may want to file this post under your “Calculating Guru” series, as well as e-mailing the authors of the book about your time discrepancy.
By Erik on Apr 13, 2008
Erik: Haha, I didn’t even realize my subconscious crossing out a Crimson graphic.
Thanks for the suggestion on the topic and emailing the author.
By Presh Talwalkar on Apr 13, 2008
Presh Well, lets say you have 30 minutes free and you take a nap instead…is that worse than taking a 30 minute walk?
By RohoMech on Apr 14, 2008
RohoMech: I daresay no one can answer that question. It appears both good sleep and good exercise are important.
I thought about a similar tradeoff recently. I started snacking on oatmeal to be healthy, but then I realized to make it tasty, I needed to add a spoon or two of sugar and a bit of salt. What’s the net impact of adding one “good” item plus two “bad” items? I find it’s hard to generalize from the elements.
By Presh Talwalkar on Apr 14, 2008
Two things.
Your whole analysis of time swap ignores exercises like using bullworker (which doesn’t add extra shower time if you do it before your normal morning shower) and Tabata exercises which take 4 minutes a day but have long term benefits.
By tom french on Jul 2, 2008
Tom French: Yes, if workouts take place before shower there is no extra time lost. That’s a strategy I use myself.
I’ll look into Tabata exercises and bullworker, but I am always cautious as intense exercises tend to strain muscles and not everyone can get motivated to even do 4 minutes.
Walking, on the other hand, who doesn’t like that?
By Presh Talwalkar on Jul 3, 2008
Hi Presh,
I will begin walking at least 30 min a day now. I wanted to also recommend a book called The China Study, if you haven’t already read it. Keep up the great writing!
By Naree on Jul 11, 2008
Naree: I’m glad to hear you’ll begin walking–it’s quite enjoyable and much easier than going to the gym. I appreciate the book recommendation, and I have in fact read “The China Study.”
I wrote a blurb about it in my article saying that health is more important than career. (link)
I’m learning that exercise has been overrated in its importance and that health really is more about what we eat. But more on that in future articles
By Presh Talwalkar on Jul 12, 2008
The China Study recommends low protein.
Virtually every fitness site etc recommends average to high protein and low carbs.
The will to be healthy is there but it is difficult to get the knowledge.
By Tom on Jul 12, 2008
The China Study is severely flawed and thoroughly debunked here:
http://www.westonaprice.org/bookreviews/chinastudy.html
By Tom French on Jul 12, 2008
Tom French: Protein requirements are definitely a hot topic, and I’d love to open the discussion. There certainly are some people that swear by high-protein diets and others that think low-protein is the way to go. I again wish to improve discourse rather than tell people what to eat, which is really none of my business.
A starting discussion point is that we’re dealing with a “nutritionism” issue. As Michael Pollan points out in “In Defense of Food,” we should really be discussing foods to eat rather than macronutrients. When people say high-protein they usually mean meat and dairy and low-protein people usually talk about plants.
Another interesting point is “high” and “low” are relative. The World Health Organization has concluded we only need 5-10 percent protein requirements for health. I also found this article very interesting:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/031200proteinpf.htm
Now there is a point I agree with you. Fitness organizations do recommend a high protein diet (meaning meat and dairy). This is because meat and dairy have proteins with similar structure to ours–they are more “efficient.” This means more muscle buildup and quicker recovery.
Where I differ is that I don’t necessarily care about fitness for fitness sake. That is because health and fitness are not the same. Fitness is about performance and short-term maximization. Health is about living a high quality life long-term. Walking 30 minutes may lead to health, but it is certainly not good enough for fitness.
Can an athlete perform well on a plant-based diet? That’s an open question. Carl Lewis says so, as he claims he trained on a vegan (Dr. McDougall) diet for his best year of competition.
As for the review of the China Study, I do agree with the Weston A Price on questioning Campbell’s motive. However, to be nitpicky, this criticism was also flawed, as the China Study author writes back:
http://www.vegsource.com/articles2/campbell_china_response.htm
Thanks for opening the discussion. I do appreciate your comments, even if we don’t agree with each other
The most important thing is to be conscious of the research and make a decision you are comfortable with. But it’s something I don’t think a lot of people do.
By Presh Talwalkar on Jul 13, 2008