Jogging is one in all those activities that seems to perfectly embody the concept of healthy physical activity. I do know individuals who run an hour or more a day. I love their commitment to physical activity and sometimes envy their seemingly good health. But a recent Danish study has me rethinking the advantages of vigorous jogging.
Researchers with ongoing Copenhagen City Heart Study Following the health of over 1,000 joggers and 400 healthy but inactive non-joggers. Between 2001 and 2014, 156 of those study participants died. Using the death rate of non-joggers as a comparison, the researchers found that light joggers had a 90 percent lower death rate than non-joggers, while moderate joggers had a virtually 60 percent lower death rate. Here's the massive surprise: The death rate of vigorous joggers was no different than sedentary non-joggers. This form of relationship known as a U-shaped curve (see figure).
The study found that only one hour of jogging per week was related to a big reduction in mortality. The most helpful combination was jogging at a slow or moderate pace two to 3 times per week, for a complete of 60 to 145 minutes throughout the week. The results were published on February 5, 2015. Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
Activating exercise
This is only one study out of a whole bunch which have checked out the link between exercise and mortality. This is definitely not a stop-the-press type of study, nor should this study alone change the present recommendations for physical activity—150 minutes of moderate physical activity per week. But it does get me eager about how much exercise, and what type, is best.
The results of the Copenhagen City Heart Study definitely help dispel the “no pain, no gain” myth related to exercise. A slow-moderate jog for 20 minutes 3 times per week must be a painless activity for many individuals, and it has clear advantages.
The current US exercise guidelines have some solid science behind them. But they're bothersome to many, leading some to offer up exercise altogether. The message from this study and others is that small amounts of activity which might be manageable as a part of a traditional lifestyle can have significant health advantages.
I think that physical activity is on the core of what known as health activation. It is a process wherein an individual actively thinks more about their health and starts working to enhance it. Being more physically energetic focuses an individual's attention on their health higher than another approach.
How can we “activate” more people? Letting more of them know that even somewhat activity is healthier than none is a step in that direction. And if the Copenhagen results hold, we will walk in that direction or get up somewhat, and never must go full tilt.