For years, Americans have been told by doctors and medical groups that 150 minutes a week of “moderate intensity” exercise is the ideal point to maximize health and longevity. That recommendation, which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention promotes as ideal on their website and literature, it equates to about 5 half hour workouts per week. The reason more exercise isn’t often advertised is because, unlike other activities, the relationship between exercise and health benefits doesn’t seem to scale linearly.
Now, a huge new study casts doubt on that suggested number. In fact, it turns out that doing twice as much exercise can actually have a host of health benefits. That suggests that millions of us who are moderately active and following the exercise wisdom of our doctors may want to consider doubling (or more) our weekly training time to live longer and be healthier.
In the recent study —which was published in the scientific journal Circulation—, the scientists analyzed a sample of more than 116,000 American adults divided into two cohorts. The researchers analyzed self-reported leisure-time physical activity while scientists followed members of the cohorts over a 30-year period (1988 to 2018). Within that group, more than 47,000 died, while the rest suffered from a wide range of health conditions within that time.
RELATED: The damning depictions of Peloton on our TVs and what that says about us
As they discovered, an important factor in terms of determining how much you should exercise is the rigor of the exercise in question. As of 2018, the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans recommend a minimum of 150 to 300 minutes per week of moderate physical activity and 75 to 150 minutes per week of vigorous physical activity. If that already sounds exhausting, guess what? You should either double it or, short of that, put “an equivalent combination of both”.
Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter the ordinary scientist.
“The near maximal association with lower mortality was achieved by performing [approximately] 150 to 300 minutes per week of long-term free time [vigorous physical activity]300 to 600 [minutes] per week of long-term time off [moderate physical activity]or an equivalent combination of both,” the study authors conclude.
The study is comprehensive enough to be taken seriously, the scientists say. One fitness expert, Harvard University professor of human evolutionary biology Daniel E. Lieberman, described the study to Salon in writing as “excellent” and added that “the results make a lot of sense.”
“[Fifty] minutes per week of moderate vigorous physical activity has been established as the standard minimum recommendation, but the word “minimum” is often left out of the conversation, and few studies have ever argued that additional physical activity, especially physical activity vigorous — was not more beneficial,” Lieberman explained. “The question has always been how much more and what intensity produces what degree of benefit. This study provides excellent evidence to bolster the evidence that 150+ minutes has benefits, especially when vigorous.”
Referring to his own recent book “Exercised,” Lieberman added that the study “also reinforces other evidence that concerns about exercising too much are overblown.”
The news may be somewhat discouraging for people who have repeatedly tried to lose weight and discovered that it is difficult to shed the pounds. Scientific evidence overwhelmingly suggests that it is difficult for most people to lose weight and keep it off, and that this difficulty can frustrate people who want to become healthier by doing so. However, even if the weight doesn’t come off as quickly or significantly as you’d like, your health will benefit greatly just by improving your diet and exercise habits.
“This study provides excellent evidence to bolster the evidence that more than 150 minutes [per week] It has benefits, especially when it’s vigorous.”
Lieberman made a similar comment.
“What all these studies do show is that some exercise is always better than none, that over time the benefits level off, and that mixing it up is also beneficial,” Lieberman said. “Moderate aerobic activity is the foundation of any exercise regimen, but some degree of strength training is important, especially as we age, and some vigorous physical activity is almost always beneficial for those who can tolerate it safely.” In addition, the situation is complicated by “many factors such as age, gender, physical condition, health status, history of previous physical activity, etc.”
However, one thing is indisputable: if you focus on being healthy, there are unlikely to be any drawbacks.
“I would remind readers that this study (like so many) looks only at life span, not health span,” Lieberman explained. “Physical activity has stronger effects on health span than life span. Put another way, what physical activity really does is reduce one’s vulnerability to a wide range of diseases, thereby increasing length of health and therefore length of life (as well as quality of life). I think we should be more concerned with length of health.”
For more Salon articles on fitness:
