While experts were debating whether to recommend a half-hour of daily exercise,
new research showed that it may not matter. When it comes to staving off heart
disease, a 12-year study of 44,452 male health professionals revealed that what
counts most is not how long you exercise, but how hard...
For example, among men who preferred walking for exercise, those who walked
briskly were less likely to develop heart disease than slower-paecd walkers,
regardless of whether they walked for more or less time...
____________________________________
This topic is from Reader's Digest's Books
Well I'm practically confused about this kind of topic. Many people say that the
longer you exercise, the more you lose calories and lower the chance of getting
heart diseases and when children(even teenagers) exercise harder, they will not
grow taller due to sudden use of heavy weights...Now the researchers believed
that people should exercise harder. Which is which is healthier? HARDER or
LONGER, please reply I'm really confused....Thanks for your comments, replies
and most of all your cooperation
i personally think its a bit of both to be honest, the fact is i dont believe
walking raises a persons heartbeat to a standard that it is actually
"working" (not as much as say cycling, or weight training) and is
therefore not a great and solid "exercise for the experiment. weight
training is good if you want an increase in size (muscle), if you want to lose
fat i suggest aerobically training for around an hour (4/5 times a week).
personally i think that one of the best kind of training is circuit training
(press ups, tricep dips, crunches, etc.) for its hard and can be modified to
suit your needs.
neway im going off subject now, but as for growth i believe thats more
genetically related. i gotta go now but ill keep checkin for others veiws. bye.
Quote by Andrathi personally think its a
bit of both to be honest, the fact is i dont
believe walking raises a persons heartbeat to a standard that it is
actually "working" (not as much as say cycling, or weight training)
and
is therefore not a great and solid "exercise for the experiment. weight
training is good if you want an increase in size (muscle), if you want
to lose fat i suggest aerobically training for around an hour (4/5
times a week). personally i think that one of the best kind of training
is circuit training (press ups, tricep dips, crunches, etc.) for its
hard and can be modified to suit your needs.
neway im going off subject now, but as for growth i believe thats more
genetically related. i gotta go now but ill keep checkin for others
veiws. bye.
Quote by Rizy123Indeed circuit training I
feel is very good! Some people may not want
to increase muscle mass and who wouldn't wanna tone their body?
Everyone should exercise a little bit jus to keep healthy and
fit!
I agree, balance is always important. If you don't push your self the comfort
zone, then it woun't have any effect. But if it is not often enough, then it
still won't have any effect. Basicly, everyone has to do what they feel happy
with, but it will only be as effective as the amount of effort you put it .
Yea...longer exercise promotes development of stamina and endurance, while
short, intense bouts help build strength and muscle mass.
Cardiorespiratory fitness is largely determined by one's endurance, though, so
low-intensity, high-duration exercises (aerobic exercises) would seem to be more
beneficial in the long run.
Effects of exercise, especially the anaerobic (those that have to do with
strength), disappear within two or so weeks of non-training. So, a maintenance
program is needed. ^^
Overall, I think "longer" would be better...but it would depend on the
goals of the individual.
Anyways, all that info comes from my PT (physical therapy) studies. Concerning
the article..."longer" exercise does help promote overall health,
since it ups the cardiorespiratory fitness of the person (he/she doesn't get out
of breath easily; can work longer; circulation and distribution of nutrients and
oxygen to the body tissues is improved).
About the use of weights...not really sure, but perhaps it's because of the
stress placed on the growing bones of the child that stunts their growth...like
if you wear very tight shoes for your whole life, your feet "shrink"
to accommodate itself in there. I guess that it would only apply to children
(around puberty or so...it shouldn't be a problem for older teenagers (18
above)..then again, I'm not really sure. Height is mainly predetermined by
genes, though...
Hehe...sorry for a long post. It's just that I feel this is something I should
know...and school's starting soon, so I'm getting geared-up for it. ^^ Hope you
learned something, and thanks for an interesting topic and bit of info as well.
^^
While experts were debating whether to recommend a half-hour of daily exercise, new research showed that it may not matter. When it comes to staving off heart disease, a 12-year study of 44,452 male health professionals revealed that what counts most is not how long you exercise, but how hard...
For example, among men who preferred walking for exercise, those who walked briskly were less likely to develop heart disease than slower-paecd walkers, regardless of whether they walked for more or less time...
____________________________________
This topic is from Reader's Digest's Books
Well I'm practically confused about this kind of topic. Many people say that the longer you exercise, the more you lose calories and lower the chance of getting heart diseases and when children(even teenagers) exercise harder, they will not grow taller due to sudden use of heavy weights...Now the researchers believed that people should exercise harder. Which is which is healthier? HARDER or LONGER, please reply I'm really confused....Thanks for your comments, replies and most of all your cooperation
Harder is always better!!!
I do reps with heavy weights at very short intervals. Pumping iron is something I really like.
Basically it works like this:
If you work longer, you're building stamina. If you exercise harder, you're building power. Depends on what you want.
i personally think its a bit of both to be honest, the fact is i dont believe walking raises a persons heartbeat to a standard that it is actually "working" (not as much as say cycling, or weight training) and is therefore not a great and solid "exercise for the experiment. weight training is good if you want an increase in size (muscle), if you want to lose fat i suggest aerobically training for around an hour (4/5 times a week). personally i think that one of the best kind of training is circuit training (press ups, tricep dips, crunches, etc.) for its hard and can be modified to suit your needs.
neway im going off subject now, but as for growth i believe thats more genetically related. i gotta go now but ill keep checkin for others veiws. bye.
Indeed circuit training I feel is very good! Some people may not want to increase muscle mass and who wouldn't wanna tone their body?
Everyone should exercise a little bit jus to keep healthy and fit!
I agree, balance is always important. If you don't push your self the comfort zone, then it woun't have any effect. But if it is not often enough, then it still won't have any effect. Basicly, everyone has to do what they feel happy with, but it will only be as effective as the amount of effort you put it
Yea...longer exercise promotes development of stamina and endurance, while short, intense bouts help build strength and muscle mass.
Cardiorespiratory fitness is largely determined by one's endurance, though, so low-intensity, high-duration exercises (aerobic exercises) would seem to be more beneficial in the long run.
Effects of exercise, especially the anaerobic (those that have to do with strength), disappear within two or so weeks of non-training. So, a maintenance program is needed. ^^
Overall, I think "longer" would be better...but it would depend on the goals of the individual.
Anyways, all that info comes from my PT (physical therapy) studies. Concerning the article..."longer" exercise does help promote overall health, since it ups the cardiorespiratory fitness of the person (he/she doesn't get out of breath easily; can work longer; circulation and distribution of nutrients and oxygen to the body tissues is improved).
About the use of weights...not really sure, but perhaps it's because of the stress placed on the growing bones of the child that stunts their growth...like if you wear very tight shoes for your whole life, your feet "shrink" to accommodate itself in there. I guess that it would only apply to children (around puberty or so...it shouldn't be a problem for older teenagers (18 above)..then again, I'm not really sure. Height is mainly predetermined by genes, though...
Hehe...sorry for a long post. It's just that I feel this is something I should know...and school's starting soon, so I'm getting geared-up for it. ^^ Hope you learned something, and thanks for an interesting topic and bit of info as well. ^^