Age Limits On Exercise?

In Tuesday’s newsletter, we asked you your opinion on whether we should exercise less as we get older, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

• About 42% said “No, we must keep pushing ourselves, to keep our youth“
• About 29% said “Only to the extent necessary due to chronic conditions etc”
• About 29% said “Yes, we should keep gently moving but otherwise take it easier”

One subscriber who voted for “No, we must keep pushing ourselves, to keep our youth“ wrote to add:

❝I’m 71 and I push myself. I’m not as fast or strong as I used to be but, I feel great when I push myself instead of going through the motions. I listen to my body!❞

~ 10almonds subscriber

One subscriber who voted for “Only to the extent necessary due to chronic conditions etc” wrote to add:

❝It’s never too late to get stronger. Important to keep your strength and balance. I am a Silver Sneakers instructor and I see first hand how helpful regular exercise is for seniors.❞

~ 10almonds subscriber

One subscriber who voted to say “Yes, we should keep gently moving but otherwise take it easier” wrote to add:

❝Keep moving but be considerate and respectful of your aging body. It’s a time to find balance in life and not put yourself into a positon to damage youself by competing with decades younger folks (unless you want to) – it will take much longer to bounce back.❞

~ 10almonds subscriber

These will be important, because we’ll come back to them at the end.

So what does the science say?

Endurance exercise is for young people only: True or False?

False! With proper training, age is no barrier to serious endurance exercise.

Here’s a study that looked at marathon-runners of various ages, and found that…

• the majority of middle-aged and elderly athletes have training histories of less than seven years of running
• there are virtually no relevant running time differences (p<0.01) per age in marathon finishers from 20 to 55 years
• after 55 years, running times did increase on average, but not consistently (i.e. there were still older runners with comparable times to the younger age bracket)

See: Performance, training and lifestyle parameters of marathon runners aged 20–80 years: results of the PACE-study

The researchers took this as evidence of aging being indeed a biological process that can be sped up or slowed down by various lifestyle factors.

See also:

Age & Aging: What Can (And Can’t) We Do About It?

this covers the many aspects of biological aging (it’s not one number, but many!) and how our various different biological ages are often not in sync with each other, and how we can optimize each of them that can be optimized

Resistance training is for young people only: True or False?

False! In fact, it’s not only possible for older people, but is also associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality.

Specifically, those who reported strength-training at least once per week enjoyed longer lives than those who did not.

You may be thinking “is this just the horse-riding thing again, where correlation is not causation and it’s just that healthier people (for other reasons) were able to do strength-training more, rather than the other way around?“

…which is a good think to think of, so well-spotted if you were thinking that!

But in this case no; the benefits remained when other things were controlled for:

❝Adjusted for demographic variables, health behaviors and health conditions, a statistically significant effect on mortality remained.

Although the effects on cardiac and cancer mortality were no longer statistically significant, the data still pointed to a benefit.

Importantly, after the physical activity level was controlled for, people who reported strength exercises appeared to see a greater mortality benefit than those who reported physical activity alone.❞

~ Dr. Jennifer Kraschnewski

See the study: Is strength training associated with mortality benefits? A 15 year cohort study of US older adults

And a pop-sci article about it: Strength training helps older adults live longer

Closing thoughts

As it happens… All three of the subscribers we quoted all had excellent points!

Because in this case it’s less a matter of “should”, and more a selection of options:

• We (most of us, at least) can gain/regain/maintain the kind of strength and fitness associated with much younger people, and we need not be afraid of exercising accordingly (assuming having worked up to such, not just going straight from couch to marathon, say).
• We must nevertheless be mindful of chronic conditions or even passing illnesses/injuries, but that goes for people of any age
• We also can’t argue against a “safety first” cautious approach to exercise. After all, sure, maybe we can run marathons at any age, but that doesn’t mean we have to. And sure, maybe we can train to lift heavy weights, but if we’re content to be able to carry the groceries or perhaps take our partner’s weight in the dance hall (or the bedroom!), then (if we’re also at least maintaining our bones and muscles at a healthy level) that’s good enough already.

Which prompts the question, what do you want to be able to do, now and years from now? What’s important to you?

For inspiration, check out: Train For The Event Of Your Life!

Take care!

What’s The Real Deal With The Paleo Diet?

The Paleo diet is popular, and has some compelling arguments for it.

Detractors, meanwhile, have derided Paleo’s inclusion of modern innovations, and have also claimed it’s bad for the heart.

But where does the science stand?

First: what is it?

The Paleo diet looks to recreate the diet of the Paleolithic era—in terms of nutrients, anyway. So for example, you’re perfectly welcome to use modern cooking techniques and enjoy foods that aren’t from your immediate locale. Just, not foods that weren’t a thing yet. To give a general idea:

Paleo includes:

• Meat and animal fats
• Eggs
• Fruits and vegetables
• Nuts and seeds
• Herbs and spices

Paleo excludes:

• Processed foods
• Dairy products
• Refined sugar
• Grains of any kind
• Legumes, including any beans or peas

Enjoyers of the Mediterranean Diet or the DASH heart-healthy diet, or those with a keen interest in nutritional science in general, may notice they went off a bit with those last couple of items at the end there, by excluding things that scientific consensus holds should be making up a substantial portion of our daily diet.

But let’s break it down…

First thing: is it accurate?

Well, aside from the modern cooking techniques, the global market of goods, and the fact it does include food that didn’t exist yet (most fruits and vegetables in their modern form are the result of agricultural engineering a mere few thousand years ago, especially in the Americas)…

…no, no it isn’t. Best current scientific consensus is that in the Paleolithic we ate mostly plants, with about 3% of our diet coming from animal-based foods. Much like most modern apes.

Ok, so it’s not historically accurate. No biggie, we’re pragmatists. Is it healthy, though?

Well, health involves a lot of factors, so that depends on what you have in mind. But for example, it can be good for weight loss, almost certainly because of cutting out refined sugar and, by virtue of cutting out all grains, that means having cut out refined flour products, too:

Diet Review: Paleo Diet for Weight Loss

Measured head-to-head with the Mediterranean diet for all-cause mortality and specific mortality, it performed better than the control (Standard American Diet, or “SAD”), probably for the same reasons we just mentioned. However, it was outperformed by the Mediterranean Diet:

Paleolithic and Mediterranean Diet Pattern Scores Are Inversely Associated with All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality in Adults

So in lay terms: the Paleo is definitely better than just eating lots of refined foods and sugar and stuff, but it’s still not as good as the Mediterranean Diet.

What about some of the health risk claims? Are they true or false?

A common knee-jerk criticism of the paleo-diet is that it’s heart-unhealthy. So much red meat, saturated fat, and no grains and legumes.

The science agrees.

For example, a recent study on long-term adherence to the Paleo diet concluded:

❝Results indicate long-term adherence is associated with different gut microbiota and increased serum trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO), a gut-derived metabolite associated with cardiovascular disease. A variety of fiber components, including whole grain sources may be required to maintain gut and cardiovascular health.❞

~ Genoni et al, 2020

Bottom line:

The Paleo Diet is an interesting concept, and certainly can be good for short-term weight loss. In the long-term, however (and: especially for our heart health) we need less meat and more grains and legumes.