Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
8 Hour a Day Office Job, 30 Minutes of Exercise a Day Not Enough
Replies
-
I had it all working nicely as I worked from home. I used to work out at lunchtime in the gym
Now am commuting everyday working in an office. I am so tired when I get home.
My fitbit is so under worked right now.
I am week 4 now so hoping I just get used to it and get my myself together.
when I do start up again it will only be 30 mins max but I will be making sure am working hard1 -
canadianlbs wrote: »CipherZero wrote: »"Can't do more" is a matter of prioritization.
i love it when people say stuff like this . . . not
i'm lucky. i ride to work and so far i've been able to find something that makes that possible, every time. and that isn't really just a matter of 'prioritization'. it's luck that i've had options that lined up with priorities. but if i were working 8.5 hours a day, driving or bussing it for two to get to and from that job, and then trying to get that mandatory 8 hours of sleep every day too . . . i would be clinically depressed within two months if yet another hour was spoken for by yet another mandatory 'must' out of the 5 and a half hours left for myself in a day. there is just no. zarking. way i'd maintain it; i'd crack. so yeah; i'd be prioritizing mental health over the physical kind, probably.
i get that a lot of people don't get that. but to me every time someone comes up with yet another prescription and yet another mark that you have to hit in the modern world in order to make yourself 'viable', and then talks glibly about 'priorities' i want to smack them. it's just like that 'tax free day' thing, where the point where you're finally getting to keep all the money you earn keeps moving deeper and deeper with every year.
this kind of thing is the same, to me. the point where you have any actual free time, yours to spend any actual way that you want, just moves later and later into the day all the time.
Take a careful look at how much time you spend watching TV, social media, etc and say you don't have time to move.0 -
Big5BigChange wrote: »There has been a lot of interest in this in recent years. However, many studies say that no amount of additional exercise can offset the damaging impact of sitting for extended periods because this isn't a matter of just trying to outrun sedentary habits. There is obviously a calories in vs. calories out argument to sitting too much, but there is also an argument that sitting for prolonged periods is bad for you in other ways. It's a bit like saying somebody in solitary confinement for a year, will be totally OK after a 2-day chat with a friend. The idea is (and I am no scientist, so am not arguing for or against) is that sitting down for long periods of times is damaging IN ITSELF and has poor impact on the way the body metabolises energy as well as forces the body to unnaturally hold unnatural positions. It's like subjecting yourself to stress positions as done in torture and interrogations, wreaking havoc on muscles! In this respect, many offices are now encouraging standing desks (where you can heighten your desk and stand at it for the majority of the day rather than sit). Other options are to stand up every time you're taking a telephone call (it makes you sound more assertive too BTW) or maybe everytime you need to read something in hard copy. Depending on your job - try to find habitual things that are easy to do while standing and then become ONLY things you do standing. Point is that being less sedentary is one thing and can be offset by more exercise later. However, regardless of the amount of exercise you do later, it doesn't offset the OTHER damaging effects of sitting for long periods without a break.
On that note - I am going to get up from my desk and make myself a cup of tea. A brief "stretch of my legs" will do me the world of good!!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/24/sitting-too-long-death_n_884152.html
PS and by the way - just because people sit for long periods of time - doesn't mean they are "lazy". I used to work 14-15 hour days in a high pressure job where I was literally GLUED to my computer screen for the entire day and barely even stopped for lunch, if at all. Ironically I was at my skinniest then, as I didn't eat and was so stressed, the weight fell off. I wasn't healthy though!!
WOW, what type of field was this job in?!0 -
melaniedscott wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I'd tackle the issue of a job where you take 2 hours of travel each way while working 10 hours. That can't be healthy psychologically.
Some of us work FT jobs with less commute (and average more like 9-9.5 hrs. / day) and are also full time grad students. Or work more than 1 job.
In that case I'd tell you I'm envious of your schedule because when I was a student my classes were all over the place and could start anywhere from 8 am to 6 pm, impossible to have a full time job with that.
Not impossible. Just complicated. I managed a group home fulltime + OT for a year and carried a full load of classes. My job was at night and my classes during the day.
I'm no longer a grad student (finished my last class 10/16/16 - yay!), but it was all online. So the working hours had some flexibility. There were deadlines to do all of the assignments, view videos of lectures (if any), read textbooks, articles, etc. and to write our various assignments and such. But it could be done any hour of the day as long as it was done by the deadline. Of course, there are so many hours in the day. If I was just a student, no problem. Since I also worked, and there was only so much time, I actually took vacation on some days when I knew a big assignment was coming due soon. For my final research paper, I took several days off from work. I really started my weight loss journey on 1/1/14 and started my degree program in the same month. I did exercise on occasion while working on the degree, but not every single day or even every week.
Now that I've graduated, I've worked on putting together a daily exercise plan and started yesterday. I put a lot of thought into the the plan I put together and it is designed to be safe and effective for my long-term goals. In the 2 weeks while putting that together, I did some hiking and running outside of the plan. So no, I didn't really have the time to exercise consistently. And now that I have the time, I am exercising consistently.1 -
Reading this at the office just made me look at the clock, realize I haven't been on my feet in almost 2 hours, and now I'm typing this while standing up, shifting in place
3 -
DetroitDarin wrote: »Everyone is born with knowledge and folks need to make better choices based on instinct.
Most people who base their eating patter on "instincts" are on here because they are now overweight.6 -
trigden1991 wrote: »DetroitDarin wrote: »Everyone is born with knowledge and folks need to make better choices based on instinct.
Most people who base their eating patter on "instincts" are on here because they are now overweight.
But i bet in the back of their mind and tummy they know they shouldn't be eating that extra donut or polishing off the family size bag of chips every night
They just choose to ignore that instinct/thought/feeling. 0 -
This is actually really good news. I remember the initial report was basically that working out wouldn't help you at all, you would have to actually get up every few hours. I can extend my workout before I can remember to get up at work, sadly.1
-
Packerjohn wrote: »Take a careful look at how much time you spend watching TV, social media, etc and say you don't have time to move.
not precisely my point.
or maybe it is, precisely, my point. tv and social media aren't my own personal thing; i'm not into either of them. but maybe what gets to me about this kind of prescriptiveness can be expressed by using the 'macro' model.
food's easy. there's 30 grammes of protein in a measured portion of foodstuff x. everyone gets that 30 grammes from that food, unless they're medically anomalous. that makes it easy to preach and prescribe for the whole world about food.
but psychological and mental macros do count. and those are not standard at all. so for some people, when you're being lofty about prioritization, i feel you're oblivious to the fact that yes, some people do prioritize personally essential macros over exercise time . . . and a lot of the time their priority stacking is more right for them that you might think.
i get *kitten*-all from tv and social media, personally in fact they leach something out of my mind - but maybe for someone else that isn't true. my own essential nutrient that i can't get without being parked on my butt is reading, but i don't swan around dictating everyone else in the world has to read two or three works of real literature every week - not just crap, the real stuff - or else their priorities are faintly contemptible. 2 -
canadianlbs wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Take a careful look at how much time you spend watching TV, social media, etc and say you don't have time to move.
not precisely my point.
or maybe it is, precisely, my point. tv and social media aren't my own personal thing; i'm not into either of them. but maybe what gets to me about this kind of prescriptiveness can be expressed by using the 'macro' model.
food's easy. there's 30 grammes of protein in a measured portion of foodstuff x. everyone gets that 30 grammes from that food, unless they're medically anomalous. that makes it easy to preach and prescribe for the whole world about food.
but psychological and mental macros do count. and those are not standard at all. so for some people, when you're being lofty about prioritization, i feel you're oblivious to the fact that yes, some people do prioritize personally essential macros over exercise time . . . and a lot of the time their priority stacking is more right for them that you might think.
i get *kitten*-all from tv and social media, personally in fact they leach something out of my mind - but maybe for someone else that isn't true. my own essential nutrient that i can't get without being parked on my butt is reading, but i don't swan around dictating everyone else in the world has to read two or three works of real literature every week - not just crap, the real stuff - or else their priorities are faintly contemptible.
Well if someone's "personal macros" involve sitting on their *kitten* (TV, reading or whatever) guess it's up to them. Research is showing though that if people don't get some movement their physical quality and length of live will be reduced.
My point is "I don't have time to exercise", for the vast majority saying it is really translated as "I don't prioritize it".1 -
Christine_72 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »DetroitDarin wrote: »Everyone is born with knowledge and folks need to make better choices based on instinct.
Most people who base their eating patter on "instincts" are on here because they are now overweight.
But i bet in the back of their mind and tummy they know they shouldn't be eating that extra donut or polishing off the family size bag of chips every night They just choose to ignore that instinct/thought/feeling.
My instincts are telling me that I need donuts right about now. Thanks for that 3 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »DetroitDarin wrote: »Everyone is born with knowledge and folks need to make better choices based on instinct.
Most people who base their eating patter on "instincts" are on here because they are now overweight.
But i bet in the back of their mind and tummy they know they shouldn't be eating that extra donut or polishing off the family size bag of chips every night They just choose to ignore that instinct/thought/feeling.
My instincts are telling me that I need donuts right about now. Thanks for that
Mine are saying chips.1 -
Packerjohn wrote: »I saw in another article related to this study, the average American spends 5 non-work hours a day in front of a tube.
Individual results may vary, but on average people can do more but choose not to.
Very glad I have NEVER been in that "average". Most days the "tube" does not even come on. Who the hell has time for that?0 -
stevencloser wrote: »I'd tackle the issue of a job where you take 2 hours of travel each way while working 10 hours. That can't be healthy psychologically.
That's a huge amount of travel alright. I wouldn't want to do that, I used to drive over an hour one way and that's bad enough at half the time.0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »I know you can add another 30 mins to your workout. An hour a day is hardly any sacrifice.
Let's see...
Wake 0530 - shower, dress, breakfast
Leave house 0615
arrive work 0830 - drive to the station, train, then a fifteen minute walk
finish work 1830
arrive home c2100
dinner, housework and a bodyweight session will take up to midnight
bed at about 0030
merely an example of where vacuous statements around adding time to a workout really don't add to the debate.
I would hardly call the statement vacuous. Look, if you really wanted to add 30 minutes a day of activity you would find a way. Stop making excuses and just get it done, or don't. But either way, own it.
And as anticipated, another vacuous comment.
So what solution would you suggest? New job that doesn't involve that amount of travel? Not having a disabled partner? Less than 5 hours sleep? Excuses perhaps, but finding alternative approaches mean disruptive, rather than incremental, lifestyle change. Finding half an hour isn't quite as simple as the original, and indeed your response, would suggest.
I'll acknowledge that the description of the day was slightly disingenuous, I'll fit in two 1.5-2hour sessions midweek, then a 2-3 hour and a 3-4 hour session at weekends. Achieving that involves considerable financial impact, as facilitating the midweek sessions costs c£200 each, to my business.
I'm sorry, but computing your health in the respect just isn't something I would do. I've taken a considerable pay cut to get to a more healthy life and wouldn't go back. More money isn't worth the health impacts and I learned that after my father, highly successful, ended where he is now and regrets that. Life is more than a bank balance.1 -
DetroitDarin wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »DetroitDarin wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »DetroitDarin wrote: »What hits me most is this: Studies are crap. Everyone is born with knowledge and folks need to make better choices based on instinct. We humans want a study or authority figure to tell us what to do so we can avoid responsibility if we end up not liking the outcome.
Humans are not born with knowledge, they are born with instinctual response. That instinct is actually what makes people fat in a land of plenty and ease. Knowledge and effort are required to undo it.
Not at the base - not at the core. The core - the foundation is simply "Want-to". Knowledge will fix nothing.
Hence the effort part. Knowing and doing are generally useless by themselves. My knowing how to track food intake would be pointless if I didn't do it. My tracking food intake would be pointless if I didn't know to weigh (or at least get a very good estimate) of what I was eating. We see examples of both here, daily.
The exact same thing can apply to exercises. I know what lifting regimen works for me. That doesn't change theh fact that said knowledge was useless to me, during the last three years when I was being lazy as *kitten*.
And that goes to my point - studies are silly. Study results are based on interpretation. Tomorrow some new study will say after 8hrs at work one should nap for 2 hours then eat an oreo pack. (shrug)
Studies to guide us are goofy. We - anyone semi-enlighted about their body - know what to do.
No, the only way you achieve enlightenment is through study and if you think you know better than the research have fun with that.1 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I'd tackle the issue of a job where you take 2 hours of travel each way while working 10 hours. That can't be healthy psychologically.
That's a huge amount of travel alright. I wouldn't want to do that, I used to drive over an hour one way and that's bad enough at half the time.
Yeah, I seriously considered a job where I would have had to move or deal with a 1.5 hour commute each way (in awful traffic -- reverse commute from the city to a suburb that was pretty far out). I thought about ways to handle it, audiobooks, maybe trying to do weird hours, but decided I just couldn't. Currently it annoys me enough that my commute is 45 minutes each way, mainly because it's way too close for that to make sense, not that I think that's inherently bad. I'm fortunate that I can run the whole way in about an hour (or longer if I want a longer route), bike it in 30 minutes (or again longer if I want a longer ride, which I normally do, at least one way), or get off the L early and walk a good bit of it, so it's easy to combine with activity.
I was surprised when looking at commuting statistics in the US, though, that most DON'T have even so long a commute as mine -- average is around 25 minutes, although it varies a decent amount: https://project.wnyc.org/commute-times-us/embed.html#6.00/42.009/-87.905.
Average in my zip is 36 minutes.0 -
I'll admit that I do spend a fair amount of time at the computer once I get home from my desk job, but I'm also one of those people with an above average commute time. On average I commute about 1 hour (give or take about 5 minutes) to work, then have roughly a 75 minute commute home. Sometimes it takes me 90 minutes to get home if the traffic is heavier than normal.0
-
Packerjohn wrote: »New study out saying the 30 minutes of moderate exercise recommended per day is not enough if you sit 8 hours in an office/car, etc.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/07/27/study-suggests-new-formula-for-physical-activity-8-hours-of-sitting-means-1-hour-of-exercise/
From the article:
“The current public health recommendations for physical activity are based on very solid evidence and our data support these. … However, if you sit for many hours a day (i.e. > 8 hours) you need to do at least one hour of moderate activity every day to offset the association between sitting time and mortality,” Ekelund wrote."
I agree the body was not created to just sit in one place all day ... get up and move0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions