Home > Uncategorized > Micro-exercise and the shortest possible (useful) workout

Micro-exercise and the shortest possible (useful) workout

August 1st, 2011

This week’s Jockology column in the Globe and Mail takes a look at “micro-exercise”: what is the smallest bout of exercise that actually offers health benefits?

Exercise generally obeys the normal rules of mathematics. You can replace one 40-minute workout with two 20-minute bouts, or even four 10-minute bouts, and get roughly the same health benefits. But beyond that, the rules break down: Exercise in bouts lasting less than 10 minutes simply doesn’t count.

At least, that’s what exercise physiologists and public-health authorities have been telling us for years.

But influential groups such as the American College of Sports Medicine are now reconsidering the value of ultra-short bouts of activity, and a new Canadian study suggests that the gradual accumulation of “incidental physical activity” – sweeping the floor, taking the stairs – in bouts as short as one minute can also contribute to your cardiovascular fitness level… [READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE]

The column focuses on the findings of a recent study by Ashlee McGuire and Bob Ross at Queen’s University. For more details on that study, check out Ashlee’s guest post describing the study’s results over at Obesity Panacea. Also, the print version of the study was accompanies by Trish McAlaster’s graphic, which hasn’t yet been posted online [UPDATE: now it's posted here]. Unfortunately, it doesn’t really fit in this blog’s format, but nonetheless:

I’m reasonably confident that this is the first mention of the caloric expenditures involved in butchering small animals to make it into the Globe!

  1. RH
    August 1st, 2011 at 06:55 | #1

    “The surgeon general recomends that you chase them up the stairs before butcthering.”

  2. alex
    August 1st, 2011 at 07:27 | #2

    Yes, chickens that continue to run around after their heads are cut off will soon be in greater demand, because of the additional exercise they provide. :)

  3. RH
    August 1st, 2011 at 11:24 | #3

    3METs is murder!

  4. skyskier
    August 5th, 2011 at 15:38 | #4

    Bummer! It now reads as “sweeping floor” in the G&M article.

    Now I see the effort for digging the hole is 5 METs but how much work is it to get the body in there.

  5. alex
    August 5th, 2011 at 22:18 | #5

    @skyskier
    Oh, man – that sucks! At least I have the proof of the original graphic above…

  6. RH
    August 6th, 2011 at 05:07 | #6

    It kinda makes sense. The 3 mets are hardly going to come from the whack, if you you use a meat axe as in the graph.

  1. August 1st, 2011 at 17:26 | #1