First some questions on resistance/strength training. The definition of what this means for a given person is vague. Questions such as Intense training vs very, very light training come up. Do you need at least a minimum number of exercises per sessions or could some exercises be spread out over the day? Is yoga that has stance work vinyasas/flow, balance work, planks.etc... in addition to other parts of yoga also considering strength training and is it enough to make a difference? What about pilattes mat workouts (no machines)? In general when we talk about exercise providing benefits we don't often qualify with how long, how hard, how often to know when the benefits are better. Doing something regularly is obviously better than doing nothing. Clearly people with physical limits can't do as much and part of the answer is that you need to do what you can based on where you are physically since extremes can lead to injuries. But on the flip side, super easy, super light movement that doesn't cause some exertion probably has less benefit.
Regarding calorie restriction: Many, many people who are older are also struggling with extra weight so they will do some form of calorie restriction in an attempt to manage it. It gets complicated when you try to trade off the benefits of excess weight vs doing calorie restriction. The intermittent fasting people that use light eating (600-800 or so calories on one or two days per week) are probably not depriving themselves all that much on average. Also I wonder if calorie content was mentioned since there are people in the various camps of paleo, always healthy (a limited and tailored lower carb approach that eventually allows for whole grain and treats in small amounts but doesn't restrict calories), mediterranean diets, etc... all try to help manage weight by the content of food rather than the quantity.
Mark, thanks for your thoughts and questions. There's a lot here. I'll attempt to provide some answers based on what I know directly and what I've learned from others.
Re your question of types and intensity of strength training to gain a benefit: I'm not sure yoga qualifies as strength training (thus, I'm not sure it doesn't), although if you're not used to doing a particular style of yoga, or any yoga, I imagine that would leave your muscles feeling as if they got a workout. Greater functional and neuromuscular strength accrues even with light weights. The number of reps/day or workouts/week isn't as important as 1) strength training regularly and 2) working your muscles to considerable fatique. If yoga or pilates achieves that, great! If you need to add in plyometrics (no weights needed), that's easy enough. Regularly using your muscles will make you stronger. I'll reiterate that you don't need a single piece of equipment to strength train your body. Bodyweight workouts are excellent and help avoid injuries that can come from going too hard too soon with weights.
Re calorie restriction: count me as a big believer in AVOIDING this — especially for older adults. Losing muscle mass is among the biggest physical health challenges facing anyone over 50 and certainly over 60, 70, etc. Muscles need fuel. CR restricts that fuel. Unless you're a competitive, experienced bodybuilder, you don't need to restrict calories. (Which is not good for brain health, either — another reason to AVOID it for older adults.) Rather than restrict calories, older people who want/need to lose weight should focus first on 1) eating whole foods and lean proteins, eliminating ultra-processed staples, which will reduce the empty calories that contribute to the flab weight they want to lose, and 2) moving their bodies, aka regular exercise. CR is not a remedy for losing weight.
Intermittent fasting is not the same thing as CR. I don't restrict calories but I do adhere to a fasting schedule from 7pm-11am most days. (But I'm not rigid about it; if my body is hungry, I listen to that message and give it healthy food.) That doesn't work for everyone, and I'm not advocating it for anyone else. But I find that it works for me.
To sum up: exercise in any form, even brisk walking, greatly lowers mortality risk, and getting physically stronger does not require heavy weights, onerous workout schedules or even a single dumbbell. (Check out the catalog of #WorkoutWednesday 3-minute workouts on the AGING with STRENGTH homepage, for 18 workouts that achieve neuromuscular fitness.)
I am in my upper 60’s and most people think I’m in my upper 50’s and that’s because I’ve stayed active in every season even though I live in the northern most US.
I disagree with the author on the drugs and vaccines. Less pharmakia, limited or no vaccines, whole food vitamins while eating a variety of sound minimally-processed foods will give best nutrients the body needs. And outdoor time-the sun is not your enemy.
It’s super important to build relationships and maintain them through positive uplifting thought, speech and action. Positive vibes.
Tobyanne, I appreciate your comment and believe in rethinking Western medicine's reliance on drugs as a primary solution to illness without first considering nutrition, time spent in nature, social habits/isolation, etc. That said, I disagree with the idea of no vaccines; many vaccines are clinically proven to prevent diseases.
I respectfully disagree with you, Paul. Many of the childhood vaccines (70plus today) have not been thoroughly dbl blind tested and contain human genetics plus other nepharious ingredients that produce harm in the receiver. While the premise seems promising I do not believe most are necessary. Studies today in various countries show the unvaccinated healthier than those who partook,myself and my children as well.
Tobyanne, I am certainly glad that you and your children are healthy. We indeed respectfully disagree. In addition, I have to point out your assertions above that are not accurate:
"70plus childhood vaccines today" — According to CDC's 2024 childhood immunization schedule, children receive vaccines protecting against approximately 14-16 diseases, with some requiring multiple doses. The total number of individual shots (total shots, not unique vaccines) is around 25-30 by age 6, depending on the combinations used.
"Not thoroughly double-blind tested" — This is false. Vaccines go through extensive clinical trials, including randomized controlled trials, before approval. The FDA requires (at least it did up to recently) Phase I-III trials for all vaccines, with Phase III typically involving thousands of participants.
"Contain human genetics" — Some vaccines (varicella, MMR, hep A) are grown in human cell lines descended from tissue obtained decades ago. These cell lines are used for virus cultivation. The final vaccines contain only trace amounts of DNA fragments that are far below levels that could cause any effect.
"Nefarious ingredients" — Not sure what you mean here. Vaccine ingredients are publicly disclosed and include adjuvants (like aluminum salts) to boost immune response; preservatives (thimerosal has been removed from childhood vaccines except some flu vaccines); and stabilizers (like sugars and gelatin). These ingredients are present in tiny amounts and have been extensively studied for safety.
"Unvaccinated are healthier" — Large-scale, well-designed studies consistently show vaccines prevent serious diseases without causing overall health detriment. Studies claiming otherwise typically have significant methodological flaws like selection bias, lack of controlling for confounders, or inadequate sample sizes.
The importance of exercise cannot be overstated. At 79, I finally got back into strength training almost 4 years ago. I'm confident this has allowed me to pull thru medical problems I've had recently far easier and more quickly than had I not been in decent physical condition. But I was sidelined for over a month and I can tell you that atrophy happens. Back in the gym!
Tom, thanks for your comment. I'm a couple decades behind you but find the same dynamic: sidelined by a recent shoulder surgery, with no ability to do vigorous physical training, atrophy happens, as you say. Also, what often goes unmentioned or unnoticed, on the surface, anyway, is the mental/psych toll of suddenly not being able to physically exercise. For me, that's my most consistent form of meditation and stress relief, so if that goes away for several weeks or months...there's a consequence. I'm glad you're going strong. Keep going.
First some questions on resistance/strength training. The definition of what this means for a given person is vague. Questions such as Intense training vs very, very light training come up. Do you need at least a minimum number of exercises per sessions or could some exercises be spread out over the day? Is yoga that has stance work vinyasas/flow, balance work, planks.etc... in addition to other parts of yoga also considering strength training and is it enough to make a difference? What about pilattes mat workouts (no machines)? In general when we talk about exercise providing benefits we don't often qualify with how long, how hard, how often to know when the benefits are better. Doing something regularly is obviously better than doing nothing. Clearly people with physical limits can't do as much and part of the answer is that you need to do what you can based on where you are physically since extremes can lead to injuries. But on the flip side, super easy, super light movement that doesn't cause some exertion probably has less benefit.
Regarding calorie restriction: Many, many people who are older are also struggling with extra weight so they will do some form of calorie restriction in an attempt to manage it. It gets complicated when you try to trade off the benefits of excess weight vs doing calorie restriction. The intermittent fasting people that use light eating (600-800 or so calories on one or two days per week) are probably not depriving themselves all that much on average. Also I wonder if calorie content was mentioned since there are people in the various camps of paleo, always healthy (a limited and tailored lower carb approach that eventually allows for whole grain and treats in small amounts but doesn't restrict calories), mediterranean diets, etc... all try to help manage weight by the content of food rather than the quantity.
I guess I need to read the book.
Mark, thanks for your thoughts and questions. There's a lot here. I'll attempt to provide some answers based on what I know directly and what I've learned from others.
Re your question of types and intensity of strength training to gain a benefit: I'm not sure yoga qualifies as strength training (thus, I'm not sure it doesn't), although if you're not used to doing a particular style of yoga, or any yoga, I imagine that would leave your muscles feeling as if they got a workout. Greater functional and neuromuscular strength accrues even with light weights. The number of reps/day or workouts/week isn't as important as 1) strength training regularly and 2) working your muscles to considerable fatique. If yoga or pilates achieves that, great! If you need to add in plyometrics (no weights needed), that's easy enough. Regularly using your muscles will make you stronger. I'll reiterate that you don't need a single piece of equipment to strength train your body. Bodyweight workouts are excellent and help avoid injuries that can come from going too hard too soon with weights.
Re calorie restriction: count me as a big believer in AVOIDING this — especially for older adults. Losing muscle mass is among the biggest physical health challenges facing anyone over 50 and certainly over 60, 70, etc. Muscles need fuel. CR restricts that fuel. Unless you're a competitive, experienced bodybuilder, you don't need to restrict calories. (Which is not good for brain health, either — another reason to AVOID it for older adults.) Rather than restrict calories, older people who want/need to lose weight should focus first on 1) eating whole foods and lean proteins, eliminating ultra-processed staples, which will reduce the empty calories that contribute to the flab weight they want to lose, and 2) moving their bodies, aka regular exercise. CR is not a remedy for losing weight.
Intermittent fasting is not the same thing as CR. I don't restrict calories but I do adhere to a fasting schedule from 7pm-11am most days. (But I'm not rigid about it; if my body is hungry, I listen to that message and give it healthy food.) That doesn't work for everyone, and I'm not advocating it for anyone else. But I find that it works for me.
To sum up: exercise in any form, even brisk walking, greatly lowers mortality risk, and getting physically stronger does not require heavy weights, onerous workout schedules or even a single dumbbell. (Check out the catalog of #WorkoutWednesday 3-minute workouts on the AGING with STRENGTH homepage, for 18 workouts that achieve neuromuscular fitness.)
I hope that's helpful.
I am in my upper 60’s and most people think I’m in my upper 50’s and that’s because I’ve stayed active in every season even though I live in the northern most US.
I disagree with the author on the drugs and vaccines. Less pharmakia, limited or no vaccines, whole food vitamins while eating a variety of sound minimally-processed foods will give best nutrients the body needs. And outdoor time-the sun is not your enemy.
It’s super important to build relationships and maintain them through positive uplifting thought, speech and action. Positive vibes.
Tobyanne, I appreciate your comment and believe in rethinking Western medicine's reliance on drugs as a primary solution to illness without first considering nutrition, time spent in nature, social habits/isolation, etc. That said, I disagree with the idea of no vaccines; many vaccines are clinically proven to prevent diseases.
If it’s really clinically proven.
Danny, they are quite clearly proven, unless you simply don't believe the science.
I respectfully disagree with you, Paul. Many of the childhood vaccines (70plus today) have not been thoroughly dbl blind tested and contain human genetics plus other nepharious ingredients that produce harm in the receiver. While the premise seems promising I do not believe most are necessary. Studies today in various countries show the unvaccinated healthier than those who partook,myself and my children as well.
Tobyanne, I am certainly glad that you and your children are healthy. We indeed respectfully disagree. In addition, I have to point out your assertions above that are not accurate:
"70plus childhood vaccines today" — According to CDC's 2024 childhood immunization schedule, children receive vaccines protecting against approximately 14-16 diseases, with some requiring multiple doses. The total number of individual shots (total shots, not unique vaccines) is around 25-30 by age 6, depending on the combinations used.
"Not thoroughly double-blind tested" — This is false. Vaccines go through extensive clinical trials, including randomized controlled trials, before approval. The FDA requires (at least it did up to recently) Phase I-III trials for all vaccines, with Phase III typically involving thousands of participants.
"Contain human genetics" — Some vaccines (varicella, MMR, hep A) are grown in human cell lines descended from tissue obtained decades ago. These cell lines are used for virus cultivation. The final vaccines contain only trace amounts of DNA fragments that are far below levels that could cause any effect.
"Nefarious ingredients" — Not sure what you mean here. Vaccine ingredients are publicly disclosed and include adjuvants (like aluminum salts) to boost immune response; preservatives (thimerosal has been removed from childhood vaccines except some flu vaccines); and stabilizers (like sugars and gelatin). These ingredients are present in tiny amounts and have been extensively studied for safety.
"Unvaccinated are healthier" — Large-scale, well-designed studies consistently show vaccines prevent serious diseases without causing overall health detriment. Studies claiming otherwise typically have significant methodological flaws like selection bias, lack of controlling for confounders, or inadequate sample sizes.
I’m in my mid-70s, and I agree 100%. Nature has worked much better for me than drugs or vaccines.
Tom, I appreciate your comment. Nature is incredibly beneficial. And so are vaccines.
The importance of exercise cannot be overstated. At 79, I finally got back into strength training almost 4 years ago. I'm confident this has allowed me to pull thru medical problems I've had recently far easier and more quickly than had I not been in decent physical condition. But I was sidelined for over a month and I can tell you that atrophy happens. Back in the gym!
Tom, thanks for your comment. I'm a couple decades behind you but find the same dynamic: sidelined by a recent shoulder surgery, with no ability to do vigorous physical training, atrophy happens, as you say. Also, what often goes unmentioned or unnoticed, on the surface, anyway, is the mental/psych toll of suddenly not being able to physically exercise. For me, that's my most consistent form of meditation and stress relief, so if that goes away for several weeks or months...there's a consequence. I'm glad you're going strong. Keep going.
Thanks. Hadn't thought of the stress relief provided by the regular exercise but definitely agree with your thoughts