There was also a piece on BBC breakfast about HIIT trailing the programme, but I only caught the end. Should be interesting 🙂

BBC2 at 9pm,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17177251

3 mins of exercise is all we need a week apparently.

So we need to come up with something energetic that we can do weekly, and lasts about three minutes? Whatever will we do?

Whatever will we do?

Can we do the same thing 6 times?

Whatever will we do?

Can we do the same thing 6 times?

you want to hoover up 6 times a week? if you want, having a rest on sunday tho eh?

I doubt it’d take 30 secs if I used a hoover.

Does insulin sensitivity = ‘fitness’? No.

Does the individual with the ‘best’ insulin sensitivity win the race? No.

Will it help diabetics? Probably.

Will in make you faster on a bike? Unlikely (especially if you stop ‘normal’ training).

. It turns out that the genetic test they had done on me had suggested I was a non-responder and however much exercise I had done, and of whatever form, my aerobic fitness would not have improved.

really? this can’t be right

3 mins of exercise is all we need a week apparently.

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdEYikIpUmw[/video]
reminds me of this pearl!

how many minutes will i count in the office tomorrow before someone decides that they are most likely a non-responder, and reaches for the cake.

So, in a nutshell, doing just a little bit of exercise is better than doing no exercise?

Wow.

Who would have believed that.

Nobel Prize anyone?

Although if you’re one of the non-responding 20% you might actually need to put some effort in to getting fitter. Heaven forbid.

It’s about the nature of that little bit, jojo. So 3 mins of hard exercise can have a benefit whereas 3 mins of walking won’t. It represents a short cut, where you can get say an hour’s worth of exercise in 3 mins, and it could be scientifically sound.

That turns over decades of conventional thinking and is pretty much a newsflash in my book

Perhaps we should watch it and then have the debate?

For what it’s worth I think the premise is that the 3 minutes is all one needs to get the health benefits associated with exercise, not to produce an athlete.

Copied from my post on the other thread …

The World Health Organisation (who know a thing or two about these things … although obviously not as much as the STW experts ) published their revised recommendations for adults last year:

150 minutes of moderate+ intensity activity per week (preferably upping to 300 minutes); or 75+ minutes of high intensity

http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/factsheet_adults/en/index.html

If you’re not sure whether your activity counts as moderate or high intensity, you can always check in the Compendium of Physical Activities: http://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/

But basically, if you’ve increased youre breathing rate it counts as ‘moderate’, if you’re panting and sweating it counts as ‘high’ intensity.

And if you wait a few weeks, I’ll be publishing our research on the the data about the amount of physical activity people get from outdoor recreation (and yes that does include mountain biking!) Bet you can’t wait for that exciting installment.

The relationship between physical activity and health is a complex one, and I must admit I’m concerned that the Horizon programme will do more harm than good, by leading people to think that if they just do 3 minutes activity a week they’ll be ‘healthy’, which is not the case.

by leading people to think that if they just do 3 minutes activity a week they’ll be ‘healthy’, which is not the case

I expect the programme to stress that it has to be very high intensity. If anyone’s watching Horizon, I think they will be intelligent enough to take that on board.

I’m encouraged by it, I think that people currently are turned off the whole exercise thing because they think it’s too much work and they have to commit loads of time.

Plus I’m not convinced the WHO are at the cutting edge of physiology research.

Or perhaps they don’t know about these things…..

Another way of looking at the WHO is to say that since their inception in 1948 they have overseen the greatest increase in obesity, heart disease, lung cancer, diabetes and mental health problems in human history.

Er yeah, not sure that’s their fault though!

macdonalds is better funded than the WHO, there is only going to be one winner in that battle.

molgrips: I was being a bit flippant, but they do have a massive amount to answer for. What I was trying to say, very bluntly, is that the advice and support given by governments and major health organisations like the WHO have contributed hugely to our current problems:

A classic example is the cholesterol hypothesis shown in the youtube clip below. Hands up who thinks that high cholesterol intake causes heart disease! They have the information, but don’t get it out there because it disagrees with what they’ve said previously for years.

Don’t even get me started on “healthy whole grains”……

macdonalds is better funded than the WHO, there is only going to be one winner in that battle.

Well, theres certainly already one loser.
The public.
How ironic is it that the companies which pedal the crap thats making people obese, and so therefore assisting in bringing about their premature demise.
Looks to said customers for their profits.

Sorry, going OT there.
Carry on.

The relationship between physical activity and health is a complex one, and I must admit I’m concerned that the Horizon programme will do more harm than good, by leading people to think that if they just do 3 minutes activity a week they’ll be ‘healthy’, which is not the case.

Yup ,when I read the article those were my first thoughts .

Another false hope for the magic fix groups.

I reckon it IS a magic fix. 3 mins very hard exercise is far easier than hours of ‘cardio’ that used to be prescribed.

I reckon it IS a magic fix. 3 mins very hard exercise is far easier than hours of ‘cardio’ that used to be prescribed.

I believe HIIT is effective, for what thats worth.

But surely there must be a minimum, within the context of the goal to be achieved.
And who would choose to exercise more than is necessary to achieve your goal ?.

As we know, loads of people exercise, but they do not all share the same goals.

So, is 3 mins enough ?.
Well, that depends.

3 mins very hard (tabata style) exercise would kill about 20% of the population

Hmm, interesting, but I’d like to have seen more people doing the HIT stuff.

Watched the program. Three minutes * 4 times per week does not get you fitter – but it does have an impact on improving your bodies ability to deal with sugar

I liked the bit where it also said that for some people VO2 would never improve regardless of exercise

However the main point of the program was that our understanding of exercise it changing and that having the same recommendations for all us may not be appropriate.

, but I’d like to have seen more people doing the HIT stuff.

I think that is the point of the £5 million study that is following on

3 mins x 4 per week suits me well …

How can you do 3 minutes of high intensity workout with warming up for a good ten minutes?

a three minute bike ride would probably suit most people.

If I do say 3×20 second flat-out sprints during the course of a 1 hour bike ride does that count as HIIT?

Well if anyone’s considering buying an exercise bike – hold on for 3-4 weeks and there will be a whole load of “as-new” models on Ebay with about 12 mins use on them 😉

However the main point of the program was that our understanding of exercise it changing and that having the same recommendations for all us may not be appropriate.

totally agree, it applies to medication as well as exercise. We need to listen to our own bodies.

I think what they were saying was pretty valid – they didn’t claim they were turning people into athletes but just giving most of the benefits of the traditional 3 hours per week recommendation in just 3 minutes per week.

Thing I found most interesting was the genetic test and how it indicated ability to train VO2 Max, that’s kind of depressing if true (although potentially a useful excuse to :p ) – doubt joe public will be able to have the test any time soon though.

The inability to improve VO2 max won’t stop you getting fitter or stronger, but it’ll stop you becoming a top athlete.

This approach could make commutes a good way to get fitter.

I’ve decided I need to add some extra HIIT sessions in to my training.

The VO2 max thingy was interesting – I always assumed exercise leads to improved VO2 max.

If you’re a ‘non-responder’ I guess you’ll need to forget about becoming a world class marathon runner and concentrate on becoming a world class golfist or fisher …

Very interesting programme, with lots of strands to it…

… I did think that the conclusions put an over-emphasis on the HIT strand, at the expense of re-enforcing the change of routine during his working day.

The chap with the rather strange dress sense said that the presenter had increased his daily calorie burn by 500 kCal – that’s quite considerable, and probaly equates to an hour in the gym for a lot of folks