
Vitamins Found to Curb Exercise Benefits - theoneill
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/health/research/12exer.html?em
======
radu_floricica
This is off-topic, but am I the only one to find all nytimes articles utterly
useless? They're all very well written and interesting, but after reading them
I never know more then I did before. I've made a habit of not clicking them,
but then I find some interesting title and click... only to again waste 5
minutes.

~~~
chris11
I'd say that I like the nytimes. Comparing it to other newspapers the articles
seem a lot better written and more informative (possibly with the exception of
the multi-page spreads that local papers sometimes produce).

At the minimum it seems to be of the same level of quality of any other
decently sized newspaper. I can think of an independent newspaper that has
some extremely well written articles, but it seems to me that the problem is
more with the format rather than the nytimes. So what newspapers are more
informative?

~~~
biohacker42
I'm not sure if there are any _newspapers_ that are more informative. Perhaps
the Irish Times, probably not the Seattle P.I.

Harder news sources like scientific and technical journals, and a very few
websites and the occasional magazine like the Atlantic monthly and the
economist are about the only things that come to mind.

------
ericwaller
What a terrible title. The researching doctor clear states:

 _antioxidants in general cause certain effects that inhibit otherwise
positive effects of exercise_

It's like claiming "food found to cause heart disease," based on a study of
cholesterol. It's true, but totally overblown.

------
rarrrrrr
Considering exercise (especially resistance training) increases your
metabolism and overall oxygen intake for many hours after, if you aren't
getting antioxidants you will be slowly killing yourself. They don't have to
come from vitamins, though. Green tea, blueberries, and purple corn are all
excellent sources.

~~~
WilliamLP
> Considering exercise (especially resistance training) increases your
> metabolism and overall oxygen intake for many hours after,

This is popular knowledge that seemingly everyone believes is important (along
with the belief that gaining muscle mass increases metabolic rate by an
important amount), but the magnitude is tiny.

From one source
([http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/anatomyandphysiology/a/rm...](http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/anatomyandphysiology/a/rmr.htm)):

> Exercise of the intensity and duration commonly performed by recreational
> exercisers (e.g., walking for 30- 60 minutes or jogging at a pace of 8-10
> minutes per mile for 20-30 minutes) typically results in a return to
> baseline of energy expenditure well within the first hour of recovery. The
> post-exercise calorie bonus for this type of exercise probably accounts for
> only about 10-30 additional calories burned beyond the exercise bout itself.

20 calories.

In practice, exercise also makes you hungrier. It is far from clear that it's
even a net win for weight loss at all, when you look at studies and data.

~~~
rarrrrrr
This is why I said "especially resistance training."

The metabolic benefits from aerobic exercises like walking, running, swimming,
etc. are rather short (1-2 hours.) Intense resistance training gives a benefit
for 12-36 hours (until your sleep, generally.)

This is why resistance training in the morning helps weight loss.

~~~
WilliamLP
How many extra calories does intense resistance training (say for 1 hour)
burn, beyond the training itself? I believe the answer is something small
enough to be practically insignificant. (I'd appreciate if you can prove me
wrong with data.)

------
giardini
Don't panic! Read

"Most Scientific Papers Are Probably Wrong":
<http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7915>

