23 hours per week vs 11 hours per week? I call this a warning sign because it screams of post-hoc analysis. Unless they then used these as pre-specified cutoffs for later studies, I would be very cautious not to overinterpret.
... Except that, looking at the abstract (there's a link in the NYT article), I find this: "Men who reported >10 h/wk riding in a car or >23 h/wk of combined sedentary behavior had 82% and 64% greater risk of dying from CVD than those who reported <4 or <11 h/wk, respectively." [I've changed one unhelpful bit of notation.] So, looks like data mining after all.
On the other other hand, as well as those (possibly cherry-picked) thresholds there are statements like "After age adjustment, time riding in a car and combined time spent in these two sedentary behaviors were positively (P(trend) < 0.001) associated with CVD death." which suggests something less ad hoc.
What was unexpected was that many of the men who sat long hours and developed heart problems also exercised. Quite a few of them said they did so regularly and led active lifestyles. The men worked out, then sat in cars and in front of televisions for hours, and their risk of heart disease soared, despite the exercise. Their workouts did not counteract the ill effects of sitting.
From the journal abstract:
In addition, high levels of physical activity were related to notably lower rates of CVD death even in the presence of high
levels of sedentary behavior.
If anybody wants to look at the article, I have access to the paper.
Participants were 7744 men (20-89 yr) initially free of CVD who returned a mail-back survey during 1982. Time spent watching TV and time spent riding in a car were reported. Mortality data were ascertained through the National Death Index until December 31, 2003.
They noted that they adjusted for age. I presume other factors like the economic status correlate also with the time they watched tv. Don't know if they've adjusted for that as well.
In other words, if you went back and looked at your data and found the best cutoffs to maximize difference in risk, is it any surprise that you found a big difference in risk? This is why they need to validate these cutpoints in a separate study.
Your thinking could stem from an affliction brought on by high schools teaching of science. They really only teach one of the scientific methods, that of hypothesis, experimentation, observation and conclusion in that order. However depending on the field of science and the subject at hand that isn't necessarily the order thing are done in. Science isn't a simple linear process like we are lead to believe in high school.
There is nothing wrong with "my thinking" but you appear to think so because your understanding is incorrect. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is the fallacy of thinking that, because something comes before another, that first something causes the second. I'm not talking about that at all. Post hoc analysis is something totally different - viz, it's performing non-prespecified analyses. It's more closely coupled to multiple testing than it is to the other fallacy you are referring to. It certainly is not limited to small sample sizes or sample sizes of one, in contrast to what you state. You can do science improperly with samples of any size.
But in this case the general hypothesis is pre-chosen and fixed, basically "men who watch TV more hours [whatever] more than men who watch TV fewer hours", and the choice of threshholds is more of a reporting step, pulling out some binned tails at either extreme for emphasis and ease of discussion, while the real correlation is full-curve-to-full-curve.
And I absolutely agree that a sort of nonparametric post hoc approach that you poo-pooed would be even more highly suspect. But I don't see the choice of thresholds as simply a reporting step that can be manipulated ad lib without adjustment of your belief in the association and magnitude of effect. (I don't mean to imply that you think that you can adjust cutoffs willy-nilly - just stating my opinion clearly here.)
Either they controlled for occupation (doubtful) or sitting in an office didn't matter or the thing whole is just off-base.
One way that sitting in an office is different from watching TV involves complete passivity whereas in an office setting, your actively engaged in some task.
But driving a car is probably closer to sitting in an office than watching TV. So the whole things seem problematic.
What exactly are you saying? I honestly can't decipher the meaning of your words.
One of the problem with analyses that are not planned in advance is that they suffer from the problems inherent in multiple testing.
If I plan in advance to compare people weighing over 150 pounds to people weighing under 150 pounds, then I am conducting one test on the data. If I, instead, collect a bunch of data and run it through the ringer, torturing it until it spits out an answer that looks good to me, then I can find all kinds of spurious associations. They are more useful for hypothesis generation (i.e., generating a hypothesis that can be tested with other data).
The Wikipedia article does a better job of explaining this than I have:
There are some pretty simple ways to add extra light physical activity to your daily routine. I tend to drink a lot of water, which means I need to go fill my bottle a few times a day and walk to the washroom more often than I would otherwise.
There was also a TED talk about communities in Italy and Japan with long lifespans and lifestyles that involved lots of minor activities
so....if you have a standing desk maybe the point is that you walk around more, whereas when one sits one is less inclined to get up for a minute walk.
I tried a self-made standing desk for a couple days but went back to sitting because I couldn't take the standing for long periods of time.
Here's my desk:
Have a look at these products
The height can be adjusted either manually (hydraulic system) or with a motor. It works better than it sounds. You can adjust the height even with a loaded desk easily.
The only question is: Would I remember to change my posture regularly?
Summary: To find the path to long life and health, Dan Buettner and team study the world's "Blue Zones," communities whose elders live with vim and vigor to record-setting age. At TEDxTC, he shares the 9 common diet and lifestyle habits that keep them spry past age 100.
I don't think article is very scientific; 'hitting the gym' can mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. They can sit in the gym, do cardio, do weights, do stretches, etc. Too many variables. Obviously if subject goes to the gym and does 20 curls before calling it quits there will be absolutely no benefit.
If you hit the gym during the lunch break or before/after work and throw cardio/stretching in (not just weights) you will be fine. Or simply do some good stretching here and there; problem solved.
For me to really take this seriously, these people need to be observed in some non-intrusive way. We do have the technology now, or so I think.
There is an entire body of research dedicated to ascertaining the quality and reliability of surveys, how surveys are delivered, and the conclusions that can be drawn from them. In doing these studies those methodologies are generally well understood (and clearly cited) as part of the paper itself.
While I know those of us who where educated in the 'hard' sciences (I'm a physicist by training) find it hard to buy into these... I've been quite impressed by how rigorous they really are.
I haven't read this particular study, so I may be way off base... but the fact that the fundamentals of the study involved a survey do not make it bad or invalid science (as long as the study was conducted properly that is).
There have been a number of clever and rather specific ways in which research psychologists have gotten around these problems. But being an expert doesn't make you superman or give you unlimited bag of tricks dealing with this inherent difficulty.
One obvious way that the study might be flawed could be that the respondents were more honest about how much TV they watched than about how much working-out they did, so TV-watched actually correlated better with exercise level than claimed level of exercise (and that's just one of hundreds possible problems).
IE, until we know some specifics that researchers might have gotten around untruthness in research based on only survey data, we're entirely justified in being somewhat skeptical. "They're expert, they can do it" isn't enough.
There's no reason why this study shouldn't be updated with real data.
Non-affiliate link: http://www.amazon.com/Stanley-11031-Telescopic-Plastic-Sawho...
Horribly outdated but accurate pic: http://icecreamforeveryone.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/img_0...
I feel more creative, have more energy throughout the day and my back feels stronger.
I used 4 stacks of paper for keyboard, an empty cardboard box for my mouse, and a pencil holder to tilt my monitor when I'm standing.
When my legs get tired, it takes 10 seconds to remove all of that and sit down again.
(Other than being a happy customer, I'm not affiliated with Indoboard.)
I love love love standing while working on the computer. There was a transition period of 2 weeks for me of leg and foot soreness. Best of all, my pre-existing knee pain went away!!
I don't have a pic yet. But I will post it to my software blog sooner than later: http://bp321.com/code/
It's easy to find organic produce here but it's not that cheap (at least compared to Europe), and I'm not exactly sure if I trust it as much as I trust organic produce in Europe or Japan...
That said from my 6 month experience living in Rochester, US is much worse... (and don't talk to me about university "food" there)
NYC is technically not "America" though, so i'm not sure if I've raised a point of contention or simply bragged about how my city is teh awesum.
During that time I never had any issues with weight gain, cholesterol, or blood pressure.
I'm sure the coworkers won't mind.
I've always been on the thin side which people put down to high metabolism, but I suspect a lot of it is also to the fact I am in fact almost always in motion (even if only a small part of me).
Man, your fingers must be pumped!
Instead, I go through life accepting the fact that I'll be dead by 80. I find it both motivating and relaxing. Instead of literally wasting 20% of my time at the gym, I can instead waste it in much more interesting ways: on games, programming, TV shows. I believe this will result in an overall healthier mental lifestyle. And since my body maintains a constant weight of ~215 pounds, and since I have no use for physical stamina or strong muscles, I literally have no use for the gym.
*Technically you don't sit on your knees. You sit on your bottom (bearing most of the weight), and use your shins for balance.
What makes people want to spend money on tools like this when the greatest fitness tool is the human body itself?
"Alright, we each have a month to come up with, manufacture, and advertise the most retarded exercise tool we can come up with. After six months of sales, we'll determine the winner by units shipped. Loser has to do a line of blow off the winner's genitals."
(And to be honest, the ads for pure resistance workouts are even douchier.)
Maybe they're talking about movement on a different scale.
1. The sit and watch - lecture model needs to die.
2. Students need to be given the option of sitting or standing in class and be allowed to alternate.
3. Punishments like sitting in detention, losing recess, or timeouts, should be replaced with activities like squats, sports, running laps, or simply walking.
The wisdom of taking a hyperactive kid's recess away has always baffled me.
They have been doing it for centuries and everybody is fine!.
I'm not sure you can make that claim so casually.
Well there go my health insurance rates (if I could afford insurance).
It takes a little while to get used to it, but once you're there, standing all day is just fine.
Who knows what to make of this.. It's not easy hearing that the profession you've chosen puts you at greater risk for heart disease.
If this is true I bet it could be balanced by good diet. I also have a dog which forces me to walk for at least 1-2 hours a day.
my %holidays = (
'mlk day' => undef,
'martin luther king day' => undef,
'martin luther kings birthday' => undef,
'presidents day' => undef,
'washingtons birthday' => undef,
'memorial day' => undef,
'independence day' => undef,
'labor day' => undef,
'columbus day' => undef,
'veteranss day' => undef,
'thanksgiving' => undef,
'fathers day' => undef,
'mothers day' => undef,
'inauguration day' => undef,
'ash wednesday' => undef,
'shrove tuesday' => undef,
'groundhog day' => undef,
'saint patricks day' => undef,
'easter' => undef,
'earth day' => undef,
'arbor day' => undef,
'cinco de mayo' => undef,
'st patricks day' => undef,
'flag day' => undef,
'rosh hashanah' => undef,
'yom kippur' => undef,
'halloween' => undef,
'election day' => undef,
'hanukkah' => undef,