So the study doesn't really show that weighlifting per se is beneficial, but putting food behind weighted hatches is?
"Voluntary wheel running (EEX) was conducted as previously described in single-housed mice with access to voluntary running wheels and food and water ad-libitum,"
And the runners could each as much as they liked?
Sounds like bunk.
I highly recommend the introductory chapter to "Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution" by the way, even for non-diabetics. It's basically just the "Life and career" section of his wiki page, but in way more detail -- a really interesting biographical account about an industrial engineer doing diabetes self-experiments with a glucose meter he procured through his wife and going up against the medical community/orthodoxy and failing, only to finally break through when he got a medical degree late in life. I could probably upload and link to just that section if people are interested.
You may intend to lift weights to gain muscle, but the body is doing a lot more than just gaining muscle. It's interesting to see what else happens. That is the point of this discussion.
> To eat, the mice had to lift the lid while wearing a small shoulder collar, causing a squat-like movement that engaged the muscle contractions people use during resistance exercise.
vs
> For the endurance group, mice were given open access to a running wheel, an established model of aerobic exercise
The study is comparing the exercise that came in right before eating, which is effective at sugar control over the exercise done at any time as desired.
Speaking as a runner, I ignore the diet bump which makes me put on extra fat when I am training up for the SF (+2.5 kg over June & July is normal).
Mostly because I eat more the night before and mostly light carbs.
In fact, I'd bet my resting metabolism is actually slower when I'm training and the resting heart rates drop to 45 bpm & sleep takes up fewer calories too.
The muscle mass increase from lifting probably never cuts your metabolism needs when you are recovering or resting.
Cardiovascular fitness doesn't really cause weight loss when you're resting. So you'll be comparing something which reduces the calorie spend for the all the time you're not running vs something slightly bumps the spend when you are not lifting.
That being said he is significantly healthier than any other 70 year old I know.
I do a lot of strength training now and I feel significantly better.
My experience is somewhat different. Even walking is more effective than chess presses or arm exercises for immediately reducing blood sugar.
After an hour or so of more intense aerobic exercise I find it basically impossible to avoid a hypo (low blood sugar).
Simplistically if the effect of exercise on blood glucose is roughly proportional to Volume of muscle engaged x Length of time engaged, things like running should be very effective. The bulk of your muscle is in your lower body and you’re continuously engaging it.
I suspect any decently intense exercise can have a moderate lowering effect on blood sugar levels after the immediate drop seen when you’re exercising, but the effective isn’t huge.
Does weight lifting have an immediate effect? Like so many T1D things (I suspect you'll know what I mean): insulin on board/carbs on board/sleep/cortisol/temperature/phase of moon/vibes all play a part, haha. If you like doing the same thing and getting different results, you might be Diabetic.
Anyways, hope you're managing well, and may your time in range be great!
These poor quality animal studies tend to be non-replicable, but provide fodder for predatory journals and tabloid journalism. And for getting grants from gullible philanthropists.
Citations and money, a great outcome for some random graduate student at a third tier programme...
I treat many obese adult diabetics. It is difficult to get most of them to go for a brisk walk a couple of times a week, far less do weight lifting before each meal. There is a reason why they are diabetics ( apart from the genetic overlay , which is a major factor in some populations).
We - as a species - are engineered and built to run. I think there is a lot to be said for it.
If anyone is reading this and considering giving it a go, please do. You don't need any specific fancy equipment (just some generic trainers/sneakers will do - running does not damage your knees, quite the opposite in fact). I love travelling for work and packing my running gear and exploring the city I am visiting while running - beats sitting in a hotel room watching netflix on my own.
My biggest advice is that when you first start running outside you will feel like you are going slow even if you are not. If you have a smartphone get an app that will help you track your running pace (Strava is popular but I use runkeeper as I don't like the gamification & social parts of strava) and don't try to go faster than 6 mins/km for the first few runs. When I first started running outside (after doing a lot of gym-based treadmill running and before smartphones were really a thing) I had no frame of reference for how I was moving through the space apart from driving so it felt so terribly terribly slow when in reality I was pushing very hard. There are no prizes here and you are not racing anyone - run at a pace that feels sustainable and let your mind go.
Good luck.
I think the best piece of advice is START SLOW. way slower than you think. And run for way shorter than you think. Even if your lungs and muscles are fine, if you haven’t ran for a while then your tendons certainly aren’t. You won’t know until it’s too late and then you’ll be out of the game for weeks or months. If you can run on grass or a softer surface your body will thank you, running on concrete is brutal until you’re used to it.
There’s probably programs than you can follow that introduce you to running, I’d follow one of those.
After running for a decade without any spectacular performance to speak of and constant weight issues, one year of powerlifting 2x a week - not only is every single health metric better with less running, possibly the best they've ever been, at a point where they should be declining; my running is hitting PBs as well.
The downside, I'm a bore about it.
I strongly believe that's why nutrition science is soooo far behind the rest of medicine. There aren't nearly enough serious RCTs (whereas regulations make them abundant for other medical interventions).
I’m having trouble with this one, and am tempted to write it off as playing with mice in a lab. The extrapolation to human conditions is hyperbolic, maybe worse.
Given the number of people with continuous glucose monitors and activity tracking watches in the world, why not study that data directly? Causation by activity would be more apparent, more relevant and more significant (if present) wouldn’t it?
Rowing is my go-to now. It is low impact so I can do it every day without any exceptions. I've been able to hold onto this discipline for 2 years now. The advantage of rowing is that there isn't really a limit to how much it can suck. You can burn 500 calories per hour, or 9000. It's more of a psychological battle than a physical one.
My system is to row at whatever intensity and duration until I my brain starts to internally play music from Spotify. However long that takes. Sometimes it's 40 minutes, sometimes it's 80. I think this variance mostly boils down to blood sugar and what I ate the previous day. If I gorge on a box of snacky crackers, I need to row for at least an hour before I stop feeling like shit.
I did have a couple low and high readings, but even with a food log and going back to re-eat the exact same meal I got completely different results.
I think the exercise induced changes that help regulate blood sugar aren’t going to show up on the time scale of ordering a couple CGMs. It has to be a sustained lifestyle choice.
Blood sugar in non-diabetics is boring, rarely moving in any significant way.
One impact could be dispelling misconceptions if you have them. Another could be discovering pre-diabetes.
GCM also isn't enough since you can have elevated insuline for 10 to 20 years before blood sugar starts rising, so a GCM won't show this.
From the top of my head: a 20 min HIIT session outperforms a ~2 to ~4 hour cardio session when it comes to glycogen depletion.
So doing cardio for blood sugar control (depletion) is probably a bad idea/waste of time (assuming you don't like to do cardio). Though obviously it's possible it may vary from diabetic to diabetic and from a healthy to a healthy person in extremes. A GCM is cheap to test it out.
For people talking about gym: legs are over 50% of your muscle mass so obviously chest and biceps curls aren't gonna cut it. Leg work is needed.