Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sit Longer, Die Sooner

timothy posted about 4 years ago | from the hence-supine-on-couch dept.

Medicine 341

mcgrew writes "Bad news for most of us here — The Chicago Tribune is reporting that even if you get plenty of exercize, sitting down all day reduces your lifespan. From the article: 'Even after adjusting for body mass index (BMI) and smoking, the researchers found that women who sit more than 6 hours a day were 37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours; for men, long-sitters were 17 percent more likely to die. People who exercise regularly had a lower risk, but still significant, risk of dying. Those who sat a lot and moved less than three and a half hours per day are the most likely to die early: researchers found a 94 percent increased risk for women and 48 percent increase for men, they announced recently in the American Journal of Epidemiology.'"

cancel ×

341 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't sit down = Immortality (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387040)

the researchers found that women who sit more than 6 hours a day were 37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours; for men, long-sitters were 17 percent more likely to die

You know... I'm pretty sure everyone is 100% likely to die...

Re:Don't sit down = Immortality (0)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | about 4 years ago | (#33387140)

+5 insightful, please. (:

Re:Don't sit down = Immortality (4, Informative)

Meshach (578918) | about 4 years ago | (#33387178)

the researchers found that women who sit more than 6 hours a day were 37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours; for men, long-sitters were 17 percent more likely to die

You know... I'm pretty sure everyone is 100% likely to die...

Unless you figure out how to exersize. It might be related to exercise, I cannot tell.

Re:Don't sit down = Immortality (1)

nomorecwrd (1193329) | about 4 years ago | (#33387300)

The funny thing is that it is spelled correctly later on the same paragraph.

Well, when in doubt, (and to lazy to look it up) that way you get a 50/50 chance. :-)

Re:Don't sit down = Immortality (2, Funny)

NemoinSpace (1118137) | about 4 years ago | (#33387486)

(and too lazy to look it up)

Pot calling the kettle black ?

Re:Don't sit down = Immortality (1, Funny)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | about 4 years ago | (#33387276)

But some of us plan on coming back: http://www.alcor.org/ [alcor.org]

Re:Don't sit down = Immortality (1)

mweather (1089505) | about 4 years ago | (#33387368)

Not me. Thanks to denial, I'm immortal.

Hmm.. stats don't lie (5, Funny)

way2trivial (601132) | about 4 years ago | (#33387394)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Number_of_humans_who_have_ever_lived [wikipedia.org]

Estimates of "the total number of people who have ever lived" published in the 2000s range approximately from 100 to 115 billion (1 E11).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population [wikipedia.org]
The world population is the population of humans on the planet Earth. In 2009, the United Nations estimated the population to reach 7,000,000,000 in 2011;[1] current estimates by the United States Census Bureau put the population at 6,864,700,000.[2]

Math
7/100 or 7/115

it's really only an 93-94% mortality rate so far.. who knows what tomorrow will bring
I'm currently beating the odds......

6 billion counterexamples (1)

mangu (126918) | about 4 years ago | (#33387400)

I'm pretty sure everyone is 100% likely to die.

Well, not everyone has died yet, you know...

I, for one, hope that immortality will be one of medical science's accomplishments during my lifetime.

Re:Don't sit down = Immortality (1)

JazzyMusicMan (1012801) | about 4 years ago | (#33387438)

It might be possible to live forever by not sitting down, it'll just be hard as hell to find out. Who are you to say that if someone never sits, ever, then they wouldn't die? You could live to 1,000 years old, but the second you put your ass in a chair, you die. It'll be like the movie Speed or that Family Matters episode where the bus can't slow under 55 or the cop couldn't stop jogging on the treadmill. More research must be done!

Re:Don't sit down = Immortality (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | about 4 years ago | (#33387490)

You know... I'm pretty sure everyone is 100% likely to die...

That's no reason to take it sitting down. (Ba-dum-tssss [instantrimshot.nl] )

First po- (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387052)

HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGH!

Re:First po- (1)

unity100 (970058) | about 4 years ago | (#33387280)

valiant effort at humor ...

I really need to get my walkstation set up (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | about 4 years ago | (#33387054)

I've been meaning to build a laptop platform for my treadmill for ages now ... this is the weekend I'm getting it done.

Re:I really need to get my walkstation set up (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387208)

I've done it, works well. I spent ages looking for a solution and they're all crap, or crazy prices. In the end I used a few lengths of 2x4 to make an H with the tops shorter than the bottom. The cross member sits tall with the side bars flat. It slots in behind the main tread panel and allows a laptop to sit on the prongs pointing forward with the cross bar pushing against the rear of the panel. Not all treads have the support bar below the panel, so you may need to create a stand of some kind.

Tips: Running and walking at pace is not going to work. You're bouncing around and typing is a real PITA. If you want to burn calories, put it on a steep incline. Have a hand towel to hand, you'll sweat a lot and you don't want that dribbling onto your laptop. Have a water bottle or two to hand too, you'll need it.

You'll be able to do 3 hour sessions without really knowing it once you get the hang of movement and keyboard work. I had to forget doing paperwork, or using pen, making notes etc, it simply didn't work for me. But pure coding, if you know what you're doing, is a breeze.

The hardest part is forcing yourself to do it. It's far easier to slough in a chair behind a couple of huge monitors.

Eh (1)

jlechem (613317) | about 4 years ago | (#33387064)

I had a good run, too much effort to get up and go outside.

"Exersize"? (2, Funny)

PhxBlue (562201) | about 4 years ago | (#33387066)

I think "exersize" is what you call someone who doesn't exercise. :)

Re:"Exersize"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387156)

I was searching the comments to see if someone has already commented on exercizzzze... LOL

Re:"Exersize"? (4, Funny)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 4 years ago | (#33387418)

I was searching the comments to see if someone has already commented on exercizzzze... LOL

Thanks for the update, I was just wondering what you were doing.

Re:"Exersize"? (5, Funny)

Anachragnome (1008495) | about 4 years ago | (#33387200)

"I think "exersize" is what you call someone who doesn't exercise. :)"

SuperSize...a minor savings that induces you to eat more.

GiantSize...Fuck the cost, I'm hungry.

ExerSize...So big, lifting it burns calories.

Re:"Exersize"? (0, Redundant)

McNihil (612243) | about 4 years ago | (#33387420)

Thanks! you just made my day. ROFL.

Re:"Exersize"? (1)

blair1q (305137) | about 4 years ago | (#33387542)

The new McDonald's Double Quarter-Tonner with Cheese.

Another brick in the wall... (5, Funny)

SOdhner (1619761) | about 4 years ago | (#33387072)

If I start to add up all the things I do that make me more likely to die it gets depressing fast. In fact, I'm now so depressed all I have the energy to do is sit here and eat ice cream. God damn it.

Re:Another brick in the wall... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387148)

depression is the leading cause of premature deaths (in depressed people)

Re:Another brick in the wall... (1)

NemoinSpace (1118137) | about 4 years ago | (#33387548)

If you want to die, is it really premature?

Re:Another brick in the wall... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387218)

Don't worry, there could be as much as an 83% chance you're likely to never die.

Re:Another brick in the wall... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387234)

What you need is an excuse to go outside and stroll around at regular intervals. Like smoking.

Re:Another brick in the wall... (1)

tobiah (308208) | about 4 years ago | (#33387340)

insightful

Re:Another brick in the wall... (1)

algormortis (1422619) | about 4 years ago | (#33387278)

If you RTFA, it says you can reduce the effects of sitting if you exercise your ass. No homo.

Re:Another brick in the wall... (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | about 4 years ago | (#33387342)

I know - like what exactly are they trying to say? Don't sit? Theres far more risk in driving your car, walking across the street, drinking, smoking...

I mean, Aging is mostly caused by breathing Oxygen! I mean, you'll live longer if you breath, but it will increase your risk of dieing.

I'd like to see how long someone could survive if they were never allowed to sit. You can't spell guilty conscience without science!

Bonus! (1)

X_DARK_X (1881648) | about 4 years ago | (#33387078)

Does that mean I now qualify for hazard pay??

arn't we all at a significant risk of dying? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387080)

not trying to be a smart ass, but the wording here looks like you either will or wont. we all are a 100% chance of dying sometime in the future, are we not?

Proof that you can indeed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387084)

outrun death!

Anybody want to join me in Death Race 3000?

100% chance to die (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387090)

This is so cool, I always thought that we all had 100% chance to die. Is there anyway to guarantee that I will make it into the 63% who are less likely to die?

To die? But not sooner? (4, Funny)

dissy (172727) | about 4 years ago | (#33387092)

the researchers found that women who sit more than 6 hours a day were 37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours; for men, long-sitters were 17 percent more likely to die

Wow. There is ANY percentage of people that are not likely to die?

I shall never sit again!

More likely to die? (5, Funny)

e065c8515d206cb0e190 (1785896) | about 4 years ago | (#33387098)

the researchers found that women who sit more than 6 hours a day were 37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours

ORLY?
I thought the two groups were equally certain to die...

Re:More likely to die? (1)

ravenscar (1662985) | about 4 years ago | (#33387168)

My thoughts exactly. Maybe someone has discovered something new. This article could be the biggest news in human history (or at least since peanutbutter met chocolate).

Re:More likely to die? (3, Informative)

DeadDecoy (877617) | about 4 years ago | (#33387414)

Stupid (multiple) copy-paste summaries never mention source. Hell they don't even get the title right. The article is: "Leisure Time Spent Sitting in Relation to Total Mortality in a Prospective Cohort of US Adults" with the link at Oxford Journals [oxfordjournals.org] . Basically, they looked at men and women ages ~50-70 and found an increased rate in death for those who sat around like lumps vs those that got exercise. It looks like 20% of the men died and 10% of the women (though I don't have the values give those that answered yes/no for sitting on the questionnaire).

And in other news... (1)

kazbah (600283) | about 4 years ago | (#33387104)

....scientists have identified that people who live eventually die.

Re:And in other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387184)

Well, that is a nice "theory" but my book says that Jesus makes me imortal.

I will not consider that theory as proven until every single man and woman has died.

Re:And in other news... (5, Funny)

X_DARK_X (1881648) | about 4 years ago | (#33387360)

What's jesus and what do you take it with?

Re:And in other news... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387494)

You take cock with it. Right up the ass.

Everybody's risk of dying is 100% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387108)

Nobody is less likely to die. Death and taxes, you know the saying.

Sitting leading cause of death in the world! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387114)

"women who sit more than 6 hours a day were 37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours; for men, long-sitters were 17 percent more likely to die."

standing around lets you live forever?

Re:Sitting leading cause of death in the world! (3, Funny)

Nadaka (224565) | about 4 years ago | (#33387228)

No, it just feels like forever.

Standing Computer Desk (1)

hdon (1104251) | about 4 years ago | (#33387116)

*sigh*

Well, I just bought myself an elliptical machine. I guess now I should buy a standing computer desk [google.com] for work.

Re:Standing Computer Desk (1)

somersault (912633) | about 4 years ago | (#33387214)

I've thought about getting these before too. Would standing in one place be any better than sitting in the same place, I wonder? I already have an angled cushion at work to try to simulate standing position and improve my posture (sitting on a flat surface makes it extremely difficult to have good posture), I wonder if that makes any difference to just slouching back in your chair..

Re:Standing Computer Desk (1)

timeOday (582209) | about 4 years ago | (#33387380)

This is timely for me because just yesterday I just in an order for a DVI splitter, second monitor, keyboard and mouse to add a stand-up terminal on my work computer. You don't need a second computer, or a KVM, etc; linux handles a second USB/mouse as you would expect, and I'd imagine Windows is the same.

I ordered this because, even though I run daily, my back is starting to tire too easily. It's funny because I'm only in my mid-30s. I think it is my ergonomic chair, turning my back muscles to jelly. Now the only question is whether I will actually use the standup workstation.

hrumph (0)

ak_hepcat (468765) | about 4 years ago | (#33387120)

What if i exercise sitting down? I bounce my legs up and down like a drummer for most of the day. Does that count as not sitting?

Hell, i sit down at home. If my wife is sitting on top of me, does that also not count as sitting? or do we have to be
completely tantric about it to count?

I mean, i'm just trying to figure it all out here....

Re:hrumph (1)

ak_hepcat (468765) | about 4 years ago | (#33387138)

For some reason, I thought I was on FARK and answered as if I were there.

I'm not usually this crass. Oh, wait, yes I am. just not here.

37% more likely to die? (1, Redundant)

Tester (591) | about 4 years ago | (#33387132)

It's interesting that women who sit more than 6 hours are 37% more likely to die. I'm curious to know the absolute percentage of women who die versus the women who don't die. I heard the Virgin Mary didn't die (but went to heaven directly). I'd be curious to about other women who have similar advantages.

Re:37% more likely to die? (1)

mangu (126918) | about 4 years ago | (#33387502)

I'm curious to know the absolute percentage of women who die versus the women who don't die

According to Wikipedia, there are about 3.5 billion women who never died [wikipedia.org] versus some 45 to 55 billion women who died [wikipedia.org]

Therefore, the answer to your question is 93%

Huh? (0, Redundant)

MBGMorden (803437) | about 4 years ago | (#33387134)

the researchers found that women who sit more than 6 hours a day were 37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours; for men, long-sitters were 17 percent more likely to die.

There has got to be more context to this than the summary is letting on. I'm pretty sure that regardless you've got a 100% chance of dieing. It's gotta qualify how much sooner or something.

Re:Huh? (3, Funny)

mozumder (178398) | about 4 years ago | (#33387182)

Are you sure about the 100% chance of dying?

I haven't died.

Re:Huh? (2, Funny)

falzer (224563) | about 4 years ago | (#33387210)

I might get modded down for this, but I haven't died either, and I suspect others like me are beginning to come out of the closet.

Re:Huh? (1)

migla (1099771) | about 4 years ago | (#33387216)

I'm pretty sure people who are moving about will not die. The trick is to never stop moving.

Re:Huh? (1)

Xerolooper (1247258) | about 4 years ago | (#33387310)

It's gotta qualify how much sooner or something.

How dare you! Don't confuse the science with facts!
lol You must be right or the world just doesn't make sense. Haha The summary was misleading.
From the article:

People who exercise regularly had a lower risk, but still significant, risk of dying. Those who sat a lot and moved less than three and a half hours per day are the most likely to die early: ...

Note it does say die early. Although the fact that the conversation was quickly reduced to what it was by the error is not surprising.

Another Post Copied : ( -5, Rehashed ) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387142)

I've got a great new revenue generator for Slashdot. Just copy the business model of
N.P.R. [npr.org] :

Sell music via hyperlinks to your stories about bands you never want to hear.

I expect a royalty payment of 80 percent on the revenue from music sales.

Yours In Moscow,
K. Trout

No more likely than anyone else (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387160)

I'll have to admit, I didn't RTFA, but a few things from the summary are amusing.

1) "37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours" Oh no! I'm more likely to die!!

I would say that they are equally likely to die - eventually.

You expect me to stand for this? (0, Flamebait)

Smidge207 (1278042) | about 4 years ago | (#33387166)

In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful
3:45
[And mention] when the angels said, "O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary - distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah]. She said, "My Lord, how will I have a child when no man has touched me?" [The angel] said, "Such is Allah; He creates what He wills. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, 'Be,' and it is. (47) And He will teach him writing and wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel (48) And [make him] a messenger to the Children of Israel, [who will say], 'Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay [that which is] like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah. And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead - by permission of Allah. And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers. (49) And [I have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me. (50) Indeed, Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is the straight path." (51)

And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous. (46) And let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient. (47)

O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs. (171) Never would the Messiah disdain to be a servant of Allah, nor would the angels near [to Him]. And whoever disdains His worship and is arrogant - He will gather them to Himself all together. (172) And as for those who believed and did righteous deeds, He will give them in full their rewards and grant them extra from His bounty. But as for those who disdained and were arrogant, He will punish them with a painful punishment, and they will not find for themselves besides Allah any protector or helper. (173) O mankind, there has come to you a conclusive proof from your Lord, and We have sent down to you a clear light. (174) So those who believe in Allah and hold fast to Him - He will admit them to mercy from Himself and bounty and guide them to Himself on a straight path. (175)

They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers. (72) They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the third of three." And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment. (73) So will they not repent to Allah and seek His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. (74) The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded. (75) Say, "Do you worship besides Allah that which holds for you no [power of] harm or benefit while it is Allah who is the Hearing, the Knowing?" (76)
Say, "O People of the Scripture, do not exceed limits in your religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclinations of a people who had gone astray before and misled many and have strayed from the soundness of the way." (77)

What about laying down? (1)

joshier (957448) | about 4 years ago | (#33387180)

Just curious, I mean - surely laying down is as natural as standing and if the statistics added up - I'd present it to the boss at work and ask him to order a bed in.

LIVE FOREVER! (0, Redundant)

fiveelementsatx (1887444) | about 4 years ago | (#33387190)

So, according to the summary there are percentages of people who will never die... WOW

Tell that to Buddhist Monks! (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387194)

Totally anecdotal; I haven't done a scientific study, but I have noticed that Buddhist monks, you know, that guys that sit perfectly still 8 hours a day 7 days a week, tend to live much, much longer than the average person. I think that is a bit of a hole in their study.

Re:Tell that to Buddhist Monks! (2, Informative)

joshier (957448) | about 4 years ago | (#33387262)

That is a good point, however let's be honest - their minds are in a scientifically proven state of meditating [i]when[/i] they are meditating and to me it sounds healthier than multi tasking 10 different things at once. Why, it was only yesterday we had the news of http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/08/25/1234231/Digital-Devices-Deprive-Brain-of-Needed-Downtime [slashdot.org] Just thought it was quite relevant.

Correlation? Causation? (3, Interesting)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 years ago | (#33387196)

The article doesn't cover correlation vs. causation at all. Does anyone have a link to an abstract or similar?

Link to the actual paper (2, Informative)

timeOday (582209) | about 4 years ago | (#33387456)

The article doesn't, but the abstract of the actual paper [oxfordjournals.org] says all participants (53,440 men and 69,776 women) were disease free at enrollment and the followup period was 14 years. Moreover they adjusted for smoking, body mass index, and "other factors." Too bad the full paper is behind a paywall. However the case for causation looks quite strong.

Re:Link to the actual paper (4, Informative)

Un pobre guey (593801) | about 4 years ago | (#33387508)

The abstract ends with this disturbing assertion based on their statistical study of a large amount of empirical data:
"The time spent sitting was independently associated with total mortality, regardless of physical activity level. Public health messages should include both being physically active and reducing time spent sitting."

In effect, no matter what else you do, the more time you spend sitting, the shorter your lifespan. That is some nasty shit.

Re:Correlation? Causation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387532)

http://xkcd.com/552/

Living = (0, Redundant)

Dyinobal (1427207) | about 4 years ago | (#33387206)

Living = 100% likely hood to die.

Re:Living = (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387298)

Not if you don't get your head cut off.

Re:Living = (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | about 4 years ago | (#33387550)

Or hanged or executed by firing squad.

Sit less than 3 Hours? (1)

iammani (1392285) | about 4 years ago | (#33387212)

What do they do the remaining 21 hours? Lie down?

137% Likely to die? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387248)

So if a perfectly healthy person has a 100% chance of death, then sitting for more than 6 hours a day you have a 37% chance to die twice... this can only mean one thing: zombies!

Interesting that women are roughly twice as likely to become zombies compared to men.

Ahh! (1)

Rainwulf (865585) | about 4 years ago | (#33387258)

This is why old people die, not because they are old, its because they sit down all the time!
Get up Grandma!

Sit Longer, Die Sooner, and... (1)

countSudoku() (1047544) | about 4 years ago | (#33387260)

Leave a good looking corpse and/or zombie husk!

You'll live longer if you ignore every stupid news story that's trying to get your attention by claiming you're going to die or live, depending on the content of said article. Not convincing enough. Sitting should just cause some interesting bowel cancer or some other less boring outcome. I want my 45 seconds back for reading that summary!

Oh fuck off. (0)

unity100 (970058) | about 4 years ago | (#33387264)

and for how long the research was conducted ? what was the sample size ? get a load of that : 'likely to die'. gee. no relevant cause of death, stuff that can happen due to anything ranging from genetic heritage to smoking or traffic accidents.

yeah.

Re:Oh fuck off. (4, Informative)

MartinSchou (1360093) | about 4 years ago | (#33387510)

Did you even make it past the first paragraph?

and for how long the research was conducted ? what was the sample size ?

The article:

That's the sobering news from a new study that tracked more than 100,000 adults for 14 years. Researchers from the American Cancer Society in Atlanta followed 53,000 men and 70,000 women and asked them to fill out questionnaires about their physical activity.

So ... yes. Obviously they completely left out the information you were missing. Especially the bit where they're expecting you to, you know, read the fucking article.

'likely to die'. gee. no relevant cause of death

The article:

Unlike most bad news, this one is best heard standing up: people who sit more than 6 hours a day are more likely to die earlier.

That's the first fucking paragraph of the article. So not only are you an idiot, you're also blind.

Re:Oh fuck off. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387582)

paragraph three of the news article:

"That's the sobering news from a new study that tracked more than 100,000 adults for 14 years. Researchers from the American Cancer Society in Atlanta followed 53,000 men and 70,000 women and asked them to fill out questionnaires about their physical activity."

there were no stats about how likely you might be to die early if you are too lazy to read beyond the first paragraph

Wow (1)

david_bandel (909002) | about 4 years ago | (#33387266)

"the researchers found that women who sit more than 6 hours a day were 37 percent more likely to die than those who sit less than 3 hours; for men, long-sitters were 17 percent more likely to die. People who exercise regularly had a lower risk, but still significant, risk of dying" So we're talking about a finite probability of immortality if I never sit? I'll never sit again!

Duh! (3, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 4 years ago | (#33387268)

A stationary target is much easier to hit by a falling piano, but walk around a bit, and you'll only lose a kidney from the flying wood splinters.

Blatant typo is blatant. (1)

Taibhsear (1286214) | about 4 years ago | (#33387274)

"exersize?" Really? Do you guys actually read what you type before posting?

Their recommendations (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | about 4 years ago | (#33387292)

They recommend the following, although there is no indication whether this comes from the cited article or it is an ex recto list:

"To squeeze in some more exercise at the office, try a few of these tips:
  • "Take frequent laps around the office or outside.
  • "Find an exercise buddy at work and agree to get off your butts several times each day.
  • "Stand up and stretch every hour. Set an alarm on your phone or computer to remind you.
  • "Do calf raises: while standing, push yourself up on your toes, hold, and release.
  • "While sitting, squeeze your butt: tense your gluteals, hold, and relax.
  • "While sitting, raise your shoulders up to your ears, then back down."

Given the astonishingly poor wording in the article, I would speculate that this list is pure unsubstantiated arbitrary touchy-feely bullshit. They sound pretty ridiculous.

chance to die? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387338)

So if I don't sit for 6 hours a day I have a chance to not die?

Yes, the cat got my tongue... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387352)

It's sad to me that with such strange and interesting news, everyone is making jokes about a missing word: "... die [sooner]...". No wonder I haven't had a good discussion with anyone lately. Though, at least I've had a few good laughs. Sigh.

Link to actual abstract (1)

noidentity (188756) | about 4 years ago | (#33387356)

Abstract.

I'm just wondering what the cause of increased mortality was. Was it the increased sitting, or some third factor that was also the cause of these people sitting more?

Re:Link to actual abstract (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | about 4 years ago | (#33387592)

link to abstract [slashdot.org]

Exercise Ball (4, Interesting)

tobiah (308208) | about 4 years ago | (#33387382)

I sit on one of those exercise balls while programming. It keeps you moving and discourages slouching.

Meh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387392)

Doesn't really bother me. I'd still rather sit here and play computer games. This world seems to only get worse every decade anyway. Even if given the ability, I still would not want to live forever.

I'm 27 now, and I've always said I would rather die early before my body starts falling apart due to old age. I've been careful not to get married or any of that crap, so I don't have anyone else to worry about.

Junk Science alert (1)

CCarrot (1562079) | about 4 years ago | (#33387396)

This whiffs strongly of someone who's scrambling to find something before the submission date, so grabs the first crackpot study she finds, throws in some butt-tightening exercises (do this or you'll DIE) and throws it at the editor...

Seriously, the numbers are all statistical, but with no context, they are (as some of you have pointed out) completely useless. 37% more likely to die than what? an 80 year old grandmother? Does sitting shorten the average lifespan by 37%? get serious.

To be fair, the fault may lie in the write-up rather than the actual study, but since she doesn't link to anything to back up her scribbles, one would have to be interested enough to dig through the ACS studies to find the original (if it's even public). Sorry, I am not that interested.

Smacks of junk science to me...

"exersize" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387398)

really, mcgrew? really?

What About Other Positions? (1)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | about 4 years ago | (#33387422)

First off, here is a link to the abstract of the paper itself [oxfordjournals.org] (if anyone could find a non-locked version, I'd be interested in reading).

Secondly, this study seems to have left out a lot of time from the day. Primarily, the study looks at humans who have spent greater than 6 hours per day sitting, or less than 3 hours per day sitting. What it doesn't do is discuss relevant times that were spent doing other things. For instance, suppose you sit right on the threshold. Suppose someone sits for 6 hours a day, but stands for three hours a day. I am pretty sure that still leaves 15 hours in that day. If we generously compensate for a 12 hour sleep period (far more than most folk I know), that still leaves 3 hours unaccounted for. I would assume those three hours were spent doing some combination of sitting and standing, and that the 6/3 hour marks are simply dividers as noted within the data. What I am curious about, though, is what exactly is the 'healthiest' method for spending your day. If I spend less than three hours a day sitting, that means I am spending 21 hours doing other stuff. If I sleep 12 hours, that means I get 9 hours of standing/physical activity. Have there been any studies done that discuss the health effects of 9 hours of straight standing/activity? I know that I've spent 10 hours doing hard manual labor before, and I can promise you that I did not feel healthy afterwards.

Also, is there any discussion or research being done regarding the best ways to break up these time intervals? Is it best to stand for three hours, sit for one, stand for three, sit for one, stand for three, and go to bed? Is it best to stand for 9 hours? Does it matter at all? For those of us spending 8 hours sitting at work, and possibly 1 to 2 hours commuting, that is a grand total of 9 to 10 hours a day of sitting. However, if we get up and bugger around for a 10 - 15 minute break every hour, that adds up to 150 minutes max, which is 2.5 hours. So now, if I take a 15 minute activity break every hour at work, I still am sitting more than 6 hours a day and standing less than three hours a day. So I am still screwed. And even more importantly, that kind of activity would probably show up on my review as damaging productivity. Can this be used as justification for insisting that my employer guarantees me more activity in my job, or perhaps more breaks?

This study certainly seems interesting from a relevancy point of view (despite the asinine way of presenting the results: chance of dying? come on that's ridiculous). However, there is almost no useful information that can be extracted from it that relates to the average office worker. In other words, what could I actually do to fix this other than changing jobs? From what I can tell, there is not a whole hell of a lot. All in all, it's an interesting study, but the results seem inescapably damning for modern work environments.

People who stand all day *still* die (4, Informative)

joelsanda (619660) | about 4 years ago | (#33387424)

As George Carlin said, "Eat well, stay fit, and die anyway."

"Nah... sometimes I wanna die." (1)

seeker_1us (1203072) | about 4 years ago | (#33387442)

Quote from Carl, Aqua Teen Hunger Force.

Re:"Nah... sometimes I wanna die." (0)

blair1q (305137) | about 4 years ago | (#33387560)

I never watched that, but the irony of a team of superheroes made out of Fast Food is...ironic.

I mean, they'll save you now, but eventually they'll kill you...

Smokers are exempt (1)

Nick (109) | about 4 years ago | (#33387470)

The ones that get up every hour to step outside for a smoke that is. Now if they can just solve the cancer thing.

ORLY? (1)

agent_vee (1801664) | about 4 years ago | (#33387520)

Sitting here in my safe office cubicle, I think I am a lot less likely to die right now than someone not sitting and out there in the world doing any number of dangerous things, like driving while texting!

Not All That New News (4, Informative)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 4 years ago | (#33387572)

FYI - similar information was reported in BusinessWeek a few months ago, referencing studies from as far back as 2005

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_19/b4177071221162.htm [businessweek.com]

One approach to avoiding these problems is the treadmill desk. [google.com] Around five years ago I had a leg injury that made sitting very painful - driving was torture - so I spent about a year standing in front a raised desk each work day. It took about a week to get used to it (the alternative being constant pain from sitting down probably helped to speed my acclimation). Once I had adjusted, I found standing just as comfortable as sitting. I expect that using a treadmill to simply walk at a very leisurely pace would be just as easy and I am planning to furnish my home office with one once the new house is built.

The faster you move, the slower you seem to age (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33387576)

The reverse statement is sort of true as well:

The faster you move around, the more you approach the speed of light. As a result, everyone around you sees you aging slower and you can see them aging faster.
Your body however, will age just as fast as anybody else to you as the observer.

Time travel ftw!

If you stand up longer, however... (1)

r00tyroot (536356) | about 4 years ago | (#33387590)

You increase your risk of Ninja star attack.

Dying from what ? (1)

VocationalZero (1306233) | about 4 years ago | (#33387594)

Those who sat a lot and moved less than three and a half hours per day are the most likely to die early

Dying from what , exactly? They never specify, not even in the article. This is FUD .

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>