Connect with us

Fitness

5 more minutes of exercise can help you live longer | CNN

Published

on

5 more minutes of exercise can help you live longer | CNN

Daily step counts and reaching at least 150 minutes a week of exercise — lots of exercise guidance focuses on hitting specific step, mile or time targets. But for many people, especially those who are least active, these goals can feel daunting and out of reach.

Can you commit to walk for five minutes daily? Instead of asking what happens when people meet ideal exercise benchmarks, researchers examined what might change if people made small, realistic shifts in how they move and how much time they spend sitting.

The findings, published recently in The Lancet journal, suggest that even modest changes could have meaningful implications for your health and longevity.

I spoke with CNN wellness expert Dr. Leana Wen about what the study found and how it influences what we think about movement in daily life. Wen is an emergency physician and clinical associate professor at George Washington University. She previously was Baltimore’s health commissioner.

CNN: What’s unusual about this new study of exercise?

Advertisement

Dr. Leana Wen: This study set out to answer a deceptively simple question: What might happen if people moved just a little more each day or sat a little less? Rather than focusing on whether people met established exercise targets, the researchers examined the potential population-wide impact of very small increases in physical activity and small reductions in sedentary time.

To investigate this question, they conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis, which means they combined and reanalyzed data from multiple other studies. The analysis included data from seven groups in the United States, Norway and Sweden, comprising more than 40,000 participants, along with a separate analysis of nearly 95,000 participants from the United Kingdom.

The researchers focused on moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, which includes activities that raise the heart rate and make people breathe harder, as well as total sedentary time. They then estimated how many deaths might be prevented if people increased their activity by just five or 10 minutes a day or reduced their sitting time by 30 or 60 minutes a day.

CNN: What did they learn about the potential impact of small changes?

Wen: The key finding was that even very small changes in daily movement could be associated with meaningful reductions in deaths when applied across large populations.

Advertisement

The researchers modeled two different scenarios. One focused on people who were least active — roughly the bottom 20% of participants — and asked what might happen if this high-risk group slightly increased their activity. The second took a broader, population-based approach, looking at what might happen if nearly everyone except the most active 20% of individuals made small changes.

In the high-risk scenario, a five-minute-per-day increase in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity among the least active participants was estimated to prevent about 6% of all deaths. When that same five-minute increase was applied across the broader population — excluding only the most active individuals — the potential reduction rose to about 10% of all deaths. These estimates suggest that modest increases in movement, when adopted widely, could translate into substantial population-level benefits.

The researchers also examined reductions in sedentary time. Cutting daily sitting time by 30 minutes was associated with smaller but still meaningful reductions in deaths. Among the least active participants, a 30-minute reduction in sedentary time was estimated to prevent about 3% of deaths, while applying that same reduction across the broader population could prevent about 7% of deaths.

CNN: Do these results support what we already know about exercise, sitting and longevity?

Wen: These findings are consistent with decades of research showing that physical activity is strongly associated with longer life and lower risk of chronic disease, while prolonged sedentary time is linked to higher risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and premature death.

Advertisement

What this study adds is nuance. Traditional exercise research and guidelines often emphasize thresholds; for example, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends at least 150 minutes a week of moderate-intensity physical activity such as brisk walking, dancing or gardening. These thresholds are based on levels of activity associated with maximal or near-maximal health benefits. While those targets are evidence-based, they could unintentionally reinforce the idea that anything less does not matter.

This analysis reinforces the concept that the relationship between activity and health is not all or nothing. Benefits begin at very low levels of activity, particularly for people who are starting from a sedentary baseline. Even incremental increases below guideline thresholds can contribute to better health outcomes.

The study also aligns with growing recognition that sitting time itself is an independent health risk. Even people who exercise regularly can spend large portions of the day sitting, and reducing sedentary time appears to confer benefits beyond structured exercise alone.

CNN: Does this study change existing exercise guidelines?

Wen: It does not change existing exercise guidelines, and it does not suggest that recommended activity levels should be lowered. The current guidelines remain grounded in extensive evidence and are designed to optimize health outcomes across many dimensions, including cardiovascular fitness, muscle strength and metabolic health.

Advertisement

What this research does change is how people might think about those guidelines. Instead of viewing them as a rigid standard that must be met to see any benefit, people can think of them as an aspirational goal along a continuum. Movement exists on a spectrum, and every step along that spectrum matters.

This framing can be particularly helpful for people who feel discouraged or defeated by traditional exercise advice. Rather than feeling that anything short of a full workout is pointless, people can recognize that small increases in daily movement are worthwhile and meaningful.

CNN: Who may benefit most from focusing on small, incremental changes?

Wen: As seen across numerous studies, the largest potential gains appear to be among people who are least active to begin with. For individuals who spend most of the day sitting and engage in very little moderate or vigorous activity, adding even a few minutes of movement represents a substantial relative increase.

This group includes many older adults, people with chronic medical conditions, individuals with physically demanding caregiving roles, and those whose jobs involve prolonged sitting. It also encompasses people who may feel intimidated by exercise culture or who have limited access to safe spaces for physical activity.

Advertisement

From a public health perspective, helping these groups move just a little more could have an outsize impact. Small, realistic changes are more likely to be adopted and sustained, and when spread across large populations, they can translate into meaningful reductions in disease and premature death.

CNN: For someone who feels overwhelmed by exercise advice, what is a realistic first step they could take today?

Wen: A helpful first step may be to shift the mindset from “exercise” to “movement.” Physical activity does not have to mean a gym membership or an intense, structured workout. It can be as simple as taking a brisk walk, taking the stairs instead of the elevator, and standing up and doing chores like vacuuming during the day.

The goal is not perfection or intensity but consistency. Adding a few minutes of movement to the day, or finding opportunities to sit less, can be a manageable place to start. Over time, those small changes can build confidence and momentum.

The central message of this new study is actually reassuring: Progress does not have to be dramatic to matter a lot. Small, realistic changes, repeated day after day, can add up in ways that benefit both you and your community as a whole.

Advertisement

Get inspired by a weekly roundup on living well, made simple. Sign up for CNN’s Life, But Better newsletter for information and tools designed to improve your well-being.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Fitness

Six ways your smartwatch is lying to you, according to science

Published

on

Six ways your smartwatch is lying to you, according to science

You check your smartwatch after a run. Your fitness score has dropped. You’ve burnt hardly any calories. Your recovery score is really low. It’s telling you to take the next 72 hours off exercise.

The worst bit? The whole run felt amazing.

So why is your watch telling you the opposite?

Ultimately, it’s because smartwatches and other fitness trackers aren’t always accurate.

Smartwatches can shape how you exercise

Using wearable fitness technology, such as smartwatches, has been one of the top fitness trends for close to a decade. Millions of people around the world use them daily.

Advertisement

These devices shape how people think about health and exercise. For example, they provide data about how many calories you’ve burnt, how fit you are, how recovered you are after exercise, and whether you’re ready to exercise again.

But your smartwatch doesn’t measure most of these metrics directly. Instead, many common metrics are estimates. In other words, they’re not as accurate as you might think.

1. Calories burned

Calorie tracking is one of the most popular features on smartwatches. However, the accuracy leaves a lot to be desired.

Wearable devices can under- or overestimate energy expenditure (often expressed as calories burned) by more than 20 per cent. These errors also vary between activities. For example, strength training, cycling and high-intensity interval training can lead to even larger errors.

This matters because people often use these numbers to guide how much they eat.

Advertisement

For example, if your watch overestimates calories burned, you might think you need to eat more food than you really need, which could result in weight gain. Conversely, if your watch underestimates calories burned, it could lead you to under-eat, negatively impacting your exercise performance.

2. Step counts

Step counts are a great way to measure general physical activity, but wearables don’t capture them perfectly.

Smartwatches can under-count steps by about 10 per cent under normal exercise conditions. Activities such as pushing a pram, carrying weights, or walking with limited arm swing likely make step counts less accurate, as smartwatches rely on arm movement to register steps.

For most people, this isn’t a major problem, and step counts are still useful for tracking general activity levels. But view them as a guide, rather than a precise measure.

3. Heart rate

Smartwatches estimate your heart rate using sensors that measure changes in blood flow through the veins in your wrist.

Advertisement

This method is accurate at rest or low intensities, but gets less accurate as you increase exercise intensity.

Arm movement, sweat, skin tone and how tightly you wear the watch can also impact the heart rate measure it spits out. This means the accuracy can vary between people.

This can be problematic for people who use heart rate zones to guide their training, as small errors can lead to training at the wrong intensity.

4. Sleep tracking

Almost every smartwatch on the market gives you a “sleep score” and breaks your night into stages of light, deep and REM sleep.

The gold standard for measuring sleep is polysomnography. This is a lab-based test that records brain activity. But smartwatches estimate sleep using movement and heart rate.

Advertisement

This means they can detect when you’re asleep or awake reasonably well. But they are much less accurate at identifying sleep stages.

So even if your watch says you had “poor deep sleep”, this may not be the case.

5. Recovery scores

Most smartwatches track heart rate variability and use this, with your sleep score, to create a “readiness” or “recovery” score.

Heart rate variability reflects how your body responds to stress. In the lab it is measured using an electrocardiogram. But smartwatches estimate it using wrist-based sensors, which are much more prone to measurement errors.

This means most recovery metrics are based on two inaccurate measures (heart rate variability and sleep quality). This results in a metric that may not meaningfully reflect your recovery.

Advertisement

As a result, if your watch says you’re not recovered, you might skip training — even if you feel good (and are actually good to go).

6. VO₂max

Most devices estimate your VO₂max — which indicates your maximal fitness. It’s the maximum amount of oxygen your body can use during exercise.

The best way to measure VO₂max involves wearing a mask to analyse the amount of oxygen you breathe in and out, to determine how much oxygen you’re using to create energy.

But your watch cannot measure oxygen use. It estimates it based on your heart rate and movement.

But smartwatches tend to overestimate VO₂max in less active people and underestimate VO₂max in fitter ones.

Advertisement

This means the number on your watch may not reflect your true fitness.

What should you do?

While the data from your smartwatch is prone to errors, that doesn’t mean it is completely worthless. 

These devices still offer a way to help you track general trends over time, but you should not pay attention to daily fluctuations or specific numbers.

It’s also important you pay attention to how you feel, how you perform and how you recover. This is likely to give you even more insight than what your smartwatch says.

Hunter Bennett is a lecturer in exercise science at Adelaide University. This piece first appeared on The Conversation.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Fitness

How the 3-3-3 Rule Helped Me Stick to an Exercise Routine

Published

on

How the 3-3-3 Rule Helped Me Stick to an Exercise Routine

If you’ve ever started a new workout routine with the best intentions only to find yourself skipping sessions by week two, you’re not alone. I’m the type to get trapped in the same cycle of burnout, where I go hard for a couple of weeks, feel exhausted, feel guilty, and repeat. For me, what finally broke that cycle wasn’t a new gym membership or a fancy fitness app, but a simple scheduling hack: the “3-3-3 rule.” I’d seen this rule applied it to general productivity, and all the same principles can apply to your fitness habits, too. Here’s how you can use the 3-3-3 rules to structure your workouts and create a habit that sticks.

What is the 3-3-3 rule?

The 3-3-3 “rule” (or “method,” or “gentle suggestion”) is essentially a weekly workout framework built around three types of movement, each done three times per week:

  • Three strength training sessions. This includes lifting weights, bodyweight circuits, resistance bands, whatever builds muscle and challenges your body.

  • Three cardio sessions. This includes running, cycling, swimming, jump rope, a dance class—what counts as “cardio” is up for debate, but here, I think of it as anything that gets your heart pumping.

  • Three active recovery days. This includes light walking, yoga, stretching, foam rolling, and so on.

And yes, I realize this math adds up to nine intentional days of movement across a seven-day week. Here’s the thing: You do double duty some days, or skip workouts here and there, or adjust to a nine-day cycle, because the point isn’t rigid scheduling. The point is rhythm over a strict structure. For me, the 3-3-3 rule provides a sense of momentum that’s flexible enough to fit into real life, but consistent enough to actually stick to.

Why the 3-3-3 rule works for me

Before I get into how the 3-3-3 rule helped me specifically, let’s talk about why so many workout plans fall apart in the first place. I believe most of them make two classic mistakes. The first is doing too much, too soon. You go from zero to six days a week at the gym, you get burnt out, and the whole thing unravels. The second mistake is having no real structure at all—just vague intentions, like “I’ll work out when I can,” which never materializes into anything real for a lot of people.

For me, the 3-3-3 rule solves both of those problems. It gives me enough structure to build habit and momentum, but not so much intensity that my body and brain feel overwhelmed. I personally adore running, but I struggle to motivate myself to lift weights; the 3-3-3 rhythm here helped me find a middle ground between those two workouts. When I know I have three strength sessions to hit in a week (or nine-ish day cycle), I can look at my calendar and find three slots without too much drama or dread.

Advertisement

There’s also plenty of breathing room built into the plan, which was the biggest game changer for me. I used to have the (toxic) thought that my rest days were wasted days, which is a mentality that led to either overtraining or complete inactivity with pretty much no middle ground.

Plus, there’s something psychologically satisfying about the number three. I know and love the rule of threes in photography, comedy, survival tips, and all over the place.

How to make a 3-3-3 workout schedule work for you

The 3-3-3 rule has a ton of wiggle room for customization. Here are some ideas for how you can approach it:


What do you think so far?

For strength days, pick a format you actually enjoy. That might be a full-body circuit, a push/pull/legs split, or a class at your gym. (Boxing, anyone?) Your focus on these days should be a progressive challenge—push yourself, yes, but don’t obliterate yourself.

Advertisement

For cardio days, variety helps. Mix a longer, easier effort with a shorter, more intense session (like a 20-minute interval run). I know I’m biased, but cardio really shouldn’t feel like punishment.

For recovery days, resist the urge to “make them count” by sneaking in extra work. The whole point is to let your body consolidate the gains from your harder days. Walk, stretch, breathe, and trust the process.

Another practical tip: Pick a night to map out your 3-3-3 week ahead of time. You’ll probably find that the week arranges itself pretty naturally once you’re looking for those nine windows.

The bottom line

As always, consistency should always be your priority in fitness. If you’ve been struggling to find a rhythm, if your past workout plans have always fizzled out around week three, give the 3-3-3 rule an honest four-week try. Maybe start with a 1-1-1 month! After all, the 3-3-3 rule isn’t a hack to totally transform your physique, but I do think it can provide something way more valuable. Finding a routine that works for you—like the 3-3-3 rule works for me—is the first step to make exercise a reliable, sustainable part of your life.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Fitness

I’m a running coach — I’ve just tested shoes actually designed for women’s feet, and they’re a total game changer

Published

on

I’m a running coach — I’ve just tested shoes actually designed for women’s feet, and they’re a total game changer

Why you can trust TechRadar


We spend hours testing every product or service we review, so you can be sure you’re buying the best. Find out more about how we test.

QLVR ENDVR: Two minute review

Most running shoes feel familiar for a reason: the formula has barely changed in millennia. We have archaeological evidence of shoes being fastened with “shoelaces” as far back as around 3,500 BC, yet the basic lace-up running trainer remains the default.

QLVR (pronounced “clever”) set out to challenge that. Its debut shoe, the ENDVR, is a laceless “running slipper” built around a women-specific mechanical structure, with a slip-on Wing Fit system inspired by the way a bird’s wing opens and closes around movement.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending