On Jan 4, 2010, at 6:18 PM, Ron Hoggan wrote:
>
>
> I can only guess that part of your (Jim, Wally, and Keith) improved
> fitness is driven by your diet.
Ron, it's an excellent point and I feel it's a big factor for me.
But obviously even an excellent diet doesn't entirely prevent
muscular atrophy. I feel a full body workout, in whatever form, is
vital to maintaining full body health.
Exercise can be defined simply as “movement produced by, or resisted
by, the force of muscular contraction” (Arthur Jones) with the
primary purpose being the improvement of functional ability. Good
news is the hackneyed phrase "use it or lose it" is only partially
true. We have the ability at any age for muscular hypertrophy and
therefore improved function.
Regarding your lung disease, we would all do well to remember that
the function of the cardiovascular system is to support the
musculature. I would be surprised if a gradually implemented
resistance program did not allow you over time to regain a great
degree of fitness. Perhaps you've already tried it and it's truly
not appropriate for you. If so, please forgive me.
Cheers!
Jim
P.S. One other note to the group, everyone here needs to read Taubes'
article on exercise. Again, he's got it half right. But the half I
really like is that if you're exercising to lose weight, you are by
and large wasting your time. The purpose of exercise is to improve
functional capability and decidedly *not* to burn calories. Calories
will take care of themselves if you eat right, the best example being
a ketogenic paleo diet. Anyway, here's a link to the article: http://
nymag.com/news/sports/38001/
|