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/