新功能、新界面、新体验,扫描即可下载生物谷APP!
首页 » 组学 » The Lancet:每天适度锻炼一小时或足以降低久坐带来的健康风险

The Lancet:每天适度锻炼一小时或足以降低久坐带来的健康风险

来源:生物谷 2016-07-31 12:46

图片来源:medicalxpress.com

2016年7月31日 讯 /生物谷BIOON/ --近日,一项刊登在The Lancet杂志上的研究报告中,来自多个国家的科学家通过研究表示,每天进行一个小时或更多时间的体力活动(体育锻炼)或可有效消除每天久坐8小时或更多时间带来的健康风险,而这种静坐方式包括工作上或家中等。

1953年研究者在英国进行的一项研究发现,相比公共汽车售票员而言,公交车司机患心脏病的风险更高,研究者认为,缺少体力活动或许是引发多种疾病和早死的主要风险因子;最近有研究推测,全球每年会有500万人因没有达到推荐的每日运动水平而死亡。在高收入国家进行的研究结果表明,成年人在大部分醒着的时间都会坐在那里,很多人会开车去上班、坐在咖啡厅、坐在家里看电视等,当前的体力活动建议成年人每周至少要进行150分钟中等强度的锻炼。

本文研究中,研究者提出问题,如果一个人足够活跃(运动足够多)的话,是否就可以减少或者消除其患和久坐相关的早死或其它疾病的风险呢?文章中,研究者分析了16项涵盖了100多万男性和女性的研究,研究者根据中等强度体力活动的水平将所有参与者分成四个四分位数,从最底部的每天锻炼小于5分钟的研究组到每天锻炼超过60分钟的研究组,比如,中等强度的体力活动就等同于每小时步行3.5英里或每小时骑自行车10英里。

研究者发现,每天进行60至75分钟中等强度的锻炼就足以消除每天久坐8小时所带来的早死风险,然而在研究中有四分之三的参与者都未能达到每日的锻炼水平。对于那些体力锻炼研究中不足的个体而言其早死的风险最高,来自剑桥大学的研究者Ulf Ekelund指出,目前很多研究都重点关注每天久坐生活方式相关的健康风险;对于很多乘车上下班及办公室坐班的人们而言,并没有办法可以避免久坐,然而每天进行适当的体力活动或体育锻炼或许可以有效降低这个人群相关的健康风险。

研究者表示,当前的数据分析结果或许还存在一定缺陷,因为这些数据主要来自对居住在西欧、美国和澳大利亚的45岁及以上人群的研究结果,后期研究者希望可以扩展到更大的范围来进行更为深入的研究,以评估体力活动对改善个体久坐引发的健康风险的效应。(生物谷Bioon.com)

本文系生物谷原创编译整理,欢迎转载!点击 获取授权 。更多资讯请下载生物谷APP.

Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women

Prof Ulf Ekelund, PhDcorrespondencePress enter key for correspondence informationemailPress enter key to Email the author, Jostein Steene-Johannessen, PhD, Prof Wendy J Brown, PhD, Morten Wang Fagerland, PhD, Prof Neville Owen, PhD, Kenneth E Powell, MD, Prof Adrian Bauman, PhD, Prof I-Min Lee for the Lancet Physical Activity Series 2 Executive Committe† the Lancet Sedentary Behaviour Working Group†

Background High amounts of sedentary behaviour have been associated with increased risks of several chronic conditions and mortality. However, it is unclear whether physical activity attenuates or even eliminates the detrimental effects of prolonged sitting. We examined the associations of sedentary behaviour and physical activity with all-cause mortality. Methods We did a systematic review, searching six databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science, Sport Discus, and Scopus) from database inception until October, 2015, for prospective cohort studies that had individual level exposure and outcome data, provided data on both daily sitting or TV-viewing time and physical activity, and reported effect estimates for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease mortality, or breast, colon, and colorectal cancer mortality. We included data from 16 studies, of which 14 were identified through a systematic review and two were additional unpublished studies where pertinent data were available. All study data were analysed according to a harmonised protocol, which categorised reported daily sitting time and TV-viewing time into four standardised groups each, and physical activity into quartiles (in metabolic equivalent of task [MET]-hours per week). We then combined data across all studies to analyse the association of daily sitting time and physical activity with all-cause mortality, and estimated summary hazard ratios using Cox regression. We repeated these analyses using TV-viewing time instead of daily sitting time. Findings Of the 16 studies included in the meta-analysis, 13 studies provided data on sitting time and all-cause mortality. These studies included 1 005 791 individuals who were followed up for 2–18·1 years, during which 84 609 (8·4%) died. Compared with the referent group (ie, those sitting <4 h/day and in the most active quartile [>35·5 MET-h per week]), mortality rates during follow-up were 12–59% higher in the two lowest quartiles of physical activity (from HR=1·12, 95% CI 1·08–1·16, for the second lowest quartile of physical activity [<16 MET-h per week] and sitting <4 h/day; to HR=1·59, 1·52–1·66, for the lowest quartile of physical activity [<2·5 MET-h per week] and sitting >8 h/day). Daily sitting time was not associated with increased all-cause mortality in those in the most active quartile of physical activity. Compared with the referent (<4 h of sitting per day and highest quartile of physical activity [>35·5 MET-h per week]), there was no increased risk of mortality during follow-up in those who sat for more than 8 h/day but who also reported >35·5 MET-h per week of activity (HR=1·04; 95% CI 0·99–1·10). By contrast, those who sat the least (<4 h/day) and were in the lowest activity quartile (<2·5 MET-h per week) had a significantly increased risk of dying during follow-up (HR=1·27, 95% CI 1·22–1·31). Six studies had data on TV-viewing time (N=465 450; 43 740 deaths). Watching TV for 3 h or more per day was associated with increased mortality regardless of physical activity, except in the most active quartile, where mortality was significantly increased only in people who watched TV for 5 h/day or more (HR=1·16, 1·05–1·28). Interpretation High levels of moderate intensity physical activity (ie, about 60–75 min per day) seem to eliminate the increased risk of death associated with high sitting time. However, this high activity level attenuates, but does not eliminate the increased risk associated with high TV-viewing time. These results provide further evidence on the benefits of physical activity, particularly in societies where increasing numbers of people have to sit for long hours for work and may also inform future public health recommendations. Funding None.

温馨提示:87%用户都在生物谷APP上阅读,扫描立刻下载! 天天精彩!


相关标签

最新会议 培训班 期刊库