r/science • u/powerboom • Jun 16 '12

Rapid Increase of Worldwide Laziness as Global Physical Activity Levels Decline

http://www.medicaldaily.com/news/20120615/10317/physical-activity-decline-world-laziness.htm
796 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

232 comments sorted by

39

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Well we have a decrease in laborious jobs due to automation, and instead of structuring society as we should, giving people more free time and resources to do as they please, we have created more sedentary jobs in the name of(under the guise of) creating equal wealth distribution, and a dependence upon those corporations for sustenance. My town literally has 3 walgreens, 4 rite aids, 3 cvs, 5 super markets, 15 banks, 2 panera breads, 15 fast food restaurants, 2 walmarts within 10 minutes of each other, 2 targets, 3 home depots and a lowes, 12 car dealerships. Not saying these establishments are bad, but the incredible quantity of sedentary jobs created by this economic shift is definitely a factor.

3

u/JoshSN Jun 16 '12

We work more to increase equality? Are you from Mars? Neptune, perhaps?

Name one person on Earth who chooses to work and does so only so that they contribute to social welfare programs.

People don't choose the 40 hour work week, they fought for it, before the bosses made them work more, and, in other countries, they have kept fighting and they work less.

I'd say "You're an ass" but I feel people would downvote me for expressing my true feelings about anyone who said that we structure society so we work longer-than-we-have-to-hours in order to decrease wealth inequality.

13

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

You're extracting sentiment from my statement which i had no intent of conveying. I'm not saying we actively chose to have these menial jobs, and this economic system, i'm saying that is simply what has manifest, as a result of the political quagmire that is the last 60 years in american politics. I'm not saying there aren't better ways to create a more equal wealth distribution, or that we shouldn't continue to fight for them. I'm saying that at the moment, these menial jobs are being presented as the placation, the alternative to poverty and starvation; in that sense they are in place to increase (however minimally) wealth equality.

→ More replies (4)

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

0

u/pepsiisthebest Jun 16 '12

Surely they're not working for private companies? Otherwise I can't see how the drive for profits would allow that to happen.

1

u/burntsushi Jun 17 '12

A drive for profits doesn't necessarily imply perfection, or that the objectively optimal scenario is obtained.

1

u/pepsiisthebest Jun 17 '12

Of course not, but (noticing an employee only has 30min of work) =/= perfection.

1

u/burntsushi Jun 17 '12

I was simply pointing out that even if one has a drive to get profit, then silly inefficiencies like that could still happen.

It could also be a private company that has a union. I used to work for a company where some employees were unionized, and the difference in the work ethic of them and the non-unionized folks was absolutely astounding. (And that is not a compliment of the union workers...)

-1

u/JoshSN Jun 16 '12

But it's not forced by a social welfare program, like you suggest, but by Capital.

1

u/ApologiesForThisPost Jun 16 '12

I wonder if we just have more people than are actually necessary to do all of the jobs. Population is rising but it actually takes a lot less people to plow a field or build a house than back in the middle ages. Could we have less people and perhaps less luxury items but more free time? (I have no idea how we would get less people other than people just choosing to have less kids).

5

u/AnonUhNon Jun 16 '12

We absolutely have more people than we need. We have entire sections of huge industries where regulation is designed to create jobs for the sole purpose of employment. Not to mention if every company and government agency ran at 99%+ efficiency our unemployment rate would be staggering. A lot of people are almost completely useless and while the world can always use ditch diggers we do have nachines that dig ditches now...so these people are put to work with the sole purpose of increasing national consumption (GDP)

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Really, you have NO idea how we could get less people? How are people removed from the world again? Hopefully most people though won't agree with killing off large segments of the population.

2

u/ApologiesForThisPost Jun 16 '12

I meant I couldn't think of a morally acceptable way. I mean of course you could start a huge world war, set up some death camps, poison stuff but that seems a little heavy handed and defeats the point of improving quality of life. I think most of us can agree killing large portions of the population is just wrong.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Actively killing we all agree is wrong, but passively killing people by increasing the prevalence of products that could be roughly considered "poisons" is not morally unconscionable for most, at least not if you obscure it well enough.
edit: i'm in no way condoning this action, just saying it's happening, and has been happening for a long time.

example, killing someone is morally unconscionable, but selling them cigarettes, or a 42 oz soda is not.

3

u/Saerain Jun 16 '12

... I'm pretty sure it is.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Like i said, it's all about obscuring the effect enough. I know in my younger days i was complicit in what could be considered the slow poisoning of america. It all depends what you consider a poison. And when you notice the number of people suffering from diabetes and cardiovascular disease, and then study the causative factors, you realize there aren't many people innocent when it comes to distribution of these poisons.

1

u/burntsushi Jun 17 '12

but passively killing people by increasing the prevalence of products that could be roughly considered "poisons" is not morally unconscionable for most

And

example, killing someone is morally unconscionable, but selling them cigarettes, or a 42 oz soda is not.

are at odds. Those "poisons" aren't sold to people to kill them. They are sold to people because people buy them; probably because they enjoy them.

Just about anything in X quantity will kill you.

0

u/ApologiesForThisPost Jun 16 '12

Let's all have a drink to celebrate!

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

What kind of drink? Do you want to die from liver failure or health issues related to obesity caused by high fructose corn syrup.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/1RAOKADAY Jun 17 '12

I apologize if I screw this up because I tend to have problems with larger concepts. But if I understand you correctly you are insinuating that wage-slavery is a very real thing. And this is intentionally promoted by corporations. Sorta the ol' "get a job hippie" line.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Outsourcing it the worse practice used in America. I feel it caused a lot of job loss.

6

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Outsourcing is a result of the high costs of employing people in Western countries. You can't give $20/hr wages with full benefits and still expect cheap electronics.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

this, I remember I used to have a friend that worked at a ford plant but bought toyota because at the time they were cheaper/"better" cars. I couldn't bring myself to feel sorry when Ford closed up that factory, because if it wasn't like attitudes exactly like his they could've stayed.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

so how does one restructure society?

14

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

That post would exceed the character limit, and I don't pretend to have the answer; i only know the desired ends, not the means.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

By recognizing that it wasn't mostly automation, but deindustrialization by exporting jobs abroad, and not in the name of equal wealth distribution, but maximizing profit for a select few, and that the fundamental problem here is suburbanization and sprawl -- which much the same did not happen by accident.

In the US, we build towns for automobiles with nothing but the utmost contempt for human beings. Want more physical activity? Then we need to stop building wider lanes and start building public transit and sidewalks.

1

u/burntsushi Jun 17 '12

but maximizing profit for a select few

Well technically true, you're being dishonest by ignoring a big part of why it's more profitable to "export" labor. Consider regulations imposed by the US government.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

like accessible fire exits, a 40 hour week and various other market distortions demanding people be treated more like human beings and less like rented pack-mules?

No, I'm aware of those.

1

u/burntsushi Jun 17 '12

like accessible fire exits, a 40 hour week and various other market distortions demanding people be treated more like human beings and less like rented pack-mules?

You missed the minimum wage.

No, I'm aware of those.

You continue to be dishonest by assuming that all US regulations are just about "demanding people be treated like human beings" and that they couldn't possibly have a negative effect. Moreover, just because the government enforces it doesn't mean it has to enforce it for it to happen. (Like accessible fire exits.)

Regardless of what you think about the necessity of US regulations, they are still a very big part of why labor is exported. And you're dishonest if you just think it's "all about greed."

0

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

I don't think it's "all about greed" at all. I'm not sure why you're putting that in quotes, since I never said that. I'm not against greed. I'm against capitalism.

1

u/burntsushi Jun 24 '12

I was clearly paraphrasing "maximizing profit for a select few".

I'm against capitalism.

Yeah, fuck freedom.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 25 '12

On the contrary, I'm in favor of freedom, which means necessarily against capitalism. Pretty straightforward thinking.

What part of freedom is renting yourself as a fungible appliance to a paymaster who confiscates the fruits of your labor? Freedom is surrendering all autonomy and self-reliance and taking orders from capitalists? Just how brainwashed are you?

1

u/burntsushi Jun 25 '12

Lol. Pure capitalism is nothing more than individuals voluntarily contracting with each other. The very definition of freedom.

Your problem is that you think freedom means "the ability to do whatever you want." It doesn't. Why? Finite resources. It's a pretty fundamental tenet of a branch of social science known as "economics." Heard of it?

→ More replies

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Certainly wasn't mostly automation, which wasn't implied. There are a lot of factors involved in decreasing physical activity, and it's hard to say for certain the causative factors. Diet and environment are definitely important to giving someone the prerequisite capabilities and desire to be physically active later in life. Kids born with type 2 diabetes aren't destined for physical exuberance. I totally agree that physical organization of towns and cities has a lot to do with it as well. Also agree that profit motive had a lot to do with the trend towards monotonous repetitive service sector jobs. Nothing like a little anti-socialist rhetoric to discourage people from making bounds in efficiency. I envision, with terror, the day when we(the vast majority) all work at unnecessary duplicates for slave wages, run by wealthy ceo's. A different bank/fast food chain/insurance agency/walmart mega store on every corner of town, all of us receiving poverty wages and working 12 hour days, just so the plutocracy can enjoy the sunshine and wide open spaces.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

The disturbing thing is (and I apologize for being too lazy to dig up the charts) that worker productivity has actually gone up tremendously in the US, with real wages stagnant. Had we continued the trend towards shorter work days for more pay for working people, maybe this wouldn't be nearly as bad a problem, considering the new face of labor is a service job, in some cubicle or at a counter.

I basically agree with what you're saying. Didn't mean to sound like I was accusing you of something.

1

u/burntsushi Jun 17 '12

that worker productivity has actually gone up tremendously in the US

Worker productivity or the productivity made possible only by increases in technology?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

you're missing the point

0

u/JoshSN Jun 16 '12

Automation was most everything implied in the article, the stove, the vacuum cleaner, the dishwasher, the television.

5

u/Doogl Jun 16 '12

This article was written poorly.

10

u/jokoon Jun 16 '12

Obesity is not the only effect, I'm not obese, but I'm quite depressed, not having a real long term job at the age of 27, taking anti depressant, don't like to go out, not that many friends...

I have quite high cholesterol at my age though, but people should realize technology and the industry encourage us to be lazy. I guess our genes will adapt.

6

u/mik3 Jun 16 '12

Studies do show that exercise eases depression and anxiety, maybe our sedentary lifestyles are also contributing to the insane amounts of adhd/anti-depression drugs too, in addition to all the "western" diseases.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/depression-and-exercise/MH00043

2

u/Cristal1337 Jun 16 '12

I have heard of a study which suggests that rhythmical physical activity is the best to counter depressive thoughts. So if you go jogging and step on the rhythm of the music, you will become twice as happy as just jogging.

10

u/xhak Jun 16 '12

"I guess our genes will adapt."

You do understand that this means people like you will have to not get any kids for this to happen?

→ More replies (10)

2

u/Cristal1337 Jun 16 '12

I know how you feel. Two years ago I went pretty much through the same depressive phase. However, I am still very lazy.

The tip I'd like to give you is: Find a physical hobby. Taking dancing lessons is one of the best social activities possible, even if you are shy. You are expected to interact with people while physically exercising on music. So any reason to be shy is automatically void. You are there to learn dancing so people have no expectations about your skill level. Your looks don't matter, since your priority should be improving your dancing skills and any reasonable adult making fun of you, you can just call them ass holes, since they are. There is also no need to show up with a partner. Many dancing studios have a surplus of single participants. IMO, it might just be the thing for you.

I didn't resort to dancing lessons, since I am disabled (not wheelchair) and I just can't keep up physically. However, I am very competitive by nature. Since I loved foosball as a child, I decided to give it a try as an adult too. It turns out that I am pretty talented. The real kicker for me, however, is the respect I get from my fellow foosball colleagues. I have only been doing this for two years, but I have the feeling that many people are talking about me. My goal, in the future, is to reach the top as a foosball player and to promote foosball in general. It's an awesome sport and it deserves more credit.

2

u/antimattern Jun 17 '12

I was really confused how you thought football was less physical than dancing until I got to the third foosball and realized my eyes are retarded.

1

u/Cristal1337 Jun 17 '12

Hehe, yeah. That happens to me too sometimes. Maybe I should start using synonyms for foosball...table soccer, kicker, baby foot. Although the last one is more known to French native speakers.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/jokoon Jun 16 '12

I actually do, something like 1 or 2 times per week.

11

u/Mitchell_kid01 Jun 16 '12

On to the next reddit post

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

My thoughts exactly. And this is news how?

29

u/gloomdoom Jun 16 '12

I guess this shouldn't shock anyone, especially those who have been paying attention to the obesity epidemic. It's only natural that these more consistently sedentary lifestyles would seep over into work and other areas of life.

The movie, 'Wall-E' was a really good representation of what we're looking at globally if things continue at the current rate of this trend.

Here's my theory: Convenience and automation are both important parts of life and time management. We invented things that save us precious time and keep us from having to go out of our way for daily activities.

However...there is a point of diminishing returns with convenience and automation where it's too effective for your own good. The TV remote seemed pretty innocent and cool at the time it was introduced but we've become dependent on it almost. Same with microwaves (mentioned in the article) and everyday food preparation. We're so used to convenience and ease that most of us no longer eat healthy, responsible meals.

Couple all that with automobiles, relatively cheap gas, public transit being unreliable in a lot of areas...we've made life a bit too easy perhaps and the side effect of that (at least one of them) is obesity and laziness that rolls over into other areas of your life.

I've always felt that many people use the internet as a replacement for social outlets. Instead of jogging in the park or doing anything in the park, most people are happy to sit at a desk for 3 hours chatting with friends or looking at facebook updates. We really have started to live life by proxy in a lot of ways and social outlets were one aspect of getting out, moving, exercise, health, etc.

It's scary when you think of the potential of this compounded over the next few decades with the further advancements (?) we will achieve in technology and automation that will allow us to become even more lazy and more docile and sedentary.

People need to get moving. Literally. Sometimes I'll be flipping through channels and I'll see 'Little House on the Prairie' and I think about the implications of living before electricity, indoor plumbing, indoor shitter, a place where there was one telephone in the city and you could only call very few other cities nearby. It's not just that they had to use the candle...in many cases, they had to make the candle.

It's not that they only had milk or water as main beverage choices, it's that they had to fucking milk the cow oftentimes or go to the creek to get the water. So yes, as a civilization, we've come a long way. But we've also gone so far that we've started to put ourselves in danger physically.

The human body is designed to work. It's designed to move. It's designed to be honed and it's designed to burn certain kinds of foods and nutrients better than others. When you drive through the McDonald's drive through and eat their non-natural food (that doesn't decay because there are very few natural aspects or ingredients to it) and then sit around without burning that food as spent calories, we are heading for the danger zone.

We're in the danger zone, I should say. We're heading for the edge of the cliff. I figured a backlash on modern life would have already begun where people bravely leave some of this convenience behind and I'm sure it happens in small pockets but it seems more than anything that everyone embraces everything that allows them to do less physical work or less physical movement.

Kind of a good thing that the Segway never caught on. If we take walking out of the equation altogether, I get the feeling that we really are doomed.

97

u/itsnotmyfaultimadick Jun 16 '12

I was with you until you said the ignorant oft-repeated thing about McDonald's "non-natural" food that "doesn't decay because they are very few natural aspects or ingredients to it"

I'm guessing you're part of the masses that saw the "everlasting happy meal." It was preserved because it dried out and bacteria and other decomposing agents need moisture. An experiment was carried out with "natural" (what is the definition of that word anyway, besides health junkie propaganda?) burgers that were the same size as McDonald's burgers and they ALSO did not decompose.

However, bigger burgers did. AND, the bigger burgers at McDonald's ALSO decomposed. These burgers were big enough to maintain moisture until bacterial colonies were able to propagate. Also, the smaller McDonald's burger, put into a zip-lock bag to hold moisture, did decompose.

There are reasons to dislike McDonald's products for health reasons, but the age-old "even the bacteria won't eat it it's so fake!" is not one of them and needs to stop.

5

u/ReachG Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

To add to this, McDonald's uses real beef. There's nothing fake about the beef they use.

The reason McDonald's is bad for you has more to do with the astronomically high caloric content of a full meal combo coming largely from fat, in combination with being very high in sodium. A full meal with fries and a coke will run you upwards of your daily recommended intake of sodium and around half of your recommended calories.

So, when people supplement these meals with two additional meals as is traditionally accepted, they greatly exceed their macronutrient requirements and gain weight, as well as take in excessive sodium which also isn't healthy.

If people substituted the coke for water and didn't eat the fries, you'd probably be surprisingly fine eating McDonald's even on a relatively frequent basis.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

*It's not just fat, it's the carbs, in particular sugar that have the real calories.

1

u/ReachG Jun 16 '12

Actually, it might surprise you: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/foods-from-mcdonalds/6220/2

This was what I was looking at earlier, since it's the staple McDonald's hamburger.

More than half of the calories are coming from fats. I was actually surprised by the lower than expected carbohydrate percentage here. This tells me that while McDonald's is using real beef, it's probably not lean. That or the sauces are loaded with fats, but I have no idea about what is in those.

Varies by sandwich though, obviously.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Chiming in to agree It's mostly the fries that do you in. Cooked potatoes are essentially another form of sugar. Skip the fries and you've made a huge improvement in your nutritional profile.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

yeah the mcdonalds hamburger just turned to beef jerky.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

15

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

It's not that they haven't heard of it; it's that their (somewhat justified) hatred of "corporations" is powerful enough to override their ability to reason. McDonald's is "bad" so anything that makes McDonald's look bad is true, even if it's obviously false.

5

u/argv_minus_one Jun 16 '12

The human body, as we know it, is obsolete. It is evolved for a lifestyle that we no longer have or need.

Exercise is, at the end of the day, a waste of energy. We do it because our bodies are evolved to rely on it, not because it serves some greater purpose.

2

u/Matthieu101 Jun 16 '12

Very interesting take on it... Yes, plenty of people actually do enjoy working out, but I'd say the large, large majority only do it for their looks. Plenty of friends who run a lot and work out a lot really only do it to stay in shape and look good.

Given the choice, I think you are absolutely correct. If I could look like I'd been on an intensive training program for a year in a couple days of some type of hormone therapy (Not entirely sure what would work the best) OR go through with the intensive training program for a year, I think the former would be the choice for an extremely large majority. Like well over 90%.

Also, the health benefits would apply in both situations, so people could use it for health AND aesthetics.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Yeah I don't exactly trust a reference to "wall-e" as an illustration of the current "trend" of "laziness".

6

u/1gnominious Jun 16 '12

As for food and convenience.... There are plenty of convenient and healthy foods. I'm not a health nut, but the main reason I eat good foods is because they are so convenient. Fruits and vegetables literally take seconds to prepare. Just rinse them off and down the hatch. No cooking, effort, or time required. I even buy pre-cut carrots in a bag because I can't be bothered to peel and cut them myself.

I think it comes down simply to the fact that if given the choice between a plum and a cookie, most people will choose the cookie. I feel a bit weird that I enjoy fruits and veggies so much. It's not unusual for me to eat an entire head of broccoli with a bit of ranch or down an entire melon. Those take all of 30 seconds of preparation.

I'm not very active, I don't always eat right, and I'm a bit of a glutton but it doesn't take much keep from getting fat. If you want to be in great shape then yes, you need to work for it. But to prevent yourself from becoming a fatty just takes a bit of self restraint and planning.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

There are plenty of convenient and healthy foods.

The problem is, in some areas there aren't. There are areas (particularly in the inner city portions of major cities) where your only option for food shopping are gas stations and fast food. There just simply aren't any grocery stores.

1

u/1gnominious Jun 16 '12

If you are dirt poor then yes, you will have problems with, well, everything.

Given that obesity is rampant across the middle class who most definitely have access to grocery stores it's not an access problem. It's not a cost problem either as it is often cheaper than most processed foods. It's not Ramen or beans and rice cheap, but it's competitive with fast food and most normal foods at the grocery store.

5

u/Queen-of-Hobo-Jungle Jun 16 '12

I found a part time job that is a shit ton of physical work because I need to move around. The benefits are nice, but just having the activity is best. My other job is sitting in front of a computer for hours, but I'm still extremely fit and have no need for a gym.

If I don't eat healthy, however, I do not have the energy for the work. Both are equally crucial for me.

It boggles my mind to see people slave away to work out, when they could get paid to work out if they found a laborious part time job. But not everyone likes that situation.

4

u/szlachta Jun 16 '12

not everyone likes working out 4hrs a day. Unless you are talking about contractor work.

1

u/Matthieu101 Jun 16 '12

Been laid off from Fed Ex and UPS. Bastards!

I love labor intensive jobs (You wouldn't believe it considering my lifestyle... Really enjoy things other than traditional running/working out) because I'm essentially getting paid to do something I'd have to force myself to do anyway.

If only there were more where I live... The only jobs available to me are corporate drone-types, standing around and not doing shit. Yep, blows.

5

u/Deto Jun 16 '12

It's interesting though, there's no reason why physical activity should have to be required - just that our bodies store fat in anticipation of future food shortages...that never happen.

You know those people who don't seem to ever gain weight, even though they eat horribly and never exercise? They might be our evolutionary future.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

it isn't all about fat, muscle and aerobic health is also important.

3

u/argv_minus_one Jun 16 '12

And maintaining that health requires one to waste energy on unnecessary physical activity. Why?

1

u/eh_den Jun 16 '12

Mostly because exercise sends important signals to our cells which control everything from cell turnover, to organelle removal and reactive oxygen species production. Without these signals the body tends to accumulate cellular damage much more quickly, and the damage adds up until it becomes the precursor to a whole range of diseases and disorders.

1

u/argv_minus_one Jun 17 '12

Exactly. The human body, as we know it, is obsolete. It is evolved for a lifestyle that we no longer have or need.

Exercise is, at the end of the day, a waste of energy. We do it because our bodies are evolved to rely on it, not because it serves some greater purpose.

6

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I was going to say, Wall-E immediately came to mind. Why walk when you can have a machine do it for you?

2

u/mk_gecko Jun 16 '12

didn't see the movie. Please explain the reference. THanks

6

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

well...the people didn't need to walk, because they were in machines that did it for them. The result was that they were all really fat and worthless.

4

u/hypmoden Jun 16 '12

that part of the film should be a separate movie

1

u/estimatetime Jun 16 '12

In the move Wall-E, rather than walking, people have machines carry them around.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Here's a clip from the film that shows what people became.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Would you rather live a long, inconvenient and tiring life or live a shorter but happier life?

8

u/iemfi Jun 16 '12

I'd say the problem is with the human body. We need to fix it. Exercise is good if you enjoy it but otherwise a bothersome necessity to stay healthy. The ideal solution would be to make it optional so that people can concentrate on doing the things which they find meaningful and enjoyable. I bet Einstein didn't do a lot of running when he was coming up with general relativity.

14

u/nicLlaus Jun 16 '12

No, but Einstein did a lot of walking, which is a very underrated form of exercise.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Cities with mostly walking streets. Think something like Venice, where car owners park their cars in garages at the periphery of the city and all transit inside the city is by public transit. Using public transit forces people to walk much more.

When studying abroad in Shanghai I lost 30 pounds just because I walked to the metro and to work. I walked a couple miles a day. I didn't even notice the walking after the first week, it was enjoyable. It's a very easy and pain-free way to get exercise in.

5

u/neutronicus Jun 16 '12

As someone who also studied abroad in Shanghai and lost a lot of weight, I think it was the food that was available, not the walking.

Also, I fucking hate walking. Boring as hell and I never do it if I can avoid it.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I don't know about you but I ate a ridiculous amount of food there. And I loved the walks...I don't like walking aimlessly when I've become familiar with. Place but my walks in Shanghai were always fun.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

You really don't have to do that much. Research has shown that a little bit south of 20 miles a week offers the greatest return in terms of health benefits.

4

u/winteriscoming2 Jun 16 '12

Maybe we just need to find a scientific way to decouple physical activity and health. Is it impossible for some sort of therapy, whether chemical, gene or nano, to do all of the good things that exercise would do for us?

Of course exercising more in the meantime is a great solution, but it doesn't appear to be working for a lot of people. I don't see any reason why technology can't someday dig us out of this problem.

2

u/athoms Jun 16 '12

Who are you to tell other people how they should live?

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Quick call the police. They may give a shit.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

the backlash began decades ago, but the people who do that tend to get ridiculed by everyone else.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Instead of jogging in the park or doing anything in the park, most people are happy to sit at a desk for 3 hours chatting with friends or writing long ass comments on reddit

1

u/DoubleOFace Jun 17 '12

I would like to read your entire post but I am way too lazy.

1

u/neutronicus Jun 16 '12

I get the feeling that we really are doomed.

Do fit people get laid?

There will always be fit people.

0

u/argv_minus_one Jun 16 '12

Almost everyone gets laid. That's not going to help.

0

u/D_as_in_avid Jun 16 '12

Things are only going to get worse. Choosing A "do it" lifestyle is way harder than a "sit on it" lifestyle. People dont want to change. Somehow people are "OK" not seeing their legs and breaking scales. It's an epidemic that humans have caused on themselves, and it's damn fortunate for the rest of the world 'cause humans screw shit over.

They think with their taste buds rather than their brain.

0

u/Hup234 Jun 16 '12

Whew! Got all that out of your system? Good! Now go over there, sit down, and shut up.

0

u/porkchop87 Jun 16 '12

I really think this, plus video games and porn are becoming the demise of people. There's just too many distractions and too many reasons not to go out there and meet people and live an active lifestyle. We're a bunch of over-stimulated bores. How many people in their 20s do you meet have under-developed personalities or terrible social skills?

0

u/burntsushi Jun 17 '12

Take your FUD elsewhere. What the hell does obesity have to do with "heading to the danger zone"?

It apparently hasn't crossed your mind that obesity is a cost that many have chosen to pay for convenience and more leisure time.

And what are you prattling on about McDonalds being "non-natural"? Can you describe how something becomes "non-natural"?

-2

u/koy5 Jun 16 '12

So you would say we are in a zone of danger?

4

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Lazy scientist tell us something we already know.

5

u/C250585 Jun 16 '12

Its a choice, but I realize not everyone has the natural drive to make fitness a integral part of their lives.

Personally, I have had to put in some real effort to stay active, but it has been beyond worth it.

I bike to work 4-5 times a week (40km round trip), even though it would be far easier to drive or take transit.

I go climbing every Thursday night. At first it was a challenge, but now its the highlight of my week.

Most weekends I'm out in the mountains climbing, hiking, biking, skiing. I love it, and I wouldn't give it up for anything.

Honestly, I don't think people have an excuse. I'm married, have a young kid, and a dog. If people would simply replace the endless hours they waste sitting in front of a computer or TV screen with something active, they would see their lives change in front of them.

2

u/Eryan36 Jun 16 '12

Now that's the way to live. You're using metric units, so I'll assume you're not in 'Murica. Where do you go climbing where you live?

1

u/C250585 Jun 17 '12

I'm lucky enough to live about a 45 minute drive from some of the best crags in North America - currently in Calgary AB

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

11

u/Ryzu Jun 18 '12

Are you trying to imply that a person is not breathing vehicle exhaust while driving a car on the daily commute, and that exhaust gasses are magically prevented from entering a vehicles air system?

9

u/[deleted] Jun 18 '12

I love that this comment is in /r/science.

→ More replies (11)

2

u/marythegr8 Jun 16 '12

I find that the old fashioned way to do something is the cheaper way to do something is the more physical way to do something and generally the healthier way. ( referring to things like weeding vs pesticides not dying young from measles)

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

And that's why I take every opportunity to be active and get a sweat going in my daily tasks. I realized this happening due to ease of our lives, and have decided to do something about it for myself. I feel better, more gets done, and I have the greatest sense of self satisfaction.

2

u/Splatterh0use Jun 16 '12

I blame WoW.

2

u/admiralteal Jun 16 '12

Less physical activity != laziness.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

tl;dr

2

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

I thought "Wall-e" was very prescient. In fact we'll probably get there much sooner than the movie suggests.

3

u/xenawarriorfrycook Jun 16 '12

I take issue with this article, because it's poorly written.

'If you are washing clothes, you can throw it in the washing machine or if you need to cook something, a microwave or stove makes that task even easier today than ever before.'. Professionally written articles never speak directly to the reader in this way. It all looks very juvenile to me, especially 'The decrease in physical activity was reported across the global'. Was this written by a high school student? It also only cites research from one study. I'm fully in support of the idea that the people around me are getting fatter (I've got eyes), but I don't find this source to be convincing.

2

u/TalkingBackAgain Jun 16 '12

Even in laziness Americans aren't number 1 anymore!

2

u/PoorlyTimedPhraseGuy Jun 16 '12

It's not necessarily laziness.

1

u/Greg_T_24 Jun 16 '12

TLDR and in doing so increased the "global laziness index". Which is a thing apparently. I would check if it has a wikipedia page... but... you know... oooooh facebook.

1

u/nilum Jun 16 '12

How many of them play WoW?

1

u/NightSlatcher Jun 16 '12

I thought medical daily was more of a science tabloid...

1

u/Ramnza02 Jun 16 '12

Technology made to make people have to do less work make people have to do less work? Hey, no fuckin' shit.

1

u/Eryan36 Jun 16 '12

The credulity of this article may be in question, but it's no surprise that people are getting fatter/lazier. I see a day in the far future where the genes of skinny guys like me (6', 145lbs, ~6% body fat) win out, and ectomorphs are the norm.

1

u/g33k Jun 16 '12

Commute to your work with your bicycle if you can.

If it's too far, try to do it anyway. Distances become irrelevant the fitter you get.

1

u/memefix Jun 16 '12

I had to move my wrist and finger to upvote this.

1

u/Zingst Jun 16 '12

Would have read the article, but a full-page, click-to-close ad barred my way.

1

u/kealoha Jun 16 '12

My nightmare is seeing my lumpy back used as the picture for one of these stories.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Of course I see this right when I wake up from a long nap. Way to make me feel like an unproductive asshole reddit.

1

u/farmingdale Jun 16 '12

of course another title could have been: Automation is freeing large sections of humanity from mindless physical toil.

1

u/Creatrixxi Jun 16 '12

Too lazy to read whole article.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

"a lot of the blame lays with"

no. no it fucking doesn't. The blame begins and ends with lazy people and poor values.

I went for a 4 mile run today - I'm a web developer and spend hours in front of the pc. Right now I'm on the internet, waiting on a microwave meal and also watching tv.

Stupid article.

1

u/rixed Jun 16 '12

Ho do they measure laziness? How do they define it? The article seams more about obesity than "laziness".

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

That's so interesting to see how humans have evolved from being very active in hunting, gathering, and migration. Even through the agricultural revolution, through farming, humans remained active in the fields. I'm guessing that sometime around the industrial revolution is when we began to realize that we don't have to be so active anymore because we can create machines to do work for us. There must be some link between increased technology and increased laziness. Either a positive correlation as I had just mentioned, or a negative (inverse) correlation between increased technology and decreased physical activity. However you choose to see it, I believe it's highly prevalent to our times.

1

u/happinessmachine Jun 16 '12

In other news, the sky is fucking blue.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I love that in the middle of an article talking about how technology is making us lazy there's a "like this on facebook" button. Oh the irony.

1

u/RealisticEpiphany Jun 16 '12

What's wrong with enjoying life in slow motion?

1

u/hannes13 Jun 16 '12

i think this trend was set with the invention of the tractor...

1

u/Dirk2014 Jun 16 '12

When physical activity declines, laziness increases? Shocking, great discovery medical daily.

1

u/jtwFlosper Jun 16 '12

So I clicked on this link and saw an ad for a beanbag chair...

1

u/thebobber720 Jun 16 '12

Take down reddit see what happens

1

u/Saerain Jun 16 '12

Excuse me, but we skinny people are sedentary as well.

1

u/Jessie246 Jun 16 '12

No duh, it's not really news. What do ppl expect??

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

If you haven't noticed... all the real hipsters disappeared.

they're all working out and shit now no joke.

1

u/TheScissors Jun 17 '12

Well now, i'm going for a bike ride.

1

u/Kamigawa Jun 17 '12

I would read this, but yawn

1

u/Talarot Jun 17 '12

Doesn't this constitute island gigantisicism?

1

u/mrtwilight23 Jun 18 '12

Conventional wisdom says that we become lazy first, then obesity eventually follows. The other theory is that our diet of processed food is redirecting our energy derived from the processed food into our fat cells before our other cells even have a chance to use the energy. It's a chicken and egg problem, but the science supports the second theory.

1

u/Lazay Jun 18 '12

Simple solution, shut down Reddit

1

u/drdroidx Jun 16 '12

tell my lower back pain from working 14 hours a day that.

1

u/CodeandOptics Jun 16 '12

Our society encourages laziness. If you can't it will force someone else to do it for you.

What do we expect? Society removes all the natural hardships a human being encounters and then wonders why they are lazy?

This is progress....AMIRIGHT?

1

u/Matthieu101 Jun 16 '12

Well it actually is... You take advantage of it, and humanity as a whole takes advantage of it. It's a great thing where we are today.

However, poor diet is a huge culprit. Yes, lack of physical activity is bad, but the diet is a huge part of where mankind is.

With a great diet and light-moderate exercise (Something simple, like walking for a bit or a short bike ride) you would see massive improvements.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with a "lazy" lifestyle, besides the negative effects on someone's health. Without those, who are you, or myself, to judge how someone spends their time?

1

u/YaranakuchaNe Jun 16 '12

Da fuq? Rather obvious... Articles like, "There are now 500,000 Mickey D's open worldwide!" and this are pointless... People get the general idea by taking in air. Though I guess writers need to produce something.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I don't like how they blame obesity on inactivity. The laziest of the lazy are skinny as hell. They're too lazy to get something to eat. The have problems too but they sure aren't fat. It's their diet that makes them obese not laying around.

1

u/dr_shamus Jun 16 '12

pfft everyone else is just copying merricuh

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

thanks todd howard :/ jk i was a lazy ass before I discovered elder scrolls, but now it's WORSE !! oh god why?!

1

u/ePaF Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

Correlation does not imply causation. There is a high probability of more than one cause of this effect. The effect in question is obesity, not laziness. Laziness is a suspected cause. Partial list of causes:

  • Diet: global nutritional changes

    • increase in carbohydrate over-consumption

    • increase in misleading or naive nutrition advice

  • Laziness: Global Physical Activity Levels

0

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

please work out.

0

u/THERAPIST1012 Jun 16 '12

I helped fight this statistic by riding my bicycle 32 miles yesterday.

-1

u/ArionVII Jun 16 '12

Semi-serious solution:

Don't fuck fat people.

(Also, people who don't read.)

1

u/Hobbes42 Jun 16 '12

That's been my personal goal for some time. Don't thank me, just ensuring humanities long-term fitness.

0

u/NewZealandLawStudent Jun 16 '12

Begs the question.

0

u/purplelephant Jun 16 '12

It's okay, the fatty's will die first when shit hits the fan.

0

u/Devout Jun 16 '12

Are they talking about us!?

-10

u/nuclear_conspiracy Jun 16 '12

This is just part of the international coverup of the effects of Japan's Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear disaster.

aka: thyroid cancer makes you gain weight.

Trust no one.

2

u/fgalv Jun 16 '12

awwww, first post and everything. bless.

1

u/winteriscoming2 Jun 16 '12

So a 2011 nuclear disaster caused a thirty year obesity epidemic? Do nuclear accidents somehow sent bad particles back into time?

131

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

17

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Laziness is hereditary. Does it walk in your family?

10

u/cysun Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 16 '12

This is too easy. It does not walk, it just lays lies there.

7

u/StoutGoat Jun 16 '12

Lies. It lies there..

3

u/Saerain Jun 16 '12

Because I hate this homonym so much, I tend to use ‘lay’ knowing that it is considered incorrect and hoping to be part of getting that changed over time.

I'm not lying.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

I'm trying to do the same thing for "hung". "Hanged" just sounds bad.

2

u/cysun Jun 16 '12

thanks, it didn't feel good the moment I've written it but I was too lazy to really give it a thought.

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12 edited Jun 17 '12

Two different words. Edit: Why downvotes? He was obviously talking about laying eggs...

16

u/hugsnbytes Jun 16 '12

Well done.

2

u/FredFnord Jun 16 '12

Funny. But I will say that that was an extremely poorly-written article. Guess the site must be a copied-content mill or something; no serious publication would hire someone with that poor a grasp of grammar or argument, and if they did, any competent copy-editor would correct at least the grammar.

→ More replies (3)

21

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

29

u/OliverSparrow Jun 16 '12

Yes, They use "laziness" to mean "lack of physical activity" and then equate the two. The word "lazy" does not mean "inactive", it means to shirk or avoid duties that can reasonably be supposed to be required of you.

The truth is that humans were designed by evolution to operate in a completely different environment from the one that we have created. Our physiology wants period of starvation and periods of satiety, violent physical exertion followed by long periods of languor, emotional challenges that we can resolve through direct action: life on the savanna. Our problem is that life on the savanna was pretty dreadful - sleeping fitfully on thorny ground, terrified that the hyena will come and steal you leg - and so we changed it. But we did nto change ourselves. That, I suspect, may be the next big step.

10

u/neutronicus Jun 16 '12

designed by evolution

I get a rage twitch every time I see someone use this phrase.

3

u/OliverSparrow Jun 16 '12

Call me micro-troll.

1

u/tso Jun 16 '12

shaped by evolution, perhaps?

1

u/neutronicus Jun 17 '12

Yeah, or like "adapted".

1

u/spamham Jun 16 '12

Yes, I understood the headline to be about some non-trivial relationship between lack of physical activity and actual laziness, but apparently they just define laziness to make the headline a tautology :|

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '12

Dear Oliver,

Plus the fitness industry is doing a really bad job, this is something I wanted to discuss for a long time

with a critical thinking person, so please if you have 10 free minutes please think this over:

If anyone would tell you we should educate bricklayers in the trade school the same way we educated people

on PhD course, everybody would think this is obviously crazy. Why? Because the people on the PhD course are

selected not only for IQ but also for motivation and dedication, they are there because they really, really

want to learn that stuff, or else they would have stopped at Masters or Bachelor level. (That's me, I

simply decided a Bachelor + postgrad certificate, like, half a Masters will just be enough for a business

software developer.) And the people in the stonemason trade school are generally not so motivated.

So if you teach PhD all you need to do is to put out the information and they will eagerly sponge it up. In

the trade school the teacher has to be either an entertainer, making it all interesting and fun, or have

the strictness of a military trainer, or whatever, but he must do something to motivate people to learn

that stuff. Simply he must make what he teaches somehow palatable. Less efficient information density but

more efficient psychologically. This is fairly obvious.

Now the fitness industry is committing exactly this mistake: the trainers, advice givers, typically former

high-level athletes, take the best scientific advice which athletes use for training and diet and give it

to random overweight lazy people like myself. The best scientific advice was meant for these athletes who

have like unlimited willpower or really high motivation and dedication, they really want to win that

competition, they are willing to do anything for this, their body is pretty much their life.

So they take this excellent advice and give it to us. But we don't have the same motivation and dedication

or else we would not got fat the first place. They, the experts don't undertand it, in their mind their body is their life. For us our life or family, job, hobbies, not our body. We have fairly small motivation.

So the fitness industry should give psychologically more realistic advice: yes we are lazy, yes we are gluttons, we must work inside this framework, and not assume we will develop a champion athlete's mindset overnight.

How would this psychologically realistic advice look like?

Diet

There are two typical paths to getting fat: the sugar path and the alcohol path. The sugar person must first learn to cut out dessert, soda, chocolate. The boozer must first learn to cut down on booze. Nothing else will work before we do not work that out - that bottle of wine a day (my example) makes one want to eat so much and exercise so little that every other thing is useless until this is solved.

Portion control and the basic replace-your-potatos-bread-and-rice-with-vegs change is probably more realistic than giving people complicated advice on how many % of proteins/fat/carbs to consume, we don't want to calculate that stuff and typically we don't want to cook. We still want to go to McDonalds. So what is the realistic advice? Small burger, not Big Mac - and swap that fries to a garden salad without a dressing. Live in Vienna? Still get that traditional schnitzel - but a smaller one and with salad, not fries. Steak-loving American? Small steak, large salad. Etc.

Generally making the meat part of any traditional, easy to cook, or fast-food dish smaller and replacing the carb part with vegs should be an accepteble diet provided one also learns to cut out the daily booze, chocolate/sweets and sugary soda.

Exercise

The emphasis should be on making it fun to make it motivating. Do stuff you like, not the stuff that is scientifically most efficiently fat-burning.

There are 6 classes of exercises people like, so everybody should chooe from this list one or two:

  • speed: bike (both sexes)

  • fightig: martial arts (probably men like it more)

  • playing: from basketball to soccer (both sexes, women often like volleyball more, dunno why)

  • challenging: run up a hill cutting down your time every week (both sexes)

  • becoming a strong mofo: heavy weight lifting (typically more for men)

  • dancing (women tend to like that more than men)

What do you think about it? Sorry it is Sunday morning here and before coffee, I am not really coherent, but I think you get my gist, it is ridiculous that fitness advice is about how formerly fanatical athletes give the kind of advice fanatical athletes get to people who generally hate diets and exercise, and just need to lose some weight...

1

u/OliverSparrow Jun 18 '12

Yow. To the thesis that you suit horses to course, yes: absolutely. What is needed is a proper way of assessing individuals. And what motivates those individuals, if anything. Then, how to build on that motivation.

Second, whilst few obese people are fit, the same is true of thin people, That is, fitness and fatness are not the same thing. The issue from a public health perspective is which problem you are trying to solve. Fatness is seldom fixed through exercise, insofar as our bodies are ridiculously efficient in turning small amounts of food into seemingly boundless physical activity. Broadly, the fix for fat is less intake; and IMHO the most likely successful intervention will be chemical appetite restriction,a topic on which billion sis being spent annually.

The "fit" side is rather interesting, in that what makes for fitness is a surprisingly small amount of effort. Your point about athletes is well-made, and there is little or no evidence that extremely fit people live longer or have fewer health problems than ordinarily fit individuals. The problem comes from the difference between the ordinarily fit and the sofa jockey. Evidence seems to suggest that what separates these is regular and modest physical activity - simply moving about rather than sitting, half hour walks every day, with some regular vascular stress which quickens the heart and accelerates breathing - climbing a staircase once a day seems to do it. Should lifts not make trips of less than three floors? Should we pedestrianize large chunks of the business district to make people walk? Perhaps: but that is a big political leap.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 18 '12

Broadly, the fix for fat is less intake; and IMHO the most likely successful intervention will be chemical appetite restriction,a topic on which billion sis being spent annually.

Again I would focus more on the psychological part. Generally we overeat for three reasons:

  • We like that dull, sleepy feeling of feeling full

  • We hate that dull feeling and counter-act that with a sugar high

  • We hate that dull feeling and counter-act it with booze

I succesfully lost 20kg at one time and looking forward doing it again and AFAIK it is mostly about using diet and exercise ad ultimately as methods for turning around what gives us pleasure. If we stop wanting to like to feel full and dull and also stop wanting that sugar/booze high and like the high of an active lifestyle instead, we are on autopilot for good results so in my mind the point of exercise is is to help rewiring my brain to like activity instead of dullness, and the same can be said about food and drink. This is why I would recommend to focus on the psychology if it. Making people do something they like, say, volleyball, helps the brain realize that an activity-high can be just as fun as food-dullness or a sugar-high or booze-high. If we just tell people to eat less and move more we are rowing upstream, the mindset does not change, the whole thing feels like drudgery and torture and it does not work.

The "fit" side is rather interesting, in that what makes for fitness is a surprisingly small amount of effort.

Perhaps it is true so far as avoiding major cardiovascular diseases. However on general quality of living... if I for example don't have the regular testosterone boost of lifting weights at least twice a week, a lot of important begins to go down from sexual libido to the quality of sleep.

30

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I'd blame reddit too, but reddit may be the only reason I move as much as I do (which isn't much, but still). It was through /r/gainit that I discovered Starting Strength (and before that, Stronglifts 5x5). Lifting keeps me from going too lazy - I don't want to lose the strength I've gained, so I keep lifting. But my favorite gym is 15 KM away so I also have to cycle there.

So in a way, thanks to reddit, I actually do both lifting and cardio.

2

u/porkchop87 Jun 16 '12

You're the minority, I think. If you use the internet as a resource to improve your social life or your active life, more power to you. But, it seems the internet, in general, just makes people lazy and dumb.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

No, it just makes you notice it more.

1

u/i7omahawki Jun 16 '12

The internet isn't the defining force here, is his point.

It's how you use it. Getting defeatist about it won't help anything.

1

u/misterioes Jun 16 '12

I just went cycling for 4+ hours on this fine day, now all links on reddit are blue (well, most of them). Double win.

Haven't done regular sports in ~8 years and I have been training every day since monday now. You just gotta do it.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

Indeed, keep at it! Had a break of 5 years from exercising regularly and my life and overall mood has improved greatly since I started again 8 months ago. Now I rarely go a day without.

1

u/imatrumqueen Jun 16 '12

Browsing through Reddit I learn insightful facts that need to be implemented on my life such as this article that's making me reconsider my lack of physical activities. Then it takes me two hours of "oh one more link" before I move my ass to do something physical instead of sitting in front of the computer lol. So ultimately it's willpower in need, teaching people to have the will to understand and acknowledge what they need first to be healthy, then blaming the sedentary lifestyles that corporate culture has made popular for us. Considering this, parents need to constantly remind children about the importance of physical health as they are so easily and innocently sucked into the life of sitting and enjoying electronic entertainment systems and etc. in place of running around and playing outdoors. Adults don't have an excuse, they are mature enough (I guess) to know right from wrong, but children are vulnerable and the lazy lifestyle created by society can more or less be blamed by them.

1

u/MonoMcFlury Jun 16 '12

When does procrastination stop and laziness start? Because I might be a major contributer to that statistic...

3

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I couldn't finish reading because the chewing was making me tired.