You voted on it - here it is. I should note that these studies are associative, but that's really the only way we can make some estimations on long term data considering we aren't going to get 50 year randomized controlled trials. So, there's some wiggle room for other factors (confounders) to be the 'real' reason for these wide reaching positive effects. However, researchers can control for some of these potential confounders by performing regression analyses, assuming they have sufficient data on these confounders available. Some of the more common confounders were investigated by the researchers (like physical activity), I simply didn't add them to the video, because they didn't change the outcome. I hope you enjoyed and I'm looking forward to the next one.
Can you do a video on TMG and B12 other supplements that lower homocysteine? Since these supplements and other supplements used to lower homocysteine increase serum methionine and methionine restriction is one of the few proven ways to extend life in many species, I wonder whether these supplements are harming us. So many people are taking them.
This was a great video. I hope you'll get a chance to look at how much is too much. There are countless articles and videos about the importance of exercise and muscle mass and strength, however almost none of the oldest people I've met ever had particularly high muscle mass. It feels like at some point the increase in muscle might become a negative factor, and I've seen some articles that found things like people that run too much or lift weights too much tend to lose some of the benefits of exercise. However for some of these I've met paywalls and haven't been able to find a satisfying answer.
The study "Associations of Muscle Mass and Strength with All-Cause Mortality among US Older Adults" did not do regression analysis of nutrition, stress, or sleep. An alternative explanation of low muscle mass being associated with low lifespan is that muscle is an excess, after the body has taken care of other metabolic requirements and damage repair. A fancy car may be a sign of being rich, but buying a fancy car won't make you rich. It will do the opposite. The study also defined low muscle mass using definitions of sarcopenia. Those who train cardio, body-weight exercise, weight training, and even walking will all not fit this definition, so the study doesn't support Peter's weight training for longevity hypothesis. Weight training may be reducing lifespan, compared to other activities. Low muscle mass wasn't significantly correlated with lower lifespan unless adjusted for BMI. Which could mean fatter people, have lower relative muscle mass. Excess fat is caused by poor nutrition. Poor nutrition causes lower lifespan. Or excess fat is caused by excess toxins, so the body has a place to store them, meaning the fat is good but the toxins are the problem. Or Also the study said that sedentary time was not significantly associated with all cause mortality, meaning exercise does not help longevity at all, according to this study. One proposed explanation in the study is that muscle mass is a metabolic reservoir to withstand disease. An equally likely explanation is that muscle mass is a metabolic sink that causes disease. Or muscle mass is a excess cholesterol sink that wards off disease. This study is the roshak test of studies, in that you can see any explanation you want to see but it isn't prescriptive. If there are any interventions studies that involved specific kinds of exercise on older adults, and measured lifespan, especially if they were placebo controlled, would be interesting to see a video on.
Can you do a video on the long term effects of sauna use on testicles and low testosterone? Nobody has talked about the potential negative effects of sauna. Some male health influencers who jumped on sauna frenzy all ended up with TRT. Peter Attia recently disclosed his total T is 381.
“A 200% increase in all cause mortality” for low muscle mass (Attia @1:30) does not mean “a 200% reduced risk” for higher muscle mass as you indicated (@1:35) but rather a 67% reduced risk, i.e., going from 1 to 3 is a 200% increase, but going from 3 to 1 is a 67% decrease.
I love how your clickbait titles are actually true to the content every time and how your content is very thorough and useful. Thanks for being one of the best UA-cam channels out there!
Strength probably really kicks in when you’re in your late 70s and in your 80s. It’s a bit scary how quickly people in this age group lose strength to carry out their normal life. Can you imagine how dispiriting that must be? It’s also self reinforcing. If it’s impossible to walk to the shops (as a for instance) then that’s one avenue of potential useful exercise unavailable. And really there’s a danger of losing access to most types of basic exercise that you should really keep up in order to just carry out basic daily life. So maybe we need to encourage ourselves to go the extra mile on strength. I know that I neglect it. It seems counterintuitive to dwell on strength when day to day aerobic and endurance seem more relevant. But by the time you’re 85, assuming you’re lucky enough to be spared, then strength is top dead centre.
And both kinds of exercise is good, I should think. Your heart is a muscle too, after all… but he definitely convinced me about strength training! Now I have to get to work on it! 💪
The thing is before 70 or 80 you have enough / excessive strength to do almost anything. When you get below some treshold, you cannot do things. There are also confounding factors relzted to muscle mass, because mm is kind of flamboyant organ not every body decides to have. A lot of things need to be in order to have it. Hormones, dietary protein and micronutrients, physical activity, enough recovery, low/managed stress. So if people go to 70s with those things out of order and also they have no skills/motivation to make them right, this all leads to sooner death.
I try to work my muscles til tired and tender about 5x a week. Lots of 10 min exercise vid's, A 10K walk with 13.5 lb dog as a weight once a week. She's elderly and won't walk far. day after that, I nap instead! lol. Rest of the week I go round th (20 min) block 2-3x a day. Sitting, watching TV, I work my arms with 2K weights (4.4 lbs). I'm 71 and can out-exercise my friends in their 40's. Keep t fun and easy so you'll keep doing it. Feels so good I crave it! I do red light therapy at Planet Fitness and the 10 min massage bed for recovery benefits.
Peter also mentioned that person's Vo2 max is highly correlated with all cause mortality. Having top 1% Vo2 max for you age and sex results in 500% decrease in acm.
In my opinion, the term "all cause mortality" should never be employed in isolation. Clearly, there is never an absolute decrease in mortality. The phrase should only be used in conjunction with the time frame as covered in the research under consideration. No increase in all cause mortality over a 3 month study has completely different implications from no increase over, say, a 3 year study.
@@johnkellett2893 As a math/stats guy, I tend to agree. BUT, as a UA-cam viewer I've learned to be less pedantic about the little details and try to absorb the context and meaning of what's being shared. Also I sometimes need to remind myself that YT is a global village of sorts, and the best communicators are those who can use simpler language and concepts that is easier for things like machine translation. As for ACM...I see it being used everywhere as a stand-in for "risk of you dying from something, somewhere". No end date on that. So I am often shaking my head when someone says, "using X is associated with a 12% decrease in all-cause mortality in men". OK. ACM against what control, and over what time (for starters)? The "control" appears to be the "average guy who lives to 78; the average woman to 82". Or something like that.
Been lifting since high school. Big and strong . Did not stop me from developing cancer three times, nor a bunch of other illness. Sometimes it’s just DNA. But I have benefited from being strong in over all mobility and enjoyment of life.
It's once you reach your 70's and 80's this is truly relevant. I've watched both my mother and mother I'm law really decline and lose all quality of life in their 80's because of low muscle mass. Once someone elderly falls, their life quality gets really poor. They fall because of low muscle strength. If you are over 80 and you don't know what he is talking about then your lifting paid off.
Strength training adds testosterone, it builds bone strength, tendon and ligament and no doubt cartilage, all strengthened due to exercise, so it would make sense that the triggers that strengthen those parts also strenthen arteries and veins, clear out clogs, open up blood flow, and burns High fructose corn syrup before it can damage the liver...
Something that might be the unifying factor for all those results is visceral fat (also part of the junk between muscle tissue). Visceral fat itself is a strong independent predictor of ACM. Someone with low muscle mass but normal strength will be less sedentary and potentially leaner (have better quality muscle, lower visceral fat) than someone with large mass/low strength, normal mass/low strength.
There’s no such thing as a 200% reduced risk. The maximum reduction in any nonnegative quantity is 100%. Notice Attia says “a 3X or 200% increase”. What you should have said is a 66 or 67% reduced risk. I wouldn’t correct a normie on this, but you’re a scientist! ❤
I drink way too much coffee watching this channel as I binge through your content and immerse myself in your discoveries. What effect on will this have on me? Will we be able to tease out whether the consequence was your videos or the coffee? Ultimately I have tremendous faith in your work. Thank you, okay resuming the adventure...
@@mstr293 because I believe preserved mobility is the reason strength factors into longevity. While upper extremity strength is great too, lower extremity strength ultimately is what will preserve your mobility into old age.
@@mstr293 Most people do. I'd say, most sports require a bit of both, even if a little dominant one way or the other. Even skateboarding which one would think is all lower body. If you dip your board, you have to catch yourself. And of course, your flailing your arms around trying to balance and such. You learn to move your whole body as one. But without a solid upper body, if you DO fall and we all do, then the upper body strength, balance and such definitely comes in to play...firstly, you can catch yourself. Secondly, you can brace your fall (which I've had to do a few times when I did fall off my skateboard). I'm a bit older now but still ride my Penny skateboard around from time to time. It's definitely risky learning to skateboard but once you have it down pretty well, it teaches you not only leg balance, situation awareness, reaction time and such, but it also teaches you how to deal with a split second "oh crap" moment...and oftentimes, you are using your upper body...it usually starts with arm flailing...but if you hit a pebble, your using your upper body for positioning. And if your going down, your bracing (or trying to grab a tree maybe ;). Definitely an overall amazing longevity type sport (I'd say similar to skiing). I think the best part other than helping with balance is that split second reaction training you get when dealing with an actual body-in-danger situation. I know I went a bit off topic...but I did have a family member once go to fall, they tried grabbing the TV and it broke...they managed to be ok, possible by bracing the TV. But honestly, it's not always the pure strength aspect. If you have really good body kinetics, you could grab that TV and know how much pressure and such is needed to not only not break the TV but not pulling it down on yourself and having it break your fall appropriately. I don't feel this is actually fully a strength thing here when it comes to preventing injury, but I do feel the muscle mass protecting against health markers is a real phenomenon and is, to a point, equally as important for falls and such but body awareness is very crucial and that transcends strength.
@@jeffschultz4168 They’ve looked at lifelong endurance athletes that did not train strength and they were no different than sedentary folks in the strength domain. I wonder how you might separate body kinetic awareness from strength as many endeavors like gymnastics will have a strength component. Maybe skateboarders/surfers. Not sure what supply of elderly ones we’ll have for a while though.
Yep! I very much agree that you could spend the rest of your life trying to tease out the full understanding and functioning of this concept. But, this concept is why I say that lifting a one-pound weight 100 times is far better than lifting a 100-pound weight once... Not anaerobic verses aerobic, but that the muscles are "trained" for the action verses just strong; I am also willing to bet that the lighter weight with higher reps will burn through more energy. But, Thanks again Nic, for applying some actual research to the talking head claims!
Shoot for the middle and lift a 50 pd weight, say, for 5 to 10 reps and it will do you more good than a single rep of a heavy weight or lots of junk reps on a too light weight. You are only secondarily lifting to burn energy at the gym. You are lifting to provide a stimulus for your muscles to get bigger so they burn more 24/7 and provide sinks for blood glucose etc.
@@billking8843 Thanks for the input... While your advise may be good for a young person with time to spare, my view is that the "training" aspect of muscle care is far more important than the "bulking" aspect -- especially for those who are very young and just starting out and for those who are fighting against the trials of old-age. The research Nic points to seems to support my view, in that longevity is supported more by trained muscle then by bulked muscle, and either is better as opposed to couch-potato muscle. Additionally, it is my experience that muscle based glucose banking is far more effective in higher repetition exercises like running than in power exercises like lifting; with such perhaps being just based on time. Anyways, join us in the growing conversations on Nic's site; great stuff!
Great nuanced video especially with regards to emphasising stength quality over just bulk. This is especially true of bodybuilders. In a large previous trial male professional bodybuilders had 20 -30% increased risk of mortality when compared to age-matched men likely due to the way they exercised, diet + some anabolic steroids. The other interesting thing is that in a large trial last year, regular people who performed 2 -4 times above the recommended amount of Moderate physical activity (300-600 min/week) had an observed 28-38% lower risk of CVD mortality and 25-27% non-CVD mortality, for an overall 26-31% lower risk of mortality from all causes - this activity was any kind of exercise.
I can guarantee that study did not look at natural bodybuilders. For all we know enhanced bodybuilders are protected by their muscle mass from some devastating affects of the copious amounts substances they take (often not taken as wisely as they could otherwise be too).
Great video Nic, as are all of your videos. First time comment for me so I just want to say this is the best no BS researched and presented channel I have ever found on YT so kudos to you. My experience here.. I am 57 yo been lifting 10 years. I am at an age where most of my similarly aged friends look like 67, and are now showing signs that the walking frame is on the horizon. I look more like a 40 yo or younger, good muscularity, power and strength. I am not a big muscular guy though, just well define and developed muscles, but super strong for my size. My genetics dictate 'chicken legs'. However, my leg muscles are developed, but small. Despite this, I can barbell squat more than anyone at my gym. Younger, bigger legged guys do not come close, and this is the key...strength! I did read a study from Japan (sorry I cannot reference it), that indicated quad strength/mortality correlation, and obviously this points to your comment about falls etc. Maybe I won't live to be 100yo, but I will die standing!
Right on man. I am 56 and started lifting when COVID shut down the climbing gyms. Used to lift in my early 20’s. Really enjoying the strength workouts.
I really appreciate your videos. I like the deep dives into all this knowledge. Been watching Peter Attia and Huberman labs for years and it was cool to see them get reviewed here :)
Why does strength correlate with increased health span? Investigate the mechanism by which increased strength is attained. Mike Mentzer’s High Intensity Training specifically prolongs time between training sessions so that recovery (compensation) is followed by growth (overcompensation). Overcompensation? Sound familiar? hormesis => prolonged sirtuin activation Watch this video: Reverse Aging Revolution Scott Leiser How to avoid AGING FAST? 1 Common Element Behind 5 Major LONGEVITY PATHWAYS Oct 11, 2022
Hi Nic! So glad having found your channel. Interestingly I have been hearing the huberman and especially the one one with attia lately... Thanks for sharing your analyses and wit with us 🙌
Very interesting, yes I would agree that it is both necessary for cardio workout and weight training, a good balance exercise program is like nutrition a well-rounded diet
+1 for the outro music. +1 for the grim reaper growl. +1 for bringing up muscle fibrosis -- are there blood text proxies for this? myeloperoxidase? others?
@@mpoharper I wonder how much of men dying before women on average is their propensity to take more risks that end their life early? Also, grip strength correlating with longer life could work for both sexes if it is based on the average per sex (I'm not sure if this is what it meant though).
@@travv88 I think estrogen is protective. You look at heart disease risk; it starts later for women. Perhaps risk also plays a role. All we know for sure is each of us will eventually go. Women are strong but in a way that differs from men. I have much better lower body strength than my husband but he has me beat in upper body and grip strength. I think the key is to keep working on strength as we age. You feel better and look better.
Boss, all these are related to soft tissues, more precise with collagen synthesis after a certain age and genetics have a tremendous role. These things are relatively known for quite a while. The grip force is really a reliable indicator for the quality of the tendons... Soft tissues, collagen which is also the main resistance constituent in the architecture of our organs , basically of the whole body. Stay focus on supplements, please (!) ; you are doing a fantastic job. I'm going to buy a premium membership!
This is helpful (in the "I seriously must learn more here" kind of way). 18-months ago, I broke my ankle (as in completely in 3 places) which was not properly set nor did I heal well or fast. I turn 70 next month. I have been disappointed at my muscle loss (which doctors in this region tell me 'I'm fine for an old woman'-- this is so wrong). I know, TMI. Thank you. I have research to do; and this, I can take to a new doctor. Meanwhile, I rebuild strength. Thanks
Ahhh Peter Attia! One of the great minds. Great coverage to breakdown the key points from his recent interview with Huberman (which was a really interesting discussion to listen to if you've a spare 1hr or more)
I know I'm late on commenting this... The opposite might well be true: healthier people tend to retain more muscle mass and strength hence people with these features appear to live more because of them. I personally think both things are true: having healthy muscle tissue helps us live more but also if we are healthy we tend to also have healthy muscles and more of them.
I am in the 51st percentile in measures of strength, but in the 86th percentile in measures of power, and 94th percentile in measures of speed. So there you have some more characteristics that could be teased out of the data! (in future studies, of course)
If muscle strength is more relevant than overall muscle mass, can I conclude (as a woman over 50) that doing resistance exercise of any kind (I do reformer pilates) is equally as good a form of exercise as weight training? I have not been able to really find the answer to this. I do pilates (to avoid injury + I don't like a bulky look) but if my conclusion is wrong and I should be lifting heavy weights instead as I age, I would love to know this. Also, how do you know if you have sufficient muscle strength for your age to prevent unfavorable health outcomes? Is there a "gold standard" table to look at? I'd love your views, please. Thank you 🙏🏻
Any compound movement and routine that includes some form of progression will do. Better keep things simple and concentrate on improving on the few exercises you do.
This is bewildering to me. Body building hunks with immense strength tend to die earlier. And I've never seen a study in the Blue Zones where the longest living groups on this planet had any special strength or were doing anything special for that. Targeted studies and their correlations seem to differ so much from real life observation observations.
See latest video , where over training with strength.resistance lessens many benefits except diabetes. Which makes sense muscles grab sugar . But useless bulk muscle mass outside of PR in gym or comps - is more tissue that can get cancer, more stress on a heart getting older , less energy for immune system , less recuperation time , more ocd behaviour etc . Calenthistics - strong lean body mass gets all the benefits with less downsides - with proviso plenty of rest. VO2 max is also quoted as great indicator of life expectancy . But again as we age you can to get VO2 you need HIIT to boost it - tradeoff to get it high , may not be worth it . Pushing heart too much with little though, or while fighting an illness can cause heart problems - namely atrial fibrillation. So get your muscle up and then work on maintaining strength . When older 80/20 rule 80% light cardio to intense , warm ups and warm downs . Listen to your body , fighting a flu - rest up - see folks with long covid -one cause was not resting . Plus increase risk of injury. Stay hydrated - when older muscles may let you know you need a break with twitching etc , go from intense to light or stop with warm down . Plus high strength to lean muscle mass , least stress on joints , with huge reserve to squat , lift , carry etc . Also work on movement , control, balance, flexibility I understand those running marathons at 80 may want that sub 3 hours - their choice, just know pros and cons for older heart . Don't see many weight training channels showing downside , just hey this is best way for max big muscles like that's the wonderful end goal . TBF the average gym goer is not ending up with big muscles . as needs crazy dedication plus don't think most people want crazy arms , or thighs that affect everyday life - like walking normally , buying clothes
@@user-yl7kl7sl1gguess who will end with very low muscle mass? The people who didn't want to have much muscle mass...and they lose more as they get older
First off. You are using the extreme as an example - that does not make sense comparing to a normal person. Elite endurance athletes risk ending up with too big hearts even though their cardiovascular health was peak during their younger years. Secondly we dont have have a blue zone combined with lifting weights, which could give even better results than what we are seeing in those zones. thirdly disease and genetic disposition is also a thing, people living longer in blue zones could be a combination of genetics and diet, rather than diet alone. As a conclusion I would argue that you are wrong to say studies differ from real life observation, because you dont know all the co-correlations in real life observations.
That low muscle vs high muscle mass could be simply correlation and not causation. Ie people who have more muscle tend to live a more active lifestyle and tend to look after themselves more than the huge population of people who don’t build muscle.
The causation can also be the otherway round. Unhealthy people are not able to move a lot and that is why there strength is low. Also after illness the elderly cannot bounce back to where they were, hence sarcopenia. Sometimes this happens even to the younger (long covid etc. )
Cool. I’m 76 and walk to the grocery story and when I’m carrying bags of groceries I pump them all the way up over my head or curl them. Besides fixing my shoulders I’m just good all over. Good to know it matters, guess I’ll increase weight or reps.
All the studies of longevity in different areas of the world omit the fact that the people continue hard physical work into old age, go to sleep early, eat locally produced food, water. Plus many don't watch television..... it's not just diet...obviously. However length of life is less important than quality, sense of fulfillment, intelligence, even if you go relatively young.
Ciaran's theory: because strength comes from energy made in the mitochondria. You could have skinny arms but your mitos are firing and thus cellular health is well. Could you be bulky but your mitos are not doing so good? yeah perhaps...
Great video. I don’t know if you’ve spoken about it at all but I’m curious about you’re take on the longevity/IGF-1 conundrum. It seems centenarians tend to have lower IGF-1 or (like in the case of Ashkenazi Jews) low functioning IGF-1 receptors. But strength training, if I understand it correctly, increases IGF-1 in middle aged and older adults. How do you square these two contradictory factors?
It’s my understanding that fast twitch muscle degrades significantly through senior years, therefore developing more mass through slow twitch training would significantly balance or compensate.
Perhaps this is more causation than effect? People with strength muscle mass are much more likely to be exercising, possibly spend more time outside and overall care for their health more. Likewise those with poor strength are more likely sedentary etc.
So, it is really strength to weight ratio that is highly correlated with longevity. This is the same as with most sports, where strength to weight ratio is highly correlated to sports performance.
The longest and best lived people I've ever met lived in the country, gardened on a regular basis growing their own fruits and vegtables while consuming whole grains with some degree of meat but not to excess. They tended to attend church and thus had social structures and didn't drink tea or alcohol and also didn't smoke or chew tobacco. They mostly drank water and tended to walk as well. These were people who were in their early to mid 90's. Purely ancedotal I know but that was my general impression. I think the gardening and doing things around their homes probably helped with preservation of muscle mass/strength to some degree. They didn't take things to extremes though and their physical activity was generally moderate in nature I would say. Being in an area with cleaner air and cleaner water probably didn't hurt either. I don't know that hardly any of them had much in the way of medical issues that I ever found out though that may be primarily due to genetics as other people in similar lifestyles that had been friends of theirs died in their mid to late 80's. It's an intresting topic to consider.
Didn't drink tea? teas are one of the healthiest habits there is! I include ginger, green tea, cinnamon, oolong, dandelion...the list goes on almost endlessly. Coffee's also a life extender.
I would like to see how elite power lifters correlate . These are people who are relatively lean and look small (but toned) compared to bodybuilder, but may be 2 to 4 times stronger by any measure... and possibly 10 times stronger than average.
Thank you for this. It would be helpful to know more about participant demographics and methods/duration in the studies referenced. Is this information generalizable to wider populations? Is the same effect found in older women?
Out of curiosity if this taking into account exercise? I mean you would assume people with higher muscle mass and strength are hitting the gym on a regular basis as well as more probable to have a better diet as well as people who frequent the gym tend to be more health conscious.
1:35 This paraphrasing of Atilla’s comment is misleading. The study correlated a 200% decrease in all-cause mortality to people with *high muscle mass* - not to people who simply have “above average” muscle mass.
My nana outlived my grandad and she was not as strong. They both passed in their 90s. They ate very little junk food, grandad smoked a pipe and nana smoked cigarettes when she was younger, neither had great muscle mass or strength, neither were sick from any major illness, grandad did start losing cognitive ability in his 90s.
Enjoyed the video thoroughly. I am trying to keep myself motivated to retain muscle mass and strength. I am a runner. Working out is hard for me. This video will give me ammunition to do resistance training consistently. Thanks Nick.
@@richiprosadmistry414 If that is what you want to do, then keep doing it. Four runs plus two resistance sessions plus a rest day might work for you. But nobody has more than four intense sessions a week of anything so with 4 X 10km runs, your resistance sessions couldn't be too hard.
Try doing body strength exercises, you can take a break while you're running to do them. Resistance fans are also wonderful, use them while you're watching TV or you can take them with you anywhere
further 0.0001% of the information on this topic: Also worth mentioning is the study that compared sprinters, marathon runners and high jumpers. High jumpers had the longest life expectancy. Furthermore, mTOR plays an important role in muscle building, but at the same time it shortens life... I thought caloric restriction would be the most powerful habit?
I plan on covering cardiorespiratory fitness, as well. Yes, calorie restriction is no doubt a factor, but if you want to optimize health and lifespan simultaneously, having high strength and high cardiorespiratory fitness are the better goals. If a person wants to just extend life, regardless of the quality of life, calorie restriction might be better (I need to look into this more), but there are consequences to being in a calorie deficit 'indefinitely'.
But that means gym goers, power lifters, would live longer which is totally not true. In fact it's little old ladies that live longest. Blue zone countries also just live longer, maybe due to a low calorie diet full of vegetables. They walk a lot. Maybe tai chi in the east.
So Peter says the strongest have a 250 percent reduction in all cause mortality compared to the weakest. But your 15 year mistake video shows 40 minutes per week of training is optimal and this reduces ACM by 15 percent. So it seems to me that the weakest could never hope to catch up with the strongest. Does this suggest the benefit arises from natural strength rather than additional strength gained by training? Thanks for your work btw which is excellent
If more strength means so much lower risk of death then it's odd men don't out live women. This is a correlation rather than causative. It probably correlates either because people that exercise tend to be stronger and live longer, or because people that age better tend to be stronger and live longer. So strength I and of itself may make no difference.
I'm still confused as to why strength is the main factor and not muscles mass. If more muscle means more glucose and cholesterol being sucked up and filtered, how can strength have that effect? Why would having more neural strength have that same effect?
![The 3 Nutrition Pillars for Fastest Muscle Growth [12 Studies]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/PRv30afjBVE/mqdefault.jpg)
![The 3 Nutrition Pillars for Fastest Muscle Growth [12 Studies]](/img/tr.png)
![Can you regain muscle and function… at 90? 100? [Study 266]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2baD3iyPtR8/mqdefault.jpg)
You voted on it - here it is.
I should note that these studies are associative, but that's really the only way we can make some estimations on long term data considering we aren't going to get 50 year randomized controlled trials. So, there's some wiggle room for other factors (confounders) to be the 'real' reason for these wide reaching positive effects. However, researchers can control for some of these potential confounders by performing regression analyses, assuming they have sufficient data on these confounders available. Some of the more common confounders were investigated by the researchers (like physical activity), I simply didn't add them to the video, because they didn't change the outcome. I hope you enjoyed and I'm looking forward to the next one.
Can you do a video on TMG and B12 other supplements that lower homocysteine? Since these supplements and other supplements used to lower homocysteine increase serum methionine and methionine restriction is one of the few proven ways to extend life in many species, I wonder whether these supplements are harming us. So many people are taking them.
This was a great video. I hope you'll get a chance to look at how much is too much. There are countless articles and videos about the importance of exercise and muscle mass and strength, however almost none of the oldest people I've met ever had particularly high muscle mass. It feels like at some point the increase in muscle might become a negative factor, and I've seen some articles that found things like people that run too much or lift weights too much tend to lose some of the benefits of exercise. However for some of these I've met paywalls and haven't been able to find a satisfying answer.
The study "Associations of Muscle Mass and Strength with All-Cause Mortality among US Older Adults" did not do regression analysis of nutrition, stress, or sleep.
An alternative explanation of low muscle mass being associated with low lifespan is that muscle is an excess, after the body has taken care of other metabolic requirements and damage repair. A fancy car may be a sign of being rich, but buying a fancy car won't make you rich. It will do the opposite.
The study also defined low muscle mass using definitions of sarcopenia. Those who train cardio, body-weight exercise, weight training, and even walking will all not fit this definition, so the study doesn't support Peter's weight training for longevity hypothesis. Weight training may be reducing lifespan, compared to other activities.
Low muscle mass wasn't significantly correlated with lower lifespan unless adjusted for BMI. Which could mean fatter people, have lower relative muscle mass. Excess fat is caused by poor nutrition. Poor nutrition causes lower lifespan. Or excess fat is caused by excess toxins, so the body has a place to store them, meaning the fat is good but the toxins are the problem. Or
Also the study said that sedentary time was not significantly associated with all cause mortality, meaning exercise does not help longevity at all, according to this study.
One proposed explanation in the study is that muscle mass is a metabolic reservoir to withstand disease. An equally likely explanation is that muscle mass is a metabolic sink that causes disease. Or muscle mass is a excess cholesterol sink that wards off disease. This study is the roshak test of studies, in that you can see any explanation you want to see but it isn't prescriptive.
If there are any interventions studies that involved specific kinds of exercise on older adults, and measured lifespan, especially if they were placebo controlled, would be interesting to see a video on.
Can you do a video on the long term effects of sauna use on testicles and low testosterone? Nobody has talked about the potential negative effects of sauna. Some male health influencers who jumped on sauna frenzy all ended up with TRT. Peter Attia recently disclosed his total T is 381.
“A 200% increase in all cause mortality” for low muscle mass (Attia @1:30) does not mean “a 200% reduced risk” for higher muscle mass as you indicated (@1:35) but rather a 67% reduced risk, i.e., going from 1 to 3 is a 200% increase, but going from 3 to 1 is a 67% decrease.
There are no such thing as 200% decrease, only increase.
@@VivungisportThat's what's he saying...
yes true - think there was a mistake there.
Maybe he meant %p?
He looks very weak whereas Attia is strong and muscular 😅... he has myopia as well at a very early age....signs of nutritional deficiencies
I love how your clickbait titles are actually true to the content every time and how your content is very thorough and useful. Thanks for being one of the best UA-cam channels out there!
Thanks - I work hard to make sure the titles are enticing, but the content delivers. I’m thankful you see that.
YT needs a double thumbs up button!
👍👍
No thumbs up or down. Videos with more views would naturally go to top of lists by algo.
@@jmc8076yeah sure you're the expert
Indeed!
Double pump ⛽?
No doctor ever told me or asked about strength training, but I have been doing it since my late teens.
Strength probably really kicks in when you’re in your late 70s and in your 80s. It’s a bit scary how quickly people in this age group lose strength to carry out their normal life. Can you imagine how dispiriting that must be? It’s also self reinforcing. If it’s impossible to walk to the shops (as a for instance) then that’s one avenue of potential useful exercise unavailable. And really there’s a danger of losing access to most types of basic exercise that you should really keep up in order to just carry out basic daily life. So maybe we need to encourage ourselves to go the extra mile on strength. I know that I neglect it. It seems counterintuitive to dwell on strength when day to day aerobic and endurance seem more relevant. But by the time you’re 85, assuming you’re lucky enough to be spared, then strength is top dead centre.
And both kinds of exercise is good, I should think. Your heart is a muscle too, after all… but he definitely convinced me about strength training! Now I have to get to work on it! 💪
The thing is before 70 or 80 you have enough / excessive strength to do almost anything. When you get below some treshold, you cannot do things. There are also confounding factors relzted to muscle mass, because mm is kind of flamboyant organ not every body decides to have. A lot of things need to be in order to have it. Hormones, dietary protein and micronutrients, physical activity, enough recovery, low/managed stress. So if people go to 70s with those things out of order and also they have no skills/motivation to make them right, this all leads to sooner death.
I try to work my muscles til tired and tender about 5x a week. Lots of 10 min exercise vid's, A 10K walk with 13.5 lb dog as a weight once a week. She's elderly and won't walk far. day after that, I nap instead! lol. Rest of the week I go round th (20 min) block 2-3x a day. Sitting, watching TV, I work my arms with 2K weights (4.4 lbs). I'm 71 and can out-exercise my friends in their 40's. Keep t fun and easy so you'll keep doing it. Feels so good I crave it! I do red light therapy at Planet Fitness and the 10 min massage bed for recovery benefits.
Something else, increasing/ maintaining muscular strength also increases/maintains bone density and joint strength.
Peter also mentioned that person's Vo2 max is highly correlated with all cause mortality.
Having top 1% Vo2 max for you age and sex results in 500% decrease in acm.
Another one I should cover.
@@Physionic definitely 👏
In my opinion, the term "all cause mortality" should never be employed in isolation. Clearly, there is never an absolute decrease in mortality. The phrase should only be used in conjunction with the time frame as covered in the research under consideration. No increase in all cause mortality over a 3 month study has completely different implications from no increase over, say, a 3 year study.
@@johnkellett2893 As a math/stats guy, I tend to agree. BUT, as a UA-cam viewer I've learned to be less pedantic about the little details and try to absorb the context and meaning of what's being shared. Also I sometimes need to remind myself that YT is a global village of sorts, and the best communicators are those who can use simpler language and concepts that is easier for things like machine translation.
As for ACM...I see it being used everywhere as a stand-in for "risk of you dying from something, somewhere". No end date on that. So I am often shaking my head when someone says, "using X is associated with a 12% decrease in all-cause mortality in men". OK. ACM against what control, and over what time (for starters)?
The "control" appears to be the "average guy who lives to 78; the average woman to 82". Or something like that.
I'm so glad I just found this gem of a science channel. Currently watching all the videos I've missed so far. Thanks for the great work!
Thank you, David.
why havnt you been searching on your own?...why do you wait for others to tell you what to believe?
@@jadezee6316 Two assumptions, neither of which are correct.
Me, too!! We’re all aging as we speak. I wzn
Been lifting since high school. Big and strong . Did not stop me from developing cancer three times, nor a bunch of other illness. Sometimes it’s just DNA. But I have benefited from being strong in over all mobility and enjoyment of life.
It's once you reach your 70's and 80's this is truly relevant. I've watched both my mother and mother I'm law really decline and lose all quality of life in their 80's because of low muscle mass. Once someone elderly falls, their life quality gets really poor. They fall because of low muscle strength. If you are over 80 and you don't know what he is talking about then your lifting paid off.
Hi Nicolas !
I only recently discovered your channel. Great content & approach to (making digestible!)data.
Grats! Keep on the good work !
Thank you, Christoph!
Strength training adds testosterone, it builds bone strength, tendon and ligament and no doubt cartilage, all strengthened due to exercise, so it would make sense that the triggers that strengthen those parts also strenthen arteries and veins, clear out clogs, open up blood flow, and burns High fructose corn syrup before it can damage the liver...
Ordered Dr Attia’s book back in December. It arrived last week. It’s fantastic!!!
Something that might be the unifying factor for all those results is visceral fat (also part of the junk between muscle tissue). Visceral fat itself is a strong independent predictor of ACM. Someone with low muscle mass but normal strength will be less sedentary and potentially leaner (have better quality muscle, lower visceral fat) than someone with large mass/low strength, normal mass/low strength.
Is there such a thing as subcutaneous fat?
Please can you discuss some of the findings and points from Dominic d'agostino and Rhonda Patrick one day 🙏
I'm doing pushups and thanking you while listening.
This reminds me of survival training in the military - the common denominator for survivability was exercise
Physionic delts continue to grow with the channel, and now we know they’re also life extending too.
I've acquired and split our firewood by hand for 35 years. At 60 I can still move 300 lb logs. I don't know of any better exercise.
Well said.
There’s no such thing as a 200% reduced risk. The maximum reduction in any nonnegative quantity is 100%. Notice Attia says “a 3X or 200% increase”. What you should have said is a 66 or 67% reduced risk. I wouldn’t correct a normie on this, but you’re a scientist! ❤
Thanks for mentioning this. I thought the risk becomes negative.
I drink way too much coffee watching this channel as I binge through your content and immerse myself in your discoveries.
What effect on will this have on me? Will we be able to tease out whether the consequence was your videos or the coffee?
Ultimately I have tremendous faith in your work. Thank you, okay resuming the adventure...
I’d argue that it is LEG muscle mass/strength that matters in longevity, not upper extremity strength
I think that would be a fair argument, Nikk.
Why not both?
@@mstr293 because I believe preserved mobility is the reason strength factors into longevity. While upper extremity strength is great too, lower extremity strength ultimately is what will preserve your mobility into old age.
@@mstr293 Most people do. I'd say, most sports require a bit of both, even if a little dominant one way or the other. Even skateboarding which one would think is all lower body. If you dip your board, you have to catch yourself. And of course, your flailing your arms around trying to balance and such. You learn to move your whole body as one. But without a solid upper body, if you DO fall and we all do, then the upper body strength, balance and such definitely comes in to play...firstly, you can catch yourself. Secondly, you can brace your fall (which I've had to do a few times when I did fall off my skateboard). I'm a bit older now but still ride my Penny skateboard around from time to time. It's definitely risky learning to skateboard but once you have it down pretty well, it teaches you not only leg balance, situation awareness, reaction time and such, but it also teaches you how to deal with a split second "oh crap" moment...and oftentimes, you are using your upper body...it usually starts with arm flailing...but if you hit a pebble, your using your upper body for positioning. And if your going down, your bracing (or trying to grab a tree maybe ;). Definitely an overall amazing longevity type sport (I'd say similar to skiing). I think the best part other than helping with balance is that split second reaction training you get when dealing with an actual body-in-danger situation. I know I went a bit off topic...but I did have a family member once go to fall, they tried grabbing the TV and it broke...they managed to be ok, possible by bracing the TV. But honestly, it's not always the pure strength aspect. If you have really good body kinetics, you could grab that TV and know how much pressure and such is needed to not only not break the TV but not pulling it down on yourself and having it break your fall appropriately. I don't feel this is actually fully a strength thing here when it comes to preventing injury, but I do feel the muscle mass protecting against health markers is a real phenomenon and is, to a point, equally as important for falls and such but body awareness is very crucial and that transcends strength.
@@jeffschultz4168 They’ve looked at lifelong endurance athletes that did not train strength and they were no different than sedentary folks in the strength domain. I wonder how you might separate body kinetic awareness from strength as many endeavors like gymnastics will have a strength component. Maybe skateboarders/surfers. Not sure what supply of elderly ones we’ll have for a while though.
I used to be conned lifting was unhealthy, but it is interesting this has come out in the last few decades.
Which means increased muscle mass keeps metabolism correct. More muscle burns more glucose which keeps insulin low.
Yep! I very much agree that you could spend the rest of your life trying to tease out the full understanding and functioning of this concept. But, this concept is why I say that lifting a one-pound weight 100 times is far better than lifting a 100-pound weight once... Not anaerobic verses aerobic, but that the muscles are "trained" for the action verses just strong; I am also willing to bet that the lighter weight with higher reps will burn through more energy. But, Thanks again Nic, for applying some actual research to the talking head claims!
Shoot for the middle and lift a 50 pd weight, say, for 5 to 10 reps and it will do you more good than a single rep of a heavy weight or lots of junk reps on a too light weight. You are only secondarily lifting to burn energy at the gym. You are lifting to provide a stimulus for your muscles to get bigger so they burn more 24/7 and provide sinks for blood glucose etc.
@@billking8843 Thanks for the input... While your advise may be good for a young person with time to spare, my view is that the "training" aspect of muscle care is far more important than the "bulking" aspect -- especially for those who are very young and just starting out and for those who are fighting against the trials of old-age. The research Nic points to seems to support my view, in that longevity is supported more by trained muscle then by bulked muscle, and either is better as opposed to couch-potato muscle. Additionally, it is my experience that muscle based glucose banking is far more effective in higher repetition exercises like running than in power exercises like lifting; with such perhaps being just based on time. Anyways, join us in the growing conversations on Nic's site; great stuff!
Great nuanced video especially with regards to emphasising stength quality over just bulk. This is especially true of bodybuilders. In a large previous trial male professional bodybuilders had 20 -30% increased risk of mortality when compared to age-matched men likely due to the way they exercised, diet + some anabolic steroids. The other interesting thing is that in a large trial last year, regular people who performed 2 -4 times above the recommended amount of Moderate physical activity (300-600 min/week) had an observed 28-38% lower risk of CVD mortality and 25-27% non-CVD mortality, for an overall 26-31% lower risk of mortality from all causes - this activity was any kind of exercise.
Yeah, well the bodybuilding thing is because all of the substances they abuse to have such muscle mass.
I can guarantee that study did not look at natural bodybuilders. For all we know enhanced bodybuilders are protected by their muscle mass from some devastating affects of the copious amounts substances they take (often not taken as wisely as they could otherwise be too).
Great video Nic, as are all of your videos. First time comment for me so I just want to say this is the best no BS researched and presented channel I have ever found on YT so kudos to you. My experience here.. I am 57 yo been lifting 10 years. I am at an age where most of my similarly aged friends look like 67, and are now showing signs that the walking frame is on the horizon. I look more like a 40 yo or younger, good muscularity, power and strength. I am not a big muscular guy though, just well define and developed muscles, but super strong for my size. My genetics dictate 'chicken legs'. However, my leg muscles are developed, but small. Despite this, I can barbell squat more than anyone at my gym. Younger, bigger legged guys do not come close, and this is the key...strength! I did read a study from Japan (sorry I cannot reference it), that indicated quad strength/mortality correlation, and obviously this points to your comment about falls etc. Maybe I won't live to be 100yo, but I will die standing!
Right on man. I am 56 and started lifting when COVID shut down the climbing gyms. Used to lift in my early 20’s. Really enjoying the strength workouts.
I really appreciate your videos. I like the deep dives into all this knowledge. Been watching Peter Attia and Huberman labs for years and it was cool to see them get reviewed here :)
I've taken so many supplements. Thinking or Boron now but unsure. Just D3/K2 and Magnesium Glyconate now.
Balance and flexibility are important too.
Enjoyed this one great work mate
Thanks, Jonathon - hope you've been well!
Why does strength correlate with increased health span?
Investigate the mechanism by which increased strength is attained.
Mike Mentzer’s High Intensity Training specifically prolongs time between training sessions so that recovery (compensation) is followed by growth (overcompensation).
Overcompensation?
Sound familiar?
hormesis => prolonged sirtuin activation
Watch this video:
Reverse Aging Revolution
Scott Leiser
How to avoid AGING FAST? 1 Common Element Behind 5 Major LONGEVITY PATHWAYS
Oct 11, 2022
Hi Nic! So glad having found your channel. Interestingly I have been hearing the huberman and especially the one one with attia lately... Thanks for sharing your analyses and wit with us 🙌
Very interesting, yes I would agree that it is both necessary for cardio workout and weight training, a good balance exercise program is like nutrition a well-rounded diet
Great content !! I’m so glad to have found you. Thanks !
+1 for the outro music.
+1 for the grim reaper growl.
+1 for bringing up muscle fibrosis -- are there blood text proxies for this? myeloperoxidase? others?
I remember hearing that grip strength being correlated with longer life span.
If that is completely true the men should live longer than women. Clearly strength is important and working on that is key.
@@mpoharper I wonder how much of men dying before women on average is their propensity to take more risks that end their life early?
Also, grip strength correlating with longer life could work for both sexes if it is based on the average per sex (I'm not sure if this is what it meant though).
@@travv88 I think estrogen is protective. You look at heart disease risk; it starts later for women. Perhaps risk also plays a role. All we know for sure is each of us will eventually go.
Women are strong but in a way that differs from men. I have much better lower body strength than my husband but he has me beat in upper body and grip strength. I think the key is to keep working on strength as we age. You feel better and look better.
Get a grip! Lol.
@@jamesbyrne9312 😂😜
Boss, all these are related to soft tissues, more precise with collagen synthesis after a certain age and genetics have a tremendous role. These things are relatively known for quite a while. The grip force is really a reliable indicator for the quality of the tendons... Soft tissues, collagen which is also the main resistance constituent in the architecture of our organs , basically of the whole body. Stay focus on supplements, please (!) ; you are doing a fantastic job. I'm going to buy a premium membership!
This is helpful (in the "I seriously must learn more here" kind of way). 18-months ago, I broke my ankle (as in completely in 3 places) which was not properly set nor did I heal well or fast. I turn 70 next month. I have been disappointed at my muscle loss (which doctors in this region tell me 'I'm fine for an old woman'-- this is so wrong). I know, TMI. Thank you. I have research to do; and this, I can take to a new doctor. Meanwhile, I rebuild strength. Thanks
Ahhh Peter Attia! One of the great minds.
Great coverage to breakdown the key points from his recent interview with Huberman (which was a really interesting discussion to listen to if you've a spare 1hr or more)
Awesome video bro. you rock
I know I'm late on commenting this... The opposite might well be true: healthier people tend to retain more muscle mass and strength hence people with these features appear to live more because of them. I personally think both things are true: having healthy muscle tissue helps us live more but also if we are healthy we tend to also have healthy muscles and more of them.
Informative and FUN to listen to and watch! Thanks!
Thanks, Cheryl!
Exercise is good. I like the clean and jerk. It also keeps calcium in the bones.
Nic covering peter! My 2 favorite youtubers 😲😲
Thanks! 😃
Great. Thanks.
I am in the 51st percentile in measures of strength, but in the 86th percentile in measures of power, and 94th percentile in measures of speed. So there you have some more characteristics that could be teased out of the data! (in future studies, of course)
If muscle strength is more relevant than overall muscle mass, can I conclude (as a woman over 50) that doing resistance exercise of any kind (I do reformer pilates) is equally as good a form of exercise as weight training? I have not been able to really find the answer to this. I do pilates (to avoid injury + I don't like a bulky look) but if my conclusion is wrong and I should be lifting heavy weights instead as I age, I would love to know this. Also, how do you know if you have sufficient muscle strength for your age to prevent unfavorable health outcomes? Is there a "gold standard" table to look at? I'd love your views, please. Thank you 🙏🏻
Any compound movement and routine that includes some form of progression will do. Better keep things simple and concentrate on improving on the few exercises you do.
Anything that builds your strength is good. Also do cardio!!!! Very important to do cardio! 😀
This is superb
Thank you, Simon!
This is bewildering to me. Body building hunks with immense strength tend to die earlier. And I've never seen a study in the Blue Zones where the longest living groups on this planet had any special strength or were doing anything special for that. Targeted studies and their correlations seem to differ so much from real life observation observations.
Body building for extreme bulk, is not the example. Think of a lean well rounded athlete
See latest video , where over training with strength.resistance lessens many benefits except diabetes. Which makes sense muscles grab sugar . But useless bulk muscle mass outside of PR in gym or comps - is more tissue that can get cancer, more stress on a heart getting older , less energy for immune system , less recuperation time , more ocd behaviour etc . Calenthistics - strong lean body mass gets all the benefits with less downsides - with proviso plenty of rest. VO2 max is also quoted as great indicator of life expectancy . But again as we age you can to get VO2 you need HIIT to boost it - tradeoff to get it high , may not be worth it . Pushing heart too much with little though, or while fighting an illness can cause heart problems - namely atrial fibrillation. So get your muscle up and then work on maintaining strength . When older 80/20 rule 80% light cardio to intense , warm ups and warm downs . Listen to your body , fighting a flu - rest up - see folks with long covid -one cause was not resting . Plus increase risk of injury. Stay hydrated - when older muscles may let you know you need a break with twitching etc , go from intense to light or stop with warm down .
Plus high strength to lean muscle mass , least stress on joints , with huge reserve to squat , lift , carry etc .
Also work on movement , control, balance, flexibility
I understand those running marathons at 80 may want that sub 3 hours - their choice, just know pros and cons for older heart .
Don't see many weight training channels showing downside , just hey this is best way for max big muscles like that's the wonderful end goal . TBF the average gym goer is not ending up with big muscles . as needs crazy dedication plus don't think most people want crazy arms , or thighs that affect everyday life - like walking normally , buying clothes
@@fitcwebb Jack LaLanne is the best example I would guess
@@user-yl7kl7sl1gguess who will end with very low muscle mass? The people who didn't want to have much muscle mass...and they lose more as they get older
First off. You are using the extreme as an example - that does not make sense comparing to a normal person. Elite endurance athletes risk ending up with too big hearts even though their cardiovascular health was peak during their younger years.
Secondly we dont have have a blue zone combined with lifting weights, which could give even better results than what we are seeing in those zones.
thirdly disease and genetic disposition is also a thing, people living longer in blue zones could be a combination of genetics and diet, rather than diet alone.
As a conclusion I would argue that you are wrong to say studies differ from real life observation, because you dont know all the co-correlations in real life observations.
I've been watching these guys for years.....very calculated and not fully transparent....keep up good work and keep going. We need you! Shocked.
That low muscle vs high muscle mass could be simply correlation and not causation. Ie people who have more muscle tend to live a more active lifestyle and tend to look after themselves more than the huge population of people who don’t build muscle.
Absolutely. See the pinned comment.
One of the variables accounted for was physical activity.
The causation can also be the otherway round. Unhealthy people are not able to move a lot and that is why there strength is low. Also after illness the elderly cannot bounce back to where they were, hence sarcopenia. Sometimes this happens even to the younger (long covid etc. )
Cool. I’m 76 and walk to the grocery story and when I’m carrying bags of groceries I pump them all the way up over my head or curl them. Besides fixing my shoulders I’m just good all over. Good to know it matters, guess I’ll increase weight or reps.
All the studies of longevity in different areas of the world omit the fact that the people continue hard physical work into old age, go to sleep early, eat locally produced food, water. Plus many don't watch television..... it's not just diet...obviously. However length of life is less important than quality, sense of fulfillment, intelligence, even if you go relatively young.
Ciaran's theory: because strength comes from energy made in the mitochondria. You could have skinny arms but your mitos are firing and thus cellular health is well. Could you be bulky but your mitos are not doing so good? yeah perhaps...
Great video. I don’t know if you’ve spoken about it at all but I’m curious about you’re take on the longevity/IGF-1 conundrum. It seems centenarians tend to have lower IGF-1 or (like in the case of Ashkenazi Jews) low functioning IGF-1 receptors. But strength training, if I understand it correctly, increases IGF-1 in middle aged and older adults. How do you square these two contradictory factors?
I would need to read some more literature on it. I don't feel educated enough on the topic, yet, Mitchell.
Daily stretching exercises/ walking 20 minutes per day... No red meat , no smoking.
Great video!
Nic have you done a video on your current supplement stack at all?
It’s my understanding that fast twitch muscle degrades significantly through senior years, therefore developing more mass through slow twitch training would significantly balance or compensate.
Perhaps this is more causation than effect? People with strength muscle mass are much more likely to be exercising, possibly spend more time outside and overall care for their health more. Likewise those with poor strength are more likely sedentary etc.
So, it is really strength to weight ratio that is highly correlated with longevity. This is the same as with most sports, where strength to weight ratio is highly correlated to sports performance.
Add to this: Walking 1 hour/day, solid 7.5 hours sleep & stretching daily......Likely 20 years added.
Love the humor😊
The longest and best lived people I've ever met lived in the country, gardened on a regular basis growing their own fruits and vegtables while consuming whole grains with some degree of meat but not to excess. They tended to attend church and thus had social structures and didn't drink tea or alcohol and also didn't smoke or chew tobacco. They mostly drank water and tended to walk as well. These were people who were in their early to mid 90's. Purely ancedotal I know but that was my general impression.
I think the gardening and doing things around their homes probably helped with preservation of muscle mass/strength to some degree. They didn't take things to extremes though and their physical activity was generally moderate in nature I would say. Being in an area with cleaner air and cleaner water probably didn't hurt either. I don't know that hardly any of them had much in the way of medical issues that I ever found out though that may be primarily due to genetics as other people in similar lifestyles that had been friends of theirs died in their mid to late 80's. It's an intresting topic to consider.
Didn't drink tea? teas are one of the healthiest habits there is! I include ginger, green tea, cinnamon, oolong, dandelion...the list goes on almost endlessly. Coffee's also a life extender.
I absolutely agree !
Fantastic video, Nic!
Thanks, Paulo!
I would like to see how elite power lifters correlate . These are people who are relatively lean and look small (but toned) compared to bodybuilder, but may be 2 to 4 times stronger by any measure... and possibly 10 times stronger than average.
Thanks for these
You've got videos on muscle cell quality and how to better it or keep them in good shape?
That outro and music was fire!
:-P
Thank you for this. It would be helpful to know more about participant demographics and methods/duration in the studies referenced. Is this information generalizable to wider populations? Is the same effect found in older women?
That outro song sounds like a great song for sled day.
Thank you Sir ♥️
Thank you so much for your fine videos. No worries about your pranks, my son would call them corny, I just call them fun!
Out of curiosity if this taking into account exercise? I mean you would assume people with higher muscle mass and strength are hitting the gym on a regular basis as well as more probable to have a better diet as well as people who frequent the gym tend to be more health conscious.
Good point. And yes. :)
1:35 This paraphrasing of Atilla’s comment is misleading. The study correlated a 200% decrease in all-cause mortality to people with *high muscle mass* - not to people who simply have “above average” muscle mass.
Hmmm.... I may have missed it but I'm wondering what is "strength," and how do you improve it?
this probably includes state of fascia (amount of stretching) and rate of movement in lifestyle
My nana outlived my grandad and she was not as strong. They both passed in their 90s. They ate very little junk food, grandad smoked a pipe and nana smoked cigarettes when she was younger, neither had great muscle mass or strength, neither were sick from any major illness, grandad did start losing cognitive ability in his 90s.
Enjoyed the video thoroughly. I am trying to keep myself motivated to retain muscle mass and strength.
I am a runner. Working out is hard for me.
This video will give me ammunition to do resistance training consistently.
Thanks Nick.
The muscle runners pledge: "Less than 3 miles per day, then the muscle will stay".
@@travelguy1564 i run 25+ miles per week. 4 times- 10k each.
@@richiprosadmistry414 If that is what you want to do, then keep doing it. Four runs plus two resistance sessions plus a rest day might work for you. But nobody has more than four intense sessions a week of anything so with 4 X 10km runs, your resistance sessions couldn't be too hard.
@@billking8843 thanks. I agree. I need to make more effort on resistance. I feel it.
Try doing body strength exercises, you can take a break while you're running to do them. Resistance fans are also wonderful, use them while you're watching TV or you can take them with you anywhere
Well said mister Nick.
Great follow upp to Petters insights(that I already seen with great interest) Thanks :)
Great to hear!
Is it having the muscle mass or is it the journey it takes to aquire the muscle mass that is helpful. Id think both but leaning towards the journey.
Did you have a chance to read recently released Dr Attia book? I think he does go in further details there.
Such a great book.
Exceptional Content
If there's indeed a connection between muscle mass/strength and longevity, then wouldn't men live longer than women generally?
further 0.0001% of the information on this topic:
Also worth mentioning is the study that compared sprinters, marathon runners and high jumpers. High jumpers had the longest life expectancy.
Furthermore, mTOR plays an important role in muscle building, but at the same time it shortens life...
I thought caloric restriction would be the most powerful habit?
I plan on covering cardiorespiratory fitness, as well. Yes, calorie restriction is no doubt a factor, but if you want to optimize health and lifespan simultaneously, having high strength and high cardiorespiratory fitness are the better goals. If a person wants to just extend life, regardless of the quality of life, calorie restriction might be better (I need to look into this more), but there are consequences to being in a calorie deficit 'indefinitely'.
Great video again but....what's the rub Nico?...👍😀
Yes, you could not resist!
😝
But that means gym goers, power lifters, would live longer which is totally not true. In fact it's little old ladies that live longest.
Blue zone countries also just live longer, maybe due to a low calorie diet full of vegetables. They walk a lot. Maybe tai chi in the east.
I'm safe, even the GRIM REAPER has his standards... SUBSCRIBED!! :)
So Peter says the strongest have a 250 percent reduction in all cause mortality compared to the weakest. But your 15 year mistake video shows 40 minutes per week of training is optimal and this reduces ACM by 15 percent. So it seems to me that the weakest could never hope to catch up with the strongest. Does this suggest the benefit arises from natural strength rather than additional strength gained by training?
Thanks for your work btw which is excellent
Amazing video m8
Thanks!
If more strength means so much lower risk of death then it's odd men don't out live women.
This is a correlation rather than causative. It probably correlates either because people that exercise tend to be stronger and live longer, or because people that age better tend to be stronger and live longer.
So strength I and of itself may make no difference.
correlation != causation
what if factor X causes reduced longevity and less strength?
I'm still confused as to why strength is the main factor and not muscles mass. If more muscle means more glucose and cholesterol being sucked up and filtered, how can strength have that effect? Why would having more neural strength have that same effect?
Brilliant~
Very refreshing having you giving us additional attacks on plenty of Comedian's
I’ve kinda back tracked from my 30 day fast, I’m 18-19 Will going on a 30 to 50 day fast stop me from growing taller/bigger.