Reviewing Exercise as a Means to Slow Neurodegeneration
Researchers here review the evidence for exercise to slow the onset and progression of neurodegenerative conditions. A mountain of evidence demonstrates exercise (and the practice of calorie restriction) to improve long term health and at least modestly slow age-related degeneration. For the cost, meaning essentially free, it is a good deal. The future will bring medical technologies that can greatly improve upon the benefits of exercise by targeting the underlying causes of aging, but for now it remains one of the best options on the table.
Neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and Huntington's disease, are heavy burdens to global health and economic development worldwide. Mounting evidence suggests that exercise has a positive impact on the life quality of elderly with neurodegenerative diseases. Three major databases were searched related to current studies in exercise intervention on neurodegenerative diseases using omics tools, including metabolomics, metagenomics, genomics, transcriptomics, and proteomics. We summarized the omics features and potential mechanisms associated with exercise and neurodegenerative diseases in the current studies. Three main mechanisms by which exercise affects neurodegenerative diseases were summed up, including adult neurogenesis, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) signaling, and short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) metabolism.
Overall, there is compelling evidence that exercise intervention is a feasible way of preventing the onset and alleviating the severity of neurodegenerative diseases. These studies highlight the importance of exercise as a complementary approach to the treatment and intervention of neurodegenerative diseases in addition to traditional treatments. More mechanisms on exercise interventions for neurodegenerative diseases, the specification of exercise prescriptions, and differentiated exercise programs should be explored so that they can actually be applied to the clinic.
I suppose I have a slight frustration when exercise is referred to or somehow hinted as an 'addition to' or possible option to the act of Living. As if the baseline of healthy living, before any damage or dysfunction is considered, can be without some kind of minimal, regular, and thoughtful physical activity. Sounds like saying "..well it's better if you run your car engine with oil, since it will increase life span of the engine..."
Perhaps the point is that we need to establish what a 'healthy life' is, just as importantly as establishing chronological vs biological age and the markers to differentiate and assess between the two. Of course, this may be asking too much if the average human being functions at a level well below the minimum 'healthy life'. Since, we are trying to extend the life span of everyone rather than just the healthiest among us - and whether one is a prerequisite for the other may not be as obvious and established as the common conceptions.
Which can possibly be informed by those trying to establish the best possible life, even before considering how to extend it medically, per:
https://blueprint.bryanjohnson.co
Jer, i agree with your strong logic and I prioritize frequent exercise in my life. But consider that it has only been for about 5 years that it has been obvious that regular exercise increases life and health span. And As recently as 10 years ago even some in the longevity community argued that oxidative stress from exercise shortened life span. Ray peat argued that the Cortisol produced from exercise negated any benefits. So many people, I am 62 now, thought I was naïve for running and swimming regularly in my 30s. Roughly speaking, almost everyone over the age of 50 has been told the majority of their life that any form of strenuous exercise as an adult had little benefit and would have possible negative consequences. The medical establishment does not yet want to own up to how wrong they were about exercise, so they frame study results like this.
The American College of Sports Medicine has published countless papers, position statements, and research about physical activity and exercise (https://www.acsm.org). ACSM "was founded in 1954 by a small group of physical educators and physicians who recognized that health problems were associated with certain lifestyle choices, especially smoking and lack of exercise. Since then, ACSM members from all professional backgrounds have applied their knowledge, training and dedication in sports medicine and exercise science to promote healthier lifestyles for people around the globe."
Take time to view the three interviews with research educators who have been leaders in this field of physical activity, health, wellness, and longevity Precious ACSM president, Dr. Jack Wilmore mentions the excellent work of Kenneth Cooper. Dr. Cooper founded the internationally recognized Cooper Institute and is considered to be "the father of aerobics."
The first female president of ACSM, Dr. Barbara Drinkwater, exercise physiologist, said in her interview (~26:45), "I think that my good health, besides good genes and everything, is related to the fact that I've been physically active my whole life."
Dr. Stephen Blair, who headed the research department at the Cooper Institute for 26+ years, led the Aerobic Center Longitudinal Study (ACLS). The outcomes of 13,000+ attendees at the Center, published here in 1989 in Journal of American Medical Society (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/379243) demonstrated that regular, moderate intensity physical activity reduces mortality and positively effects every measurement of health and wellness. The end of the abstract states:
"Attributable risk estimates for all-cause mortality indicated that low physical fitness was an important risk factor in both men and women. Higher levels of physical fitness appear to delay all-cause mortality primarily due to lowered rates of cardiovascular disease and cancer."
Several other long running studies confirm this including Longshoreman Study (initiated in 1951, op ed 1999, https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/01.CIR.100.1.2). Here the editors concluded: "From a public health standpoint, the findings that exercise is beneficial at any age, does not need to be strenuous or prolonged, includes activities at work and at home, and does not have to be done every day are extremely encouraging. As personal computers invade our lives and society becomes increasingly successful at reducing our need to move, opportunities for everyone to become more physically active should be given a high priority. Encouragement from physicians is of particular importance in this endeavor. Physical activity may not add many years to life but, more importantly, may add life to years. Thus, increasing the level of moderate physical activity may be a simple and low-cost solution to the spiraling costs of caring for our burgeoning elderly population." Another well known longitudinal study supports findings of ACLS and Longshoremen, see Harvard (1962-1988,https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7707624/) Alumna Study founded the field of epidemiology of physical activity.
Finally, studies of "Blue Zone" populations:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6125071/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30202288/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhJl-T_AB6A
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-longest-living-among-us-do-it/
Thanks JohnD. I was unaware of the theories that posited such extra damage from exercise after middle age. Though, i would never expect the same level of exertion post-50s and that I would expect that all exercise must be vetted for safety and efficacy at all stages of life. I suppose my point is that the human body is healthiest in a dynamic state - whatever that means- and that that should be a minimum baseline (though possibly with decreasing exertion past 50s) for which all assessments/ interventions of human longevity should occur. Perhaps it is about finding that trade-off between fitness-related robustness and damage-minimizing longevity. Now if we could just better sense and quantify that damage and robustness in real-time as the link I provided purports, we may get further ahead. Cheers.
Thanks Becky Behlling. Very interesting studies and other public commentary. However, the most critical part of your comment:
"... Physical activity may not add many years to life but, more importantly, may add life to years..." would be the contentious point. What is the minimally acceptable level of health at any given age and what got us there? Of course we all want to live to be at least 120 and still be walking, driving, and interacting with most faculties intact over the latter half of this century - but as we make our lifestyle choices after 75 and look back at what lifestyle choices we made before that time, the trade-off going forward may lean more to medical, pharmaceutical, and related interventions to preserve faculties outside of skeletal and physical strength/ endurance abilities. Where do our remaining resources go?