That the Americans today declare seated for an average of More than 9 hours a dayDespite everything we know about how harmful This can be, is a real testimony to the universal instinct to launch the can with regard to personal health.
Mountains of evidence tell us that too sedentary lifestyle can have wreaking havoc on the heart and brain and can raise the risk of cancer. A JAMA 2024 study nearly half a million people over a dozen years have revealed that sitting most of the day at work leads to a Risk 16% higher For early death.
But hey, these are all dangers in the longer term and are both tempting and easy to ignore in the face of the immediacy of deadlines, meetings, emails and competitions that can keep us glued to chairs and sofas for hours.
While research began to examine the mechanisms closer to the mechanisms, causing some of the most well documented effects of the prolonged session, new discoveries connecting certain models to the capacity of the body to develop muscles provide a imperative reason to get up and move.
An element that means that the logic of the outfit and the absence works really often becomes a short duration compared to all the other Rec on physical activity and the long session periods: protein synthesis.
The lack of movement overshadows the lack of fuel
Daniel Moore, PhdAssociate professor in muscular physiology at the University of Toronto in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, pleasant that he mainly studies an old adage: use it or lose it.
In 2022, Moore published the first study on Prolonged use of space and amino acidsin which he noted that taking regular and short or squat shortage in the hours that followed the body’s ability to transform food proteins into muscle construction blocks. Although its results are based on a small group of only 12 people, the effect was consistent and important, and also aligns with 2019 results This has shown a 27% decrease in this muscle diet when people were forced to reduce their daily stages by 90%.
Many previous attempts to understand the most immediate effects of the session focused on food and metabolism, or the ability of the body in different conditions to use what we fight it, explained Janice Thompson, PhdHonorary professor emeritus of public health, nutrition and exercise at the University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England, which was not involved in the Moore study. It’s just that proteins never get the spotlight on carbohydrates and fats.
Among the three main macronutrients, “we mainly use proteins for construction and repair,” said Thompson. “This is its main objective, while carbohydrates and fats mainly provide us with energy.” For this reason, carbohydrates and fats play an important role in controlling blood sugar, making it key catalysts for the type of cardiovascular problems later in life linked to the session (and therefore to key research objectives).
Even thus, said Thompson, proteins represent “another fascinating piece of the puzzle”, in the interconnected history of metabolic health. Research like Moore is essential to complete the situation as a whole.
In fact, parts of Moore’s results closely reflect what other researchers have found on the importance of muscle movement itself in metabolic production. Previous studies on glycemic control have shown that “all kinds of muscle contraction to what we call an effect similar to insulin,” said Thompson. “There is something in this muscular contraction which is quite critical.”
This something is control of blood flow throughout the body. If the blood vessels are like the railways on which the nutrients and other tools navigate in the body to ensure that each work site offers all the supplies it needs to make breaks, the muscles are the steam engines, keeping everything as long as they are. It also means that standing, Unfortunatelywill simply not cut it as a useful intervention for one of the harmful metabolic effects of the session.
In the end, you must develop muscles
The construction of the muscle is not only for bodybuilders, explained Stuart Phillips, PhdProfessor of kinesiology and director of the Center for Excellence of Physical Activity at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, which was not involved in the Moore study. Protein synthesis, the final stage of the process that transforms what we ingest in muscle mass, is a continuous necessity because damaged proteins are rinsed from the same muscles. This turnover process is essential for daily muscle function, but “to drive it and store proteins, you have to make a certain form of movement,” said Phillips.
So how much movement is enough? The answer, according to Moore and Phillips, is not so simple. The last years of the science of exercise have finally taught us that “it is not only to know how much we move during the day, but when we move,” said Moore. This is why he and others who study the movement models most often recommend what is now largely called “activity snacks”, short but regular gusts throughout the day that successfully thwart The effects of the session (yes, they also increase cardiovascular health).
But not all snacktivity – A word just from literature – is created equal. In Moore’s study, who twice examined twice a 2 -minute or 15 squats walk, squats have activated an additional biological path for the synthesis of proteins that was not present in walkers.
It is possible, he said, that this reflects the improved advantages of the resistance exercise compared to daily movements, to which the body can be more used. Other creative ways to engage the muscles that do not move much to an office, such as slots, jump jumps or even dance breaks, are completely viable options.
The key ingredient: protein
As Thompson suggests, let us shed light on proteins here.
How many proteins should you eat? General recommendations Are 0.8 g per kg of body weight (a kg is equivalent to 2.2 pounds, so a person of 220 pounds would need 80 g of protein per day per measure), but research suggests that higher quantities may be better.
A small study Divide women into two groupsHigh protein intake (2.5 g per kg of body weight) and low protein intake (0.9 g per kg of body weight), the two groups carrying out the same 8 -week resistance training program. The two groups increased resistance to similar rates, but the high protein group added more than triple muscle than the low protein group, with a decrease in fat in the group rich in proteins and remaining unchanged in the low protein group.
A JAMA 2024 study Of more than 8,000 people over 10 years have found that the higher protein intake was associated with lower mortality rates, in particular more advanced age (the study also examined older people – a higher protein intake also benefited them). The type of protein – animal, vegetable or both – did not matter.
A study of January 2025 People of middle and older aged type 2 diabetes and low fitness markers have revealed that the higher protein intake can improve muscle, low strength and physical performance. One group ate 0.8-1 g / kg per day for 12 weeks, the other ate 1.2-1.5 g / kg. The protein -rich group has shown a “significant improvement” of the handle strength and physical performance, while the lower protein group saw a drop.
The combination of protein intake and even minimum “exercise snacks” can always be useful to those seated all day. But what is important is that it doesn’t take much. In particular, for the elderly with a more sedentary life than the 20 years included in the study of Moore, studies have shown that small pieces of movement can make even more pronounced differences with regard to functions such as mobility And heart health. This is probably true for protein synthesis, added Moore. It is an excellent reason to get out of the chair at any age.