Brady Holmer

it actually didn't really seem to have much of a benefit.

Doing more light intensity physical activity didn't significantly reduce.

So there were, you know, five to 10% risk reductions, which the authors actually didn't consider to be meaningful in the context of this study.

So doing more physical activity, if it were light, didn't seem to produce an extra risk reduction for a lot of these outcomes other than diabetes and all cause mortality reduction, which I think

It's kind of important to point out there was a quote in the study from the authors.

They said, not even the largest amounts of daily LPA or low intensity physical activity can elicit the health benefits of moderate or vigorous intensity.

So I think that tells us kind of all we need to know about the study.

That was kind of a very apt conclusion there.

Right.

There wasn't really a there wasn't really a dose response, a potent dose response in the study.

Yeah, cancer.

Is there more benefit in it?

It was, let's see, I think it was just for all cause mortality and diabetes was for light activity.

Cancer did have that huge equivalence when it came to the light versus vigorous.

It was like 256 minutes, I think, of light activity you needed for the risk reduction of vigorous.

But yeah, no dose response for cancer for light activity either.

Yeah, which I think is kind of liberating as well because we're not saying, oh my God, you need to do 300 minutes of high intensity interval training.

Yeah, exactly.

The Norwegian 4x4.

It's you just, I mean, if you get that amount of zone two, just exercise is beneficial.