This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Paul T. Williams, PhD
Berkeley, Calif

Arch Intern Med. 1997;157(15):1774-1776.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Blair and Cooper's¹ informative editorial raises important issues regarding the dose of exercise and health benefits. We agree that sedentary men and women may benefit from becoming moderately active but disagree on the shape of the dose-response curve between physical activity and its health benefits.² We also interpret prospective epidemiological data, which show fewer deaths in men who improve their fitness over time, differently; Blair and Cooper believe the lower mortality is caused by increased physical activity, and I largely attribute the lower mortality to regression to the mean.

The editorial claims that cardiorespiratory fitness (treadmill test duration) is more accurate and objective than reported physical activity. The reproducibility I have observed of self-reported weekly running distance (r=0.89)³ is as strong as treadmill test duration from previous trials (r=0.89 in 30 sedentary men⁴ and r=0.62 in 83 sedentary overweight men^5,6). I believe this amount of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?