And I would probably cosign what RapAdmin says here. Exercise might give you 5-10 years of superior functioning and healthspan. Where I donât believe there is any evidence, is for longer lifespan. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary, at least in animal models. If we take the single most successful max life extending intervention, CR, then the animals which obtained the greatest longevity benefit were the ones on the greatest degree of restriction and without exercise (because that would require more calories). There was some indication that with less restrictive CR, you could add exercise and compensatory calories, and still come out at the same length (not longer!), but again, for the very longest, no exercise. Other exercise focused studies in rodents showed that exercise squared the survival curve, i.e. it greatly reduced mortality at any point in time, but it did not extend the curve, an important distinction. Recently there was the mouse study discussed on this site which disassociated healthspan from lifespan. So you can have better healthspan, but not lifespan. Or in plain words, you wonât live longer, but you will live better.
Of course itâs all a bit more complicated. It assumes that the long lived non exercisers have optimal everything else: diet (especially not overnutrition), no smoking or other deleterious lifestyle habits, vaccinations and protections against low status and poverty etc. With these optimal conditions, you can probably live just as long as an exerciser. Now, what exercise might do on top of that is allow your quality of life to be better, you can do more where physical limitations might constrain you otherwise (say, long treks, playing physical games etc.). But even so, I would not go overboard - I believe that you need very little (relatively) exercise to obtain all or almost all the healthspan benefits. There is absolutely no health reason to spend hours upon hours in the gym or on the running trail. Just not being sedentary, and engaging in activities of daily living with some aspect of physical movement - gardening, walking around with errands, etc., not sitting on the couch, you are likely extracting the vast majority if not all the benefits of exercise on healthspan. But quality of life is the ultimate difference - if you enjoy physically strenuous sports or activities, mountain climbing, sailing, tennis etc., then yes, you really cannot do without exercise. Thatâs where I think the advantage lies without question. But for everything else? Meh.
That said, I do exercise, and not just a little - itâs my Pascalâs wager approach. I donât overdo it, but itâs what would be considered pretty vigorous and consistent program - 200 minutes a week of jogging with a cople of HIIT sessions (4 sessions a week), 64 minutes of weighted and jumping squats a week (2 sessions), some isometrics etc. I do this to maximise my mobility resources - this is important for aging, avoiding falls etc. and general functional abilities to max out ADL capabilities.
Bottom line: if you do everything else to high standards, exercise is a nice-to-have, not a must-have, useful but overrated by folks like Peter Attia. Of course, YMMV, and I might be totally wrong!
