Hacker News Reader

Comment by pandemicsoul | Hacker News Reader

Just like a month ago there was a study showing that no amount of quick walks could offset a day of sitting.

Which is why the words "proof" and "fact" have no place in science.

Science is built upon a foundation of falsifiability. The pinnacle of understanding in science is an accepted theory which can, of course, be discarded if significant evidence to the contrary comes to light.

Would love to see the study. Per the other comments, it may mean that you can't concentrate the walking and the sitting? That is, 22 minutes of walking every 2 hours could be a lot different from 44 minutes every 4 hours.

This wouldn't be much different from any other process. And, of course, could call into question many other things we have fixed times in the day for.

https://archive.ph/jZCMg

Thanks! This seems to support the general thought I put up. You have to substitute sitting time with exercise. The article talked about people that would sit for 10-12 hours a day, and how if they sat that long, adding exercise did not help. My assertion is that added exercise has to reduce the time sitting.

I'm actually struggling to imagine sitting 12 hours a day and also getting real exercise in. Unless they don't count walking around the house to eat and such, that is a crap load of sitting.

I've seen articles purporting this too and it always makes me wonder if my exercise time counts as standing time to them or not. I go for an hour run 5 days a week, do I count that as standing time?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com