I've always wondered what the health trade-off is for a less mentally stimulating role if it dramatically reduces your stress levels and offers better work/life balance.
On a similar note, I've often wondered what the optimum amount of exercise is if you don't like exercise, but want to maximise your time not exercising.
Don’t the government of various countries recommend 90 mins of cardio per week and 2-3 strength training sessions on top of 30-60 minutes of daily light activity?
I feel like they would be the ones to answer the optimal exercise question over a huge number of people.
If you want to do weight training but don't want to spend a lot of time in the gym, look into "myo-reps". Rather than doing a traditional "Do 3 sets of 12 reps separated by 90-120s", you do a set of 12, then do several sets of 5 after waiting only 15 seconds. It's more intense but just as effective, and a lot faster.
Doesn't really work on leg day if you're lifting heavy, because 15 seconds isn't enough to catch your breath; but has worked pretty well for me for push and pull days, where my whole workout is usually less than half an hour.
Myo reps might have training benefit for strength-endurance athletes, but afaik they don't improve muscle growth or 1rm strength comparably to traditional schemes. If new work has come out showing that please share.
As of about 4 years ago the research I'd seen suggested that taking rest breaks of 3 mins vs 30s or 1m improves gains over time, though to be fair the lower rest breaks resulted in less overall work being done, so that's not entirely surprising.
> they don't improve muscle growth or 1rm strength comparably to traditional schemes
I didn't say they improved muscle growth cf traditional rest times, just that they took less time. The person I responded to didn't sound like they wanted to be as huge as they could be. I don't want to be as huge as I can be either -- I primarily want to maintain muscle mass as I age (nearing 50). Getting in a solid workout in 20-30 minutes rather than 45-60 minutes makes a big difference to that goal. ETA: As they say, "The best workout is the one you actually do".
This guy is a bit vulgar, but has a lot of good information:
Great question. The approach I've always taken (now that I'm past my prime) is to just show up. If I train 15 minutes and call it a day, at least I was active and sustained the habit of being active. If I train for a couple hours, that's great too. What I try very, very hard to avoid is doing nothing.
I suspect I get the majority of the gains from the first 20 minutes or so. And since I'm no longer training to compete at a high level, I don't need to eek out as much from my training as possible...but I have no data to back that up.
If it's just a matter of time vs results, HIIT and overhead press/deadlift for 3 sets each of 5-10 reps, with ~2-3 minutes between sets (you can do stuff like bicep curls and chest flyes in between big exercise sets). Unpleasant but high reward/time.
If you want to optimize for exercise pleasantness, start consuming all your tv on a treadmill or elliptical at a slow-moderate (2.5-3m/h) pace.
Same here. I worked repetitive manual labor jobs for a long time before I switched to tech. I was bored out of my mind at work, but after work loved playing games and working on programming/tech/electronics projects.
Now that I'm in tech I have 0 desire to do anything screen based or deep thinking/problem solving after work. There are days I look out the office window and kind of wish I was the guy mowing the lawn and trimming trees. But I know I'd be bored.
I think the sweet spot is lots of mental stimulation and no stress. This is probably why university positions were so coveted in the past, before academia became completely dysfunctional.