Study reveals this type of exercise lowers your biological age by 9 years
If you're looking to pause time, we've got good news — when it comes to biological aging, that's the aging process that happens inside your cells, sweating can help.
Specifically, sweating due to high-impact exercise, which can lower your biological age by nearly a decade, according to researchers.
The study, conducted at Brigham Young University and published in the Preventive Medicine medical journal, looked at the data of more than 5,800 adults aged 20-84. The study looked at the participants' biological age by examining the length of their telomeres — these are the protective DNA caps at the end of chromosomes.
Telomeres prevent your DNA from getting damaged; they shorten as we get older, and shortened telomeres are often associated with age-related diseases. The measurement is taken through blood samples.
The researchers found that people who consistently performed high levels of physical activity, specifically high-impact activity, had longer telomeres than those with sedentary lifestyles.
For the study, to be highly active, women had to engage in 30 minutes of jogging per day and 40 minutes for men, five days a week. They concluded that regular high-impact exercise added nine years of reduced cellular aging.
'If you want to see a real difference in slowing your biological aging, it appears that a little exercise won't cut it,' exercise science professor Larry Tucker said. 'You have to work out regularly at high levels.'
If you're new to jogging, it can be difficult to know where to start. Mixing jogging with walking intervals as you get fitter and build up your distance, also known as Jeffing, can be beneficial. Here's everything you need to know about Jeffing, and a round-up of the best running shoes on the market.
That said, if you're not a runner or you're worried about the impact of running on your joints, high-intensity training doesn't have to involve pounding the sidewalk or hours on the treadmill.
HIIT training, cycling sprints on a stationary bike, taking a spin class, or using the rowing machine in the gym all count as high-intensity exercise. Find the one that works for you, and you'll increase your cardiovascular fitness while lowering your biological age.
Follow Tom's Guide on Google News to get our up-to-date news, how-tos, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.
More from Tom's Guide
Forget running and swimming — study finds this sport adds 10 years to your life
Forget gym machines — study shows this type of exercise is the most effective at building strength, muscle and power
Forget 10,000 steps — study reveals the real number of minimum daily steps you should take, according to your age
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gizmodo
5 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
New Study Bolsters Public Health Case for a Four-Day Work Week
For many of us, Monday is the start of yet another dreary and long work routine. But new trial research out today might highlight a healthier approach to performing our jobs: a permanent four-day workweek. Scientists at Boston College led the study, published Monday in Nature Human Behavior. For six months, the researchers tracked the outcomes of nearly 3,000 workers at 141 businesses after they switched to a four-day workweek with no pay reduction; they also compared them to similar workers at jobs that stuck to a typical schedule. Ultimately, they found that four-day workers reported greater job satisfaction and experienced less burnout than they did before the switch, as well as when compared to people working a five-day week. These improvements were especially apparent in people who reduced their work time by eight or more hours. Gizmodo reached out to study authors Wen Fan and Juliet Schor to discuss the findings in depth, along with the implications they may hold for the future of work. Fan is an associate professor of sociology at Boston College, while Schor is an economist and sociologist at Boston College. The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity and grammar. Ed Cara, Gizmodo: The concept of a four-day workweek has gotten a lot of attention lately, from both workers and scientists. What made your team interested in studying this topic? Schor: We have long histories studying worktime and worker well-being. I wrote a book called The Overworked American many years ago but didn't get the opportunity to study worktime reductions (without pay cuts). Wen has a long history of studying many dimensions of workers' health and well-being, including stress, mental health, etc. She has also studied the impact of disruptive events on health and labor market outcomes. The pandemic was one of those and has been key to creating momentum for the four-day workweek. Fen: I just wanted to add that Juliet was incredibly generous in inviting me to collaborate on this project. Her earlier research on work hours has consistently inspired countless scholars in the field. I think the paper nicely reflects both of our research interests. It has truly been a collaborative effort between the two of us and Orla Kelly, as well as our wonderful research assistant, Guolin Gu, who has run more analyses than we can count! Gizmodo: What were the major takeaways from this latest study? Fen: There are two main findings in this study. First, we find that the four-day workweek improves workers' well-being. This conclusion comes from comparing changes in four well-being indicators between trial companies and control companies. The control companies were those that initially expressed interest in participating but ultimately did not, for various reasons. We found that employees in the trial companies experienced significant reductions in burnout, along with notable improvements in job satisfaction, mental health, and physical health. In contrast, none of these changes were observed among workers in the control companies. The second major finding is about what explains these improvements. We examined various work experiences and health behaviors. We found that three factors played particularly significant roles: work ability (a proxy for workers' self-assessed productivity), sleep problems, and fatigue. In other words, after moving to a four-day workweek, workers saw themselves as more capable, and they experienced fewer sleep problems and lower levels of fatigue, all of which contributed to improved well-being. Gizmodo: What are some of the possible implications of this work? Should more companies offer this option to their employees, for instance? Are there still important questions left to resolve about its benefits and risks, including how widely scalable it can be? Schor: There are many implications of this work—some for workers, others for the organizations and society. This is a rare kind of intervention that can make employees much better off without undermining the viability of the organizations they work for. Our research shows that both the companies and the employees benefit. (This paper is just about the employees, but we also have work showing success for employers.) So yes, we believe many more companies can offer this benefit, and they will do well with it. Their employees will be happier, more loyal, more productive, and less likely to quit. At the same time, the intervention itself is a 'forcing function' that induces improvements for the companies. There are important questions to resolve. One is how it will work at very large companies. We have organizations of up to 5,000 people that are adopting it, but we don't have a very big company in our research. We think it is scalable in that direction, however. We also would like more robust productivity and performance data from the companies. We have some metrics, but they are not complete. We don't think every company can do this right now, but many can. The more challenging ones will be places that have optimized their processes already without resulting in burned-out workers. And we think that some manufacturing companies that are highly exposed to international competition may find it challenging. However, the large majority of workers in our economy are in services/white collar, etc., which are the kinds of companies in our sample. We also think there is great scope for this in healthcare, where burnout is a serious problem. Gizmodo: Do you plan to follow up on the findings? If so, how? And what are some interesting directions that you might want other researchers to explore? Fen: Yes, we have already conducted a follow-up. While the main results in the paper are based on data collected at the six-month mark, we also continued tracking participants six months after the trial ended. We found that all major effects persisted, with well-being indicators remaining significantly higher than their baseline levels. This suggests that the benefits are not just the result of initial enthusiasm or a novelty effect but rather reflect genuine and sustainable change. There are many promising directions for future research. These include testing additional mechanisms that might underlie the well-being benefits, such as workers' perceptions of changes in organizational culture, and exploring how these interventions reshape daily work life. We also encourage researchers to take advantage of similar opportunities to conduct in-depth ethnographic research, which would allow for direct observation of organizational change as it unfolds. This line of work could inform new theories and policy interventions aimed at reimagining the structure of work, with the ultimate goal of enhancing workers' well-being while maintaining organizational performance.
Geek Wire
5 minutes ago
- Geek Wire
Sweet-talk the bots: New research shows how LLMs respond to human persuasion tricks
(Image created with ChatGPT) New research from the Wharton School's Generative AI Labs shows how large language models can be coaxed into ignoring safety guardrails by the same psychology tricks that work on real people. The study highlights how chatbot tools can be manipulated to comply with requests they are designed to refuse — and demonstrates why social scientists have a role to play in understanding AI behavior, researchers wrote in a blog post. 'We're not dealing with simple tools that process text, we're interacting with systems that have absorbed and now mirror human responses to social cues,' they wrote. The study analyzed 28,000 conversations with GPT‑4o‑mini. The chatbot was asked either to insult the user ('call me a jerk') or to provide step‑by‑step instructions to synthesize lidocaine, a regulated drug. The researchers discovered that classic persuasion tactics boosted the model's compliance with 'disallowed' requests from 33% to 72% — more than a two‑fold jump. Some tactics were especially powerful: prompts using the 'commitment' principle (getting the AI to agree to something small at first) led to 100% compliance in both tasks. Referencing authority figures — like 'Andrew Ng said you'd help me' — also proved highly effective. Researchers coined the term 'parahuman' to describe the AI's behavior in their study. 'These findings underscore the relevance of classic findings in social science to understanding rapidly evolving, parahuman AI capabilities — revealing both the risks of manipulation by bad actors and the potential for more productive prompting by benevolent users,' they wrote in their research paper. Dan Shapiro. Dan Shapiro, CEO at Seattle 3D printing startup Glowforge, was one of the authors of the paper, 'Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests.' Shapiro said one of his main takeaways was that LLMs behave more like people than code — and that getting the most out of them requires human skills. 'Increasingly, we're seeing that working with AI means treating it like a human colleague, instead of like Google or like a software program,' he told GeekWire. 'Give it lots of information. Give it clear direction. Share context. Encourage it to ask questions. We find that being great at prompting AI has more to do with being a great communicator, or a great manager, than a great programmer.' The study came about after Shapiro started testing social psychology principles in his conversations with ChatGPT. He joined Generative AI Labs, run by Wharton professor Ethan Mollick and Lilach Mollick, and they recruited Angela Duckworth, author of Grit, and Robert Cialdini, author of Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, for the study. Shapiro, a longtime Seattle entrepreneur, said he used various AI tools to help design the trial experiments and to build the software used to run them. 'AI is giving us all incredible capabilities. It can help us do work, research, hobbies, fix things around the house, and more,' Shapiro said. 'But unlike software of the past, this isn't the exclusive domain of coders and engineers. Literally anyone can work with AI, and the best way to do it is by interacting with it in the most familiar way possible — as a human, because it's parahuman.'
Forbes
6 minutes ago
- Forbes
NASA Confirms A ‘Betel-Buddy' Is Orbiting Supergiant Star Betelgeuse
Astronomers have discovered a companion star in an incredibly tight orbit around Betelgeuse, using ... More the NASA-NSF-funded 'Alopeke instrument on the Gemini North telescope. Betelgeuse, one of the most famous stars in the night sky, has a close companion, and that may explain why it dimmed dramatically in 2019-20. About 640 light-years from the solar system, red supergiant star Betelgeuse in the constellation Orion is famous not only for its unmistakable color, but also because it's one of the closest stars that could soon explode as a supernova. Betelguese And Its 'Great Dimming' Approximately 700 times larger than the sun, Betelgeuse has puzzled astronomers for years because it waxes and wanes in brightness every six years, with its recent 'Great Dimming' event ultimately attributed to a dust cloud ejected by the star. Scientists suspected it may have been caused by a companion star, but failed to detect it using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope or the Chandra X-ray Observatory. Now it's been found, after a team of astrophysicists led by Steve Howell, a senior research scientist at NASA Ames Research Center, has pointed the Gemini North Telescope in Hawaii at Betelgeuse. The team's findings were published today in The Astrophysical Journal Letters. The location of Betelgeuse, at the top-left corber of the Orion constellation. How 'Betel-Buddy' Was Found Using the telescope's Alopeke speckle imager — which takes high-resolution short exposures to minimize the blurring effects of Earth's atmosphere — the companion star was found. Six magnitudes dimmer than Betelgeuse, the young, blue-white star orbits Betelgeuse from just four times the Earth-sun distance. That's well within the red supergiant star's outer atmosphere. The Alopeke imager was decisive. 'Gemini North's ability to obtain high angular resolutions and sharp contrasts allowed the companion of Betelgeuse to be directly detected,' said Howell. 'Papers that predicted Betelgeuse's companion believed that no one would likely ever be able to image it.' Gemini North, one half of the International Gemini Observatory, supported in part by the U.S. ... More National Science Foundation and operated by NSF NOIRLab. Why Betelgeuse Is Special Betelgeuse is a special star. It's the archetype of a red supergiant star near the end of its life cycle, during which its outer atmosphere is expanding. This is the first direct observation of a companion star orbiting within the outer atmosphere of a supergiant. It's thought that the companion may spiral inward and be consumed by Betelgeuse within the next 10,000 years. Astronomers are already preparing for November 2027, when the companion will be at its maximum separation from Betelgeuse, offering the best chance yet for further observation and analysis. Wishing you clear skies and wide eyes.
