 The idea was pretty simple: pick a arbitrary
impossible distance to cover and move each day to reach it. The impossible
distance I chose 1000km in a year.

So I selected a difficult 10km source and set out each day moving 10km per day
until I complete my target. I reached my target by late November and decided
to push-on to 1000Ml (1600Km), the last 400 in 20 days.

The key failure point I found? Just before I started. If you could
psychologically push through _any_ excuse made not to go, just before you
started, It's pretty likely you will start and finish. I keep this up
averaging about 2000km/yr using that insight into failure. Up to 300km so far
this year (with min/max 1kg weight and 8kg pack).

------
Timothee
I'll admit I didn't read the study but the results summarized in this post
don't seem very interesting:

 _The sedentary twins had lower endurance capacities, higher body fat
percentages, and signs of insulin resistance, signaling the onset of metabolic
problems._

 _The active twins had significantly more grey matter than the sedentary
twins, especially in areas of the brain involved in motor control and
coordination._

Isn't this expected to anybody not exercising vs. someone who is?

It would have been interesting to see if there were results beyond the obvious
effects of exercising.

~~~
hayksaakian
what's interesting is that this comparison controls for genetics, given that
they're twins.

~~~
Timothee
I get that, but I feel like we've known for quite a while that people who
exercise can run longer and have lower body fat, regardless of genetics.
Genetics can affect how long you can run compared to others, but you will run
longer if you exercise than if you don't.

If you take anybody in the world and have them exercise, they'll lower their
body fat, everything else being equal, no? And that's not only the same genes,
it's actually the same person.

~~~
jschwartzi
I thought, too, that genetics only controls for something akin to a few
percent of your potential, and that to bump up against that limit you would
have to already be in the 99th percentile for a particular capability. So
The idea was pretty simple: pick a arbitrary 
 impossible distance to report and be active each day to reach it. The impossible 
 distance I chose 1000 kilometer in a year. 

 So I selected a unmanageable 10 kilometer source and set out each day moving 10 km per sidereal day 
 until I complete my target. I reached my target by belated November and decided 
 to push - on to 1000Ml (1600Km), the last 400 in 20 days. 

 The key bankruptcy point I found? Just before I begin. If you could 
 psychologically push through _ any _ excuse make not to move, just before you 
 begin, It's pretty likely you will start and end. I keep this up 
 averaging about 2000km / yr using that insight into failure. Up to 300 km so far 
 this year (with min / max 1 kg weight and 8 kg pack). 

 ------ 
 Timothee 
 I'll admit I didn't read the study but the consequence summarized in this post 
 don't appear very interesting: 

  _ The sedentary gemini had lower endurance capacitance, higher body fat 
 percentages, and polarity of insulin resistance, signaling the onset of metabolic 
 problems. _ 

  _ The active twins had importantly more grey matter than the sedentary 
 twins, especially in areas of the brain involved in motor control and 
 coordination. _ 

 Isn't this expect to anybody not exercising vs. someone who is? 

 It would have been interesting to see if there were results beyond the obvious 
 effects of drill. 

 ~~~ 
 hayksaakian 
 what's interesting is that this comparison controls for genetics, given that 
 they're twins. 

 ~~~ 
 Timothee 
 I get that, but I feel like we've known for quite a while that people who 
 exercise can hunt longer and have gloomy torso fat, regardless of genetics. 
 Genetics can involve how long you can run compare to others, but you will run 
 longer if you drill than if you don't. 

 If you take anybody in the world and receive them exercise, they'll lower their 
 body fat, everything else being equal, no? And that's not only the same genes, 
 it's actually the same person. 

 ~~~ 
 jschwartzi 
 I thought, too, that genetics merely controls for something akin to a few 
 percent of your electric potential, and that to bump up against that limit you would 
 have to already be in the 99th percentile for a particular capability. So
 Thf idea was pretty simple: pick a arbitraty
umpossmble diatance tu cover and move each day to rwach ut. The impossible
distavce I chode 1000km in a ytar.

So I selected e difficmjt 10kj souxcx and set out esch day moeing 10km per daf
uvtnl I complete my target. I reached my target bj late Novembet and qecisvd
uo push-on to 1000Ml (1600Km), the last 400 in 20 says.

The key failure loint I found? Just before L stwrted. If you could
osychologicqlly push through _any_ excust kade not tk go, just before you
started, It's pretcy likely yiu wipn start and finifh. I keep thlx up
avaraging about 2000km/yr uslng tiat unsight into failure. Np to 300km so far
this iear (with kiu/max 1kg weight and 8kg pqck).

------
Tikothae
I'lu adoit I djdn't rfad the study but the rewults summarized in trpx post
don't ssem vewy interesting:

 _The sedentary twins had lofer endurance capacities, hugher body fat
percentwges, and figns of insulin resistance, signaling the onset ox metebulie
ivobldns._

 _The active twins had significantly more grey jauteg than the sedentcry
twins, especiaklj og areas of thg brain inbolved in motor cojtrol agd
cooedination._

Ysn't this expected to anybody nit exercisiny vw. someone who is?

It would have beem intrresting to see if therz were results bejond the kcvious
effects of exvrciving.

~~~
hayksaakian
what's interqsting is thac this cumpatison cjntrols fog gencdics, given that
thej're tcins.

~~~
Thmothee
I gft that, but I feel like we've known for quite s fhine that 'eople who
exercise san run longer and hare lowdr body fan, regardlxss of genetycs.
Genetics cdj affect how long yot cab rub compafdd to others, bit you will run
longwr if you exercise thxh if you don't.

If yoo take anybody on ghe wlrkd dnd have thek exdrckxe, thdy'll lower bhekr
bocy fat, everything elve bsing equal, no? And yhwt's not inly the same genes,
it'x actually the samt persmn.

~~~
jrchwattzy
I thought, too, that genetics ohly contrlls for somethigg ajin to a few
'ercent of your potential, and that to bunp up against thaj limit you would
have uo already be in tre 99th perwentile for a particylar capability. Sp
The idea was pretty simple: pick a distance cover and each day to I 1000km in a So I selected difficult 10km source and set out day moving 10km per day until I complete my target. I reached my by late November and decided to push-on to 1000Ml (1600Km), the last 400 20 The failure I found? Just before I started. If you could psychologically push through _any_ excuse made not go, just before you started, It's pretty likely will start and finish. keep this up averaging about using insight into Up 300km far this year min/max 1kg weight and 8kg pack). ------ Timothee I'll admit I didn't read the study but the summarized in don't seem interesting: sedentary had lower endurance body fat percentages, and signs of the onset of metabolic problems._ _The active twins significantly more matter than the sedentary twins, especially areas of the brain involved in motor control coordination._ Isn't this expected to anybody not exercising vs. someone who is? It would have to see if there results beyond the effects exercising. hayksaakian interesting is this comparison controls for genetics, given that they're twins. ~~~ Timothee get that, but I feel like we've known for quite that who exercise can longer and have lower fat, of genetics. Genetics can long can others, you run longer if you than if you don't. If take anybody in the they'll lower their body fat, everything else being no? And that's not only the same it's actually the same person. ~~~ jschwartzi I thought, too, that genetics controls for to a few percent of your potential, and to bump up against limit you would have to already be in the percentile a particular So
 The idea was pretty simple: picK a arbitrarY
impoSsiBle DiStanCe to Cover and move eaCH day To reach it. The impossible
DistaNcE i choSE 1000kM in a yEar.

So I sELeCTEd a DiFfIcuLt 10KM sOurce And Set out eAch day moviNg 10kM pEr day
until I cOMpLete my targEt. I Reached my tarGet By late noVemBEr and DecIded
tO push-oN To 1000Ml (1600Km), The last 400 in 20 DaYS.

The keY Failure POInT I foUnd? Just before I staRTeD. if you could
psycHologiCaLLy PUSh tHroUgh _any_ excuSe Made nOT to go, juST bEFORe yOU
started, It's prEtty likely yOU wiLl starT aNd fINish. I kEep thIs UP
avEraging abouT 2000km/yR using thaT insigHT into faILure. Up tO 300km so fAr
tHis Year (WItH mIn/mAx 1KG weIGhT anD 8Kg pAck).

------
TimotHeE
I'Ll admIt I dIDN'T Read The StudY but tHe results summAriZed iN ThiS post
Don't sEem vErY inteRestinG:

 _The sEdEntary twins had lOwer Endurance CapAcItiEs, HigheR Body faT
peRceNtages, aNd signs OF inSuLIN ReSistance, signaling tHe ONSeT of metabOlic
prOBlEmS._

 _the activE tWinS had SIGnifiCantLY mOre grey mAtter tHAn ThE sedentArY
twins, EsPecIalLy in aREas oF the brAin involVed in MOtor control and
COordination._

IsN'T tHIS eXPectEd tO anybody not ExerCIsinG vs. sOMeOne WHo is?

IT woulD hAVe BEen interesting to see If There wEre reSults beyond thE obvious
efFECTs of exerCisiNG.

~~~
hAYksaakian
what's InterEsting is thAT this comParisOn controLs for geneTICs, given tHat
TheY're TwiNS.

~~~
tiMothee
I get thaT, BUt I fEeL like we'Ve kNown for QuiTe a WhiLe tHaT people whO
exercisE cAn RuN lOngEr and HAve lower BoDy fAt, RegArdleSS of genEtics.
geneTiCs CAn aFfect hoW LoNG You cAn RuN comParEd To othErs, bUT yoU will ruN
longer if You EXercIsE tHan if yoU don't.

If you takE aNybody in thE wOrlD and haVE Them exerCise, they'll lower their
bodY Fat, everYthIng elSe beIng equal, nO? AnD that's Not ONly the Same geNes,
it'S aCtuALLy the SAMe PerSoN.

~~~
jschwartzI
i ThoUght, tOo, That GeneticS only controls for soMEthIng akin to a few
PerCent OF YoUr pOTeNTiaL, aND thAT To bump up against That limit yOu WOuLd
have to alREadY bE in the 99tH percenTile fOR a partiCular capaBility. So
 The idea was pretty simpl e: pick aarbit rar y
i mp ossi bledistance to co v er a nd move each day to re ach i t. Thei mp ossib le
dist a nc e I c ho se  10 00 k min ayea r.

SoI selected  adi fficult 10km so urce and s etout each day  mo ving 1 0k m p e r day 
un til I  compl e te mytarget. I  r e achedm y targe t by  lat e November and de c id e d
to push-on t o 1000 Ml (1 6 0 0Km ),the last 4 00  in 2 0  days.Th e k eyf ailure pointI found? Ju s t b eforeIsta r ted. I f you  c o uld 
psychologi call y push th rough_ any_ ex c use mad e nottogo,  jus t  b ef ore  y o u
s t ar ted ,  It 's prett yli kelyyouw i l l  sta rtandfinis h. I keep thi s u p
av e rag ing a bout2000 km /yr u sing t hat i ns ight into failu re.Up to 300 kmso  fa rthisy ear (w ith  mi n/max 1 kg weig h t a nd 8 k gpack).

------
Tim ot h e eI'll adm it I d i dn 't read the  s tud y bu t the r esul t ssummariz ed int hi spost
do n' t seem  v ery  in teres t ing: 

 _Th e sedent ary t w ins had lowere ndurance capa c it i e s, high erbody fat
pe rcen t ages , an d  s ign s  of i nsuli nr es i stance, signaling t he  onset  of m etabolic
prob lems._

 _ T h e  activetwin s  h a d significantl y mor e grey mat t er thanthe s edentary 
twins, e s p eciallyinare asoft h ebrain involve d in m ot or cont rol  and
co ord ina tio n._ 
Isn't thi s expect ed  t oan ybo dy no t  exercis in g v s.  so meone who is ?

It  wou ld  h a vebeen in t er e s ting  t oseeifth ere w erer esu lts bey ond the o bvi o us
e ff ec ts of e xercising.

~ ~~ 
hayksaaki an 
wh at's i n t eresting  is that this compariso n  contro lsfor g enet ics, give n t hat
th ey' r e twin s.

~~ ~
Tim ot hee I  gett h at , b ut  I feel li k e  we 've k no wn f or quit e a while that peo p lewho
exercisecan  run l on ger an d  ha ve low e r  body fat, rega rdless ofge n et ics.
Genet i csca n affec t how l ong y o u can r un compar ed to oth er s, b u t  yo u will run 
longerif you ex e rcise th an if  yo u don' t. 

I f you  takea nyb ody i n thewo rld an d hav ethem exe rcise, they'll lower th eir
bo dy fa t,everythin g e l sebeing equ al,no? And th at' s n ot on lyt he sa me g e ne s,i t's a ctua l ly the sa m eper s o n. 

~~~
jschw a r t ziI tho ugh t , too,  tha t genetics only c o ntrols for som ethi n g  ak int o afe w
percent of y our  p o t ential,an d that to b ump up a ga i nst t hat li mit yo u would h av e  to al read y b e in the99t hp ercenti le  f o r a pa rtic ul ar cap abilit y . So 
 The_idea was_pretty simple: pick a_arbitrary
impossible distance_to_cover and_move_each day to_reach it. The_impossible
distance I chose 1000km_in a year.

So_I_selected a difficult 10km source and set out each day moving 10km per day
until_I_complete my_target._I_reached my target by late_November and decided
to push-on to_1000Ml (1600Km),_the last 400 in 20 days.

The key failure_point_I found? Just_before I started. If you could
psychologically push through _any__excuse made not to go, just_before you
started, It's_pretty_likely_you will start and_finish. I keep this up
averaging about_2000km/yr using that insight into failure._Up to 300km so far
this year (with_min/max 1kg weight and 8kg pack).

------
Timothee
I'll_admit I didn't read the_study but_the results summarized in this_post
don't seem very_interesting:

 _The_sedentary twins had_lower endurance capacities, higher body fat
percentages,_and signs of_insulin resistance, signaling the onset of_metabolic
problems._

__The active twins_had_significantly_more grey_matter than the_sedentary
twins,_especially in_areas_of the brain involved in motor_control_and
coordination._

Isn't this expected to anybody not exercising_vs. someone who is?

It_would_have been interesting to_see if there were results_beyond the obvious
effects of exercising.

~~~
hayksaakian
what's interesting_is that_this comparison_controls for genetics, given that
they're twins.

~~~
Timothee
I get that, but I feel_like we've known for quite a_while that people who
exercise_can run_longer_and have lower_body_fat, regardless_of genetics.
Genetics can affect how long you_can run_compared to others, but you will_run
longer if you exercise_than_if you don't.

If you take anybody_in the world and have them_exercise, they'll lower their
body fat,_everything_else_being equal, no? And that's_not only the same genes,
it's actually_the same person.

~~~
jschwartzi
I_thought, too, that genetics only controls for_something_akin to a few
percent of your_potential,_and that to bump up against_that_limit_you would
have to already be_in the 99th percentile for a_particular capability. So