Debate needed over exercise

I READ with interest the article (News, 26 February) reporting the findings of some work related to exercise and health regarding a former colleague of mine Professor Timmons. This work published in the BMC journal in January 2009 reported a modest but significant improvement in insulin sensitivity in healthy but sedentary males following two weeks of high-intensity training.

The newspaper article was in the main correct in its content but the second paragraph is somewhat misleading since neither this work nor any other similar work in this field has been able to demonstrate any effect from high-intensity training on fat utilisation either at rest or during exercise.

The principal reason for writing is that the editorial comment “Gym’ll fix it” has missed the point of the leader article in its dismissive tone by suggesting “health experts are reduced to presenting the public with the least arduous option it is possible to conceive”.

The concept of the study is not simply about doing two minutes of exercise but that it is two minutes of hard physical exertion, the final stages of the study involved asking the volunteers to complete 6x30 seconds of maximal physical exertion, which is far from the concept of the least arduous option. I invite the writer to come to our laboratory here at Heriot-Watt to experience this sort of exercise programme and then report whether or not it is particularly arduous.

The concept of this work is to examine the signals involved in regulating the uptake of sugar from the blood into muscle that becomes dysfunctional with diseases such as diabetes and to look at solutions that might correct this problem.

I agree with the concluding sentence to this piece that any exercise is better than no exercise but the debate about how much we need to maintain health is balanced with how hard should that exercise be to make a difference.

Dr Derek Ball, Director of Sport and Exercise Science, School of Life Sciences, Heriot Watt University