Exercise minimalism is an unhealthy path to go down.
Exercise minimalism is an unhealthy path to go down.
I f you could get all the benefits of exercise with none of the work, would you do it?
Humans being what we are today, the tempting answer is “Of course!” Most people want to be physically fit. But whether they want to take the necessary steps is a different question. Hence the constant search for diets, superfoods, and small workouts with outsized fitness effects.
A new “exercise pill” that claims to replicate in the body the effects of intense exercise without the trouble of an actual workout fits in this broader category. It might seem like a godsend. Examining the science behind it, however, helps show that, in many ways, it’s hard to beat the beneficial effects of a real session at the gym.
Regarding the supposed miracle pill, the New York Post recently reported on a study by Danish researchers in which they claimed to have developed a molecule that can re-create some of the effects of strenuous activity on the human body — without the strenuous activity. “In practice, the molecule brings the body into a metabolic state corresponding to running 10 kilometers at high speed on an empty stomach,” Thomas Poulsen, one of the chemists who led the research, said.
As someone who has run many 10ks at high speed on an empty stomach, I found this claim enticing — and offensive: Could one really bottle the benefits of a cross-country race? The researchers indeed discovered that the molecule, LaKe, elevates the level of two key metabolites, which are substances produced by the body’s breakdown of other chemicals, such as those in food or drugs. Both substances typically appear with exercise, and with them their beneficial effects on the body. LaKe induced them on its own.
It sounds great. And it may have future applications for obesity treatment, for athletes, and for those currently inhibited from engaging in physical activity. That is, it’s best thought of as an “exercise supplement,” as Brady Holmer, the science writer and researcher whose Substack made me aware of the study, put it to me. When these studies get attention, though, it’s usually for their more exciting potential to herald the end of the need for exercise.
This is an unhealthy response. LaKe may be able to replicate a few of the processes that exercise induces in the body. But physical activity has many additional benefits beyond what the molecule can re-create. For one, the actual muscle contractions inherent in exercise have effects a pill could likely never replicate. This process releases thousands of myokines, molecules that promote an “inter-organ cross-pollination” that communicates health-promoting signals throughout the body, Holmer tells me.
Even a cardio nut like me can acknowledge that fitness levels and regimens short of “marathoner” or the equivalent in other exercise domains are worthwhile. Physical fitness is compatible with a wide range of physical capacities, life choices, and time and environmental constraints. So, to some extent, it’s welcome that there are resources available for people who, for whatever reason, aren’t exercising as much as they should. Something is better than nothing. Even a drug might have some use for those who truly need it.
But sometimes, those resources can mislead people. Leave LaKe’s possible use (and abuse) aside for a moment, and take a look at a recent Time magazine article. It asks “just how little exercise can you get away with, while still getting” the benefits of exercise, “according to experts.” These experts soothingly counsel that doing nothing for a week — or a couple of weeks — is tolerable, as long as you return to your regimen eventually. They even suggest tricking yourself into doing “physical activities that don’t feel like exercise at all.” These can be useful things to remember. But such indulgent advice can easily turn from motivation into excuse-making.
This is the big potential problem with both LaKe and the exercise minimalism offered by Time: Rather than offering a pathway back to health for those who need one, they could encourage shortcuts to fitness. A drug that promises to replicate the boons of exercise and a mindset that looks for the smallest possible amount of exertion that still produces some of its benefits don’t just neglect the full range of health possibilities offered by a truly active lifestyle. They also shortchange our possibilities as human beings.
On an individual level, physical activity doesn’t just help our bodies. It can also help our brains, strengthen us against the entropy of aging, and develop habits of discipline, goal-orientation, and persistence that are both good in themselves and applicable to other areas of life.
On a group level, exercise’s benefits are just as great. The cross-country and track teams I’ve run on are the source of some of my fondest memories and closest friendships. It’s even possible to befriend people on other teams, however unlikely the heat of competition may make that seem. In the interest of both full disclosure and proving my argument, I offer Brady Holmer himself, a high-school cross-country rival of mine who has become my friend (and a helpful resource) in the years since. Similar relationships are possible in less formal settings: On the morning I wrote this column, I ran with two friends, both of whom I first met — you guessed it — on a run. (One introduced me to the other, in fact.)
Considering all this, answering the question of whether you’d try to get all of the benefits of exercise with none of the drawbacks becomes at least a little harder: The benefits and the drawbacks are linked and at times are even one and the same.
Some may still answer in the affirmative. And should the drugs improve, or the methods of exercise minimalism be perfected, then they could leave serious exertion behind forever. The rest of us, however, can continue to enjoy it — for its own sake, for what it can do for us, and for how it can bring us together. Good luck getting a pill to replicate all of that.