If you could only have one test...which would it be?

Newventurer

Recycles dryer sheets
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
473
Location
in the sticks
I was at My local big box store yesterday that had a free blood pressure check machine which I occasionally use and was pleased to discover that my pressure on that day was 'Great!' as shown by the screen print out.

Got me to thinking, is there one measurement that can be relied on, above all others as an indication of overall health?

Blood pressure? AC1? Cholesterol? Weight? Body Fat? Etc?
 
If it has to be boiled down to only one measure of good health, I'd say waking up in the morning is about as close as it gets. :)
 
My DR. just ordered a cervical MRI. That's what I'm looking forward to.
 
If it has to be boiled down to only one measure of good health, I'd say waking up in the morning is about as close as it gets. :)

And looking in the mirror is probably the best single test of physical fitness.
 
I'm using the self administered physical fitness stress test. After I get up in the morning and fog a mirror, I've got things to do. :)
 
Oh, dear- DH is in trouble. He's got balance problems. The test makes sense, though; falls are a major cause of death for the elderly. I suspect my 80-something mother could pass this test but even she says that you really have to work to maintain your balance because otherwise you wake up one day and it's gone.

There's such a thing as "balance therapy". It's not much fun(or wasn't for me), similar to physical therapy. Make sure you get someone that is certified, they're probably a PT too. It does work, actually at the end the therapist left it up to me, something makes your balance bad, do it 20-50-100-500 times. Keep doing it till doesn't bother you.

A lot of it was very simple, walk while looking side to side or up and down. Standing on one foot is good too, I do that while waiting in line at the grocery store. You have the cart there to touch if you start to fall. It's amazing how just touching something with one finger will stabilize you.
 
If your non-insurance healthcare costs have been zero dollars for the past several years, you'll probably survive the next few months... or so.
 

This is obviously not true. The ability to sit and rise like they demonstrate is closely tied to age, as in I could do it easily at age 30, and it gets harder and harder each decade. Now at almost 60 I'd probably get a 4 or so on the test, mostly because of the standing back up part.

However, if you look at actuarial tables I, at age 60, have a life expectancy of age 83.4. But a 30 year old only has a life expectancy of 82.2. So there! Scientifically disproven.
 
I didn't think I would do particularly well (I also think the test, like most pop-science indicators like cholesterol, exercise, sleep, social interaction etc is an effing crock anyway) however, I scored a 9. Getting up required me to touch one knee to the floor.
 
When I tried it I felt like Sticky the stick insect trying to get off a sticky bun. I don't want to talk about it. :nonono:

I'd like to see your video :LOL:
I watched the Daily Mail video. The narrator looks like he's going to cry any minute. Maybe he did the sit-rise one too many times.
 
This sit down get up thing was new to me, so I watched a few videos. There was blatant causality issues in most of the commentary. Suggesting that just by training, and so learning how to increase the score that you'd increase your chances of living longer is not what the study uncovered. It was a simple correlation that was uncovered. So the benefit of training to improve ones score is great as exercise, its hardly the path to longevity.

I got a 10 after a few tries. Gently down, no problem. The first few times, I didn't "stick the landing", meaning I had to take a step after standing up. But after practice, I could stick the landing. For me, the key was to get my feet tucked in close before standing up.
 
Last edited:
I got down OK but on the way up I heard some strange popping sounds coming from my knees. Now they are a little sore. Score 10 I guess.
I don't think we are on to a fountain of youth secret here.
 
OK, I finally tried this.

Sitting, no problem.

Standing. Was able, although I had enough momentum rising that I took a couple steps back once I was up.

I think it's just a matter of practice to judge how much momentum is needed.

But now my knees and ankles aren't happy......

I don't hink I'm going to practice this. I'll just keep doing yoga.
 
Last edited:
Crossing my legs as far as demo woman had them resulted in staggering around. Keeping my feet close when crossed I got up and down without much drama - maybe a point or two off for lack of fluid grace. Not gonna stop a bus from hitting me.
 
This is obviously not true. The ability to sit and rise like they demonstrate is closely tied to age, as in I could do it easily at age 30, and it gets harder and harder each decade. Now at almost 60 I'd probably get a 4 or so on the test, mostly because of the standing back up part.

However, if you look at actuarial tables I, at age 60, have a life expectancy of age 83.4. But a 30 year old only has a life expectancy of 82.2. So there! Scientifically disproven.

The study does conclude "Multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, and BMI confirmed these findings, with similar hazard ratios as those in the unadjusted model"

http://geriatrictoolkit.missouri.edu/srff/deBrito-Floor-Rise-Mortality-2012..pdf

One big difference between the study and trying at home is that the the participants were just told "Without worrying about the speed of movement, try to sit and then to rise from the floor, using the minimum support that you believe is needed." and they likely didn't get to see a video showing the best technique for the highest score.
 
Yeah, but the observers told the participants what they could do to improve their score, and the highest score was the one recorded. So I think the participants got a stepwise progression to the limits of their ability.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom