Holtermann Andreas, Rasmussen Charlotte Lund, Hallman David M, Ding Ding, Dumuid Dorothea, Gupta Nidhi
National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Sports Med Open. 2021 Dec 20;7(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s40798-021-00394-8.
"Sit less-move more" has been the univocal advice to adults for better health. Predominantly, this advice is based on research of physical behaviors during leisure-time. A recent study among > 100,000 adults indicates a u-shaped association between leisure-time physical activity and risk for cardiovascular disease and mortality among adults in physically active occupations. This may be explained by the considerable difference in 24-h physical behaviors between adults in sedentary and physically active occupations. Thus, the advice "sit less-move more" might not be the best for health among adults in physically active occupations. To provide a scientific approach and encourage research on 24-h physical behaviors and health for those in physically active occupations, we propose the "Sweet-Spot Hypothesis." The hypothesis postulates that the "Sweet-Spot" of 24-h physical behaviors for better health differs between adults, depending on their occupation. Specifically, the hypothesis claims that the advice "sit less-move more" does not bring adults in physically active occupations toward their "Sweet-Spot" of 24-h physical behaviors for better health. The purpose of our paper is to encourage researchers to test this proposed hypothesis by describing its origin, its theoretical underpinning, approaches to test it, and practical implications. To promote health for all, and decrease social health inequalities, we see a great need for empirically testing the "Sweet-Spot Hypothesis." We propose the "Sweet-Spot Hypothesis" to encourage discussion, debates, and empirical research to expand our collective knowledge about the healthy "24-h physical behavior balance" for all.
“少坐多动”一直是给成年人增进健康的统一建议。主要而言，这一建议是基于对休闲时间身体行为的研究。最近一项针对超过10万名成年人的研究表明，休闲时间的身体活动与从事体力活动职业的成年人患心血管疾病的风险及死亡率之间呈U型关联。这可能是由于久坐职业的成年人与从事体力活动职业的成年人在24小时身体行为上存在显著差异。因此，“少坐多动”这一建议对从事体力活动职业的成年人而言可能并非对健康最有利的。为了提供一种科学方法，并鼓励针对从事体力活动职业的人群的24小时身体行为与健康进行研究，我们提出了“最佳点假说”。该假说假定，对增进健康而言，24小时身体行为的“最佳点”因成年人的职业不同而有所差异。具体而言，该假说称“少坐多动”这一建议并不能使从事体力活动职业的成年人达到其增进健康的24小时身体行为“最佳点”。我们本文的目的是通过描述该假说的起源、理论基础、验证方法及实际意义，鼓励研究人员对这一假说进行验证。为了促进全民健康并减少社会健康不平等现象，我们认为非常有必要对“最佳点假说”进行实证检验。我们提出“最佳点假说”，以鼓励讨论、辩论及实证研究，从而扩展我们关于所有人健康的“24小时身体行为平衡”的集体知识。
