AnnaRaven
Lovin' The Homestead
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2011
- Messages
- 861
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 78
I actually agree with you. I prefer to be able to work activity into my daily routine than to have to formally "exercise". The problem with it is that for me, my work involves the computer, so getting enough activity *consistently* to keep my body in shape requires scheduling something, so if I don't have something in my daily labor, I can make up for it with something else, like walking the dog.lwheelr said:Activity levels are important. I mean, if you look at history, the people who had problems with high weight were the rich who had servants to wait on them. The average lower income person rarely did - and it wasn't just an issue of not being able to afford excess food, it was high activity levels.
I think "exercise" is a fallacy. I think it is just like food supplements. A replacement for something better, made necessary by a modern life which lacks sufficient physical action. Hard work is the best thing.
This is why our long term plan is a large enough property to have to walk a lot, and why bucking hay is part of what we consider to be necessary labor.
I don't want to have to spend half an hour to an hour of useless time every day replacing what I should be getting from the daily labor.
I will say that one way to reduce expenses and overbuying on groceries at the same time is to drop the gym and walk to the grocery store and back. I'm always a little amused at people who pay for a gym membership, drive 6 blocks to the gym, and then get on the treadmill...