Experts Say This Type Of Exercise Is The 'Fountain Of Youth'— Especially If You're Over 50
Aging gracefully isn't just about staying active; it's about choosing the right kind of activity to support your health. Resistance training (such as bodyweight, free weight, and resistance band exercises) is one of the best ways to counter the effects of aging, helping you build up muscle to support daily activities and prevent conditions like osteopenia and osteoporosis that can lead to bone fractures. And even if you've never lifted a weight before, it's never too late to start.
'Weight training is the fountain of youth,' says Abby Bales, PT, DPT, CSCS, founder of Reform Physical Therapy. 'Not only does it help increase and maintain bone density to prevent fractures, but the muscle mass that weight training builds also helps to regulate our blood sugar and metabolism.' Weight lifting can even improve balance and coordination, decreasing the frequency, severity, and likelihood of falls.
On top of the physical benefits, resistance training has shown promise in staving off neurological conditions like Alzheimer's and dementia, according to a 2023 study published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, making it a multi-benefit tool for aging well. You can think of lifting weights as your body's best tool to promote resilience, energy, and independence through the aging process.
Starting with small, manageable steps—such as incorporating resistance bands or light weights (at first) into your routine—can help you gain confidence and momentum while reaping the long-term benefits.
Remember: Building a strength training routine doesn't have to be complicated—it just needs to be consistent. 'Start small, build gradually, and stick with it,' says Bales. She recommends starting with two or three sessions per week. Try rotating between upper body, lower body, and core exercises to keep things balanced.
Progress takes time, so be patient. 'Results usually show in six to eight weeks,' Bales explains. The key is to keep showing up and enjoy the process—your future self will thank you.
Need some inspiration to get started? Weight lifting later in life doesn't come without its fair share of challenges, but the rewards far outweigh the hurdles. Take it from these inspiring women, who spoke with WH previously about their later-in-life strength training journeys:
Marilynn Larkin says not to let fear or self-consciousness hold you back. 'Feel your fear, then go through it,' she previously told WH. Following a cancer diagnosis, lifting weights became a way to push through her fears and embrace all that her body was capable of. '[Weight lifting] is all about allowing your body to reach its full potential and accepting it as it is.'
Ginny MacColl recommends starting with a small yet challenging goal and celebrating each milestone—no matter how small, focusing on progress, not perfection. 'Little by little, these small steps lead to big changes,' she previously told WH, after becoming the oldest woman to complete an obstacle on American Ninja Warrior and breaking a Guinness World Record as a result. 'Instead of letting negativity and thoughts like 'I can't' creep in, I focus on getting stronger, physically and mentally. It works.'
Michelle Alber says don't wait. After just 18 months of training focused on progressive overload (gradually increasing the weight and intensity of her workouts) and working with a coach to ensure her routine was safe and effective, she reversed her osteoporosis. 'There is never a 'perfect' time to start or a 'right' time to do anything,' she previously told WH. 'Was it hard to make major lifestyle changes at 65? Yes! But it's about choosing your 'hard' and taking control of your life.'
You Might Also Like
Jennifer Garner Swears By This Retinol Eye Cream
These New Kicks Will Help You Smash Your Cross-Training Goals
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
24 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
The Underestimated Cost of Healthcare in Retirement - Your Money Briefing
As retirees get older, they could face additional costs including medication and doctors visits that could add tens of thousands of dollars to out-of-pocket expenses . Host Oyin Adedoyin talks with WSJ contributor Gail Marks Jarvis about how to prepare for unanticipated healthcare expenses in retirement. Full Transcript This transcript was prepared by a transcription service. This version may not be in its final form and may be updated. Oyin Adedoyin: Here's Your Money Briefing for Monday, June 16th. I'm Oyin Adedoyin for the Wall Street Journal. Saving for retirement is hard enough; where you choose to live once you retire can add tens of thousands of dollars in healthcare costs, and then you have to factor in the costs of doctor's visits and certain medications. Gail Marks Jarvis: There have been some estimates that have said that the average couple, instead of thinking they're going to spend $330,000, that maybe they'll have to spend over $600,000. That takes into account more of these unusual expenses that people may have to pay. Oyin Adedoyin: We'll talk with Wall Street Journal contributor Gail Marks Jarvis about where these sneaky medical costs come from and how to prepare for them. That's after the break. Americans tend to enter retirement in relatively good health, but as they age, their health may start to deteriorate, which could lead to recurring expenses that can squeeze even the most affluent retirees. Wall Street Journal contributor Gail Marks Jarvis joins me to talk about it. So Gail, planning for retirement is kind of like trying to see into the future in some ways. We're estimating how much money we're going to need to live comfortably in our 60s and 70s. Your reporting has shown that medical costs can be a blind spot in that crystal ball. Why is that? Gail Marks Jarvis: Well, in part it's because it's hard to know just what's going to happen to you medically. So a lot of people are going to go through retirement and spend about what Fidelity estimates, which is, during all of retirement, about $330,000 for a couple and about $165,000 for an individual. But you don't know if you are that average. What happens if you get sick and need drugs that are not covered by your drug plan, or what happens if you think you're really healthy when you're young and you move out to some isolated area and you get sick? So your expenses could be huge. Oyin Adedoyin: Those are some pretty interesting numbers. Let's say that I'm a retiree with a pretty healthy nest egg saved up like that. Guidance from Fidelity says that retirees should have 10 times their salary by the time they're 67. How much of this is estimated to be eaten up by those medical costs that you mentioned? Gail Marks Jarvis: If you have saved that 10 times amount and you average, you're probably going to be okay in terms of your medical costs. But if you start doing unusual things like going to a mountaintop to live in retirement where there's no doctors around or no good hospitals, that's going to change considerably. There have been some estimates that have said that the average couple, instead of thinking they're going to spend $330,000, that maybe they'll have to spend over $600,000. That takes into account more of these unusual expenses that people may have to pay. Oyin Adedoyin: One of the things that you explain in your story as one of those unanticipated costs is Part D Medicare. Can you talk a little bit about how that works and how that can add to those costs when you're retired? Gail Marks Jarvis: Just a few years ago, they added a new part of Medicare, and it's called Part D. and that's what's supposed to cover your drugs. You pay a premium every month, just like you pay a premium every month for Medicare. Medicare only pays about 80% of your medical costs, so the supplement pays the extra 20%, and the drug insurance pays some of your drug costs. But the key about Medicare Part D, the drug insurance, is that you are only covered by what your policy says they cover. What people don't realize is that their drug coverage is based on something called the formulary list that every drug plan has, and every drug plan is different. If you bought a drug plan and I bought a drug plan, each one would have a different formulary. So maybe a cancer drug would be covered in yours but not mine. So what do you do about that? If you're stuck with a drug that costs $9,000 and your plan doesn't cover it, for that year, you're going to have to pay the $9,000. But at the end of the year, you have the right to shop for a new drug plan. And what you can do then is pick a new drug plan that does have that expensive drug on the formulary list. And so instead of having to pay $9,000 again the next year, you pay only $2,000. Oyin Adedoyin: Wow. Those costs are really adding up. Gail, what are some possible solutions and ways that people can either prevent the situation or navigate it? Gail Marks Jarvis: Before they ever retire, while they're still on regular insurance, go to that community that they think they're going to live in, find a doctor, and get accepted by that doctor as a patient. They still could get turned down later when they go on Medicare, but doctors tend to continue to take patients that they have had even when they go on Medicare. A second step is just to realize that, for example, Florida is a place people go to cut their taxes, but they may have extra expenses, like they may pay more for medical care. So all of these things are things to think about in advance of retiring. Oyin Adedoyin: Speaking of in advance, Gail, I'm 25. This is all blowing my mind right now. I have a 401k through my job, and that's it. What can I do now to ensure that I don't end up in that predicament where I'm underestimating future medical costs by the time I'm retired? Gail Marks Jarvis: Well, it sounds like you're aware of the rule of thumb that when you go to retire, you want at least 10 times what you were making. But the other thing is, every year you should try to maximize what you're putting in your 401k, and you should make sure that you're at least getting the employer match. I have been shocked at the number of young people who say, "Oh, I have student loans. I'm busy. I can't figure out the 401k." And they skip it even though their employer would give them free money. Some of that free money, if you start in your 20s, that's liable to be like $250,000 of free money by the time you go to retire. So you don't want to ever give up that free money. Oyin Adedoyin: That's WSJ contributor Gail Marks Jarvis, and that's it for Your Money Briefing. This episode was produced by Ariana Aspuru with supervising producer Melony Roy. I'm Oyin Adedoyin for the Wall Street Journal. Thanks for listening.
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Early Eye Exams Are Essential for New Patients With Diabetes
For patients, a new diagnosis of diabetes can be overwhelming. It means not only managing blood sugar but also preventing serious future health complications such as diabetic retinal disease, a leading cause of vision loss when diabetes goes untreated. Early, comprehensive eye exams are crucial for detecting subtle changes long before symptoms appear. Primary care doctors play a vital role in emphasizing the importance of these underutilized exams and ensuring patients are referred promptly — steps that can significantly impact long-term eye health and quality of life. The Hidden Threat: Early Eye Changes in Diabetes Type 2 diabetes often develops quietly. Thomas Gardner, MD 'It's a slow process — people gain weight and progress from prediabetes to diabetes,' said Thomas Gardner, MD, an ophthalmologist and diabetic retinal disease researcher at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 'It's not like breaking your arm, where you know exactly when it happens.' He noted that some patients may have had mild, undiagnosed diabetes for years before diagnosis. This prolonged, subclinical phase can still affect the eyes: Some 7% of people with prediabetes already show signs of retinopathy. Diabetic retinal disease remains the leading cause of vision loss among working-age adults globally. Yet vision loss is largely preventable. 'Early detection is key because it allows us to identify patients at higher risk for rapid progression of their retinopathy,' said Jennifer Sun, MD, chief of the Center for Clinical Eye Research and Trials at the Beetham Eye Institute at Joslin Diabetes Center in Boston. Timely detection also allows clinicians to tailor monitoring and management plans, opening the door to proactive patient education aimed at preserving vision. Practical Challenges and Risk Stratification in Screening Current guidelines recommend a comprehensive, dilated eye exam as soon as possible after a type 2 diabetes diagnosis, given that many patients have experienced years of undiagnosed hyperglycemia, putting them at risk for retinal damage before symptoms appear. For patients with type 1 diabetes, screening should begin within 5 years of diagnosis. Annual eye exams are crucial for monitoring disease progression, with more frequent follow-ups recommended for people with advanced retinopathy or a higher risk for complications. Jennifer Sun, MD 'Patients can develop very advanced vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy without any symptoms at all,' said Sun. She emphasized that poor glycemic control and pregnancy are two factors that can accelerate progression and warrant closer monitoring. Despite recommendations, fewer than half of patients with diabetes receive timely, comprehensive eye exams. 'In places like the UK, national screening policies ensure everyone is screened — the government pays for it. In the US, it's hard to get patients to see ophthalmologists for screening,' said Gardner. Primary care physicians face competing demands in busy clinics, Gardner noted, and may not prioritize eye exams unless symptoms are present. He said patients with peripheral neuropathy or kidney disease are at significantly higher risk for diabetic retinal disease and should be prioritized for prompt ophthalmologic evaluation. The Role of Primary Care: Early Detection, Intervention, and Communication Regular eye exams are essential for detecting diabetic retinal disease before symptoms appear and preventing vision loss. 'Early detection helps us manage diabetes to reduce the risk of retinopathy worsening,' said Sun. Discovering early complications also drives better diabetes management. 'Patients might feel fine with mildly elevated blood sugar, and physicians might be less aggressive, but if early nerve, kidney, or eye problems are found, physicians can be more proactive with medications and urging lifestyle changes,' said Gardner. Primary care providers play an important role in discussing eye health and facilitating timely referrals. Sun recommends the DRCR Retina Network, which offers a searchable directory of clinics by state. Thanks to large medical trials, treatment options for diabetic retinal disease are well-established. And while emerging technologies, such as smartphone-based retinal imaging and artificial intelligence, show promise, Sun cautioned that providers should assess the strength of the evidence before incorporating them into routine screening workflows. As for communicating with patients, vision loss can be a powerful motivator. Studies show patients fear vision loss more than cancer, stroke, heart disease, or limb amputation. 'We don't want to scare our patients, but it can be a very powerful motivator to improve blood sugar control,' said Sun. 'I always emphasize that the foundation of caring for your eyes is systemic control — blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol.' She encouraged providers to offer patients hope as well: Many patients maintain excellent vision for years — even decades — thanks to early detection and modern treatments. 'The goal is lifelong preservation of vision without impairment from diabetes,' she said.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
A ‘war on children': as US changes Covid vaccine rules, parents of trial volunteers push back
As the Trump administration contemplates new clinical trials for Covid boosters and moves to restrict Covid vaccines for children and others, parents whose children participated in the clinical trials expressed anger and dismay. 'It's really devastating to see this evidence base officially ignored and discarded,' said Sophia Bessias, a parent in North Carolina whose two- and four-year-old kids were part of the Pfizer pediatric vaccine trial. 'It's infuriating. My kids contributed literal blood and tears to help demonstrate the safety of these vaccines,' Bessias said. Related: Doctors fear 'devastating consequences' for pregnant people after RFK Jr order on Covid-19 boosters 'As a parent and also a pediatrician, I think it's devastating that we might no longer have the option to protect kids against Covid,' said Katherine Matthias, a pediatrician in South Carolina and a cofounder of Protect Their Future, a children's health organization. Robert F Kennedy Jr, head of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), has called for new trials using saline placebos for each of the routine childhood vaccines recommended by the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), even though these vaccines have already been tested against placebos or against vaccines that were themselves tested against placebos. Marty Makary, the head of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Vinay Prasad, the FDA's vaccines chief, outlined a plan in a recent editorial to restrict Covid boosters for anyone under the age of 65 without certain health conditions. For everyone else between the ages of six months and 64 years old, each updated Covid vaccine would need to undergo another randomized controlled clinical trial, Makary and Prasad said. It's not clear when, how or whether this plan will be implemented officially. On Tuesday, top US health officials said on the social media site X that they would remove the recommendation for Covid vaccination from the childhood immunization schedule, and would also cease recommending it for pregnant people, who have much higher risks of illness, death and pregnancy complications with Covid. On Friday, the CDC appeared to contradict that announcement by keeping Covid vaccines as a routine immunization for children – though the agency now says health providers 'may' recommend the vaccine, instead of saying they 'should' recommend it. Changing recommendations could affect doctors' and parents' understanding of the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines. Vaccines recommended by the CDC are also covered by the federal Vaccines for Children program, and health insurers are required to cover the costs of routine vaccines. It's not clear if the wording change from 'should' to 'may' will affect that coverage. If insurance no longer covers the vaccines, pediatricians are less likely to keep many of the shots in stock, Matthias said, and pharmacies are limited by different state laws on which ages they may vaccinate – which means families who want the vaccines may not be able to find them. Matthias drove her children, then aged 15 months and 14 years old, two hours each way to a Moderna pediatric trial. They did six or seven visits, plus two visits to receive the actual vaccines after they learned they had received placebos. Child participants spent hours on each visit and endured blood draws, Covid swabs, regular symptom and temperature monitoring, and, of course, several shots. Each shot was followed by a week of daily journaling and side-effect reporting. Participants who got Covid, even months later, had blood draws to check their antibody responses. 'It was a pretty big commitment of our time and energy. But I did it because I wanted to be sure that my kids and all kids had access to vaccines,' Matthias said. Laura Labarre, a parent in Oregon, said the trials involved 'committing to something that felt important but larger than ourselves, because it ended up being a lot of work and a lot of logistics and a lot of effort'. She drove her two kids, then aged one and three, an hour and a half each way to a Pfizer trial, and searched for ways to keep them occupied for hours on end. When most people hear about new developments in pediatric medicine, such as new vaccines, they don't often consider the hard work of volunteers, some only a few months old, who made the trials possible, Labarre said. 'I don't think people consider the toll on the families who are the ones who bravely and nervously put their children up to be the first to try it out,' she said. When Nick Giglia got the call asking if he still wanted to enroll his one-year-old daughter in the Pfizer pediatric vaccine trial, he immediately said yes. For eight visits, extending over nearly a year, he would drive an hour each way to a trial in New Jersey. In all, his daughter received seven shots – three saline placebos, three vaccines and a booster. 'It was very rigorous,' Giglia said of the study design. Now, he said, 'it's really difficult to hear people harping on the thoughts of there not being the placebo group. Well, it's news to me. My kid was in the placebo group,' he said. Parents who were eager to enroll in the original trials now wonder whether families would want to endure another round of placebo-controlled trials for updated vaccines. 'Finding the number of participants that they would need would be extremely difficult,' Matthias said. 'To think that they would subject anyone, let alone children, to potentially getting the placebo in a trial where we know that the control is already so beneficial for health, just seems highly unethical and really disturbing,' Labarre said. 'A new trial today would not add anything we don't already know,' Bessias said. 'It would feel like actually participating in a project of undermining the existing evidence, rather than contributing new evidence.' And the whole point of updating the vaccines is to counter new strains, Matthias said. Those vaccines would be out of date by the conclusion of a new study, which could take years. 'People should have the option' to get Covid vaccines, Matthias said. 'The people who don't want it don't have to get it.' When Matthias enrolled her kids in 2021, she felt as though they were in a limbo, and 'we were all just desperate to get our kids protected', she said. 'To kind of have that feeling coming back now – we worked so hard and we advocated so much to get our kids access and now it might just be taken away – is really upsetting.' While Covid mortality rates are highest among people over the age of 65, Covid is still the eighth leading cause of all deaths among children. Any child dying a preventable death is a tragedy, Bessias said. 'We have to take a step back and realize that absolute numbers matter, too. And we can really avoid a lot of hospitalizations and deaths and transmission and horrible experiences for families by reaching those younger children. It's baffling because that seems to be completely left out of these discussions.' Labarre feels 'profoundly enraged and betrayed' by the Trump administration's actions. Limiting access to the vaccine, especially while proposing cuts to Snap and Medicaid, feels like 'an additional audacious battlefront they've opened up in this sort of war on children', she said. 'It is destabilizing, frustrating and enraging to feel like my daughter, who wasn't even 18 months old, has done more for public health than some people who are now currently in charge of it,' Giglia said. 'It is very frustrating to hear that sacrifice that we volunteered to make for the country, and frankly, the world, belittled.' At the end of the trial, Giglia's daughter was given a stuffed teddy bear in a sweater that said 'Covid-19 vaccine study hero'. 'I don't care what anybody says. That's what she is,' Giglia said. 'I look forward to one day being able to tell my little girl all about how she helped save the world. And it's hard to hear that many people think that we did the exact opposite.'
