The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
The basic design of this physical exercise is that it be approximately 60 minutes. So maybe 60 plus or minus 15 minutes should be well within the margins of keeping hormonal health proper and not going too long nor making the workout so short that it's not beneficial.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
The basic design of this physical exercise is that it be approximately 60 minutes. So maybe 60 plus or minus 15 minutes should be well within the margins of keeping hormonal health proper and not going too long nor making the workout so short that it's not beneficial.
The data all point to the fact that working out hard for longer than an hour can actually be detrimental because of the way that it raises cortisol. And cortisol can be a good thing if it's appropriately timed and in the appropriate low levels, but you don't want to have your cortisol levels up throughout the day or have big spikes of cortisol repeatedly. So keeping workouts relatively short can definitely help with that And certainly if you're training hard, 60 minutes or less should be more than sufficient. And for many people, including myself, 45 minutes or 50 minutes is probably even more optimal.