It is not uncommon for people to spend one-half of their waking day sitting, with relatively idle muscles. The other half of the day includes the often large volume of nonexercise physical activity. Given the increasing pace of technological change in domestic, community, and workplace environments, modern humans may still not have reached the historical pinnacle of physical inactivity, even in cohorts where people already do not perform exercise. Our purpose here is to examine the role of sedentary behaviors, especially sitting, on mortality, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome risk factors, and obesity. Recent observational epidemiological studies strongly suggest that daily sitting time or low nonexercise activity levels may have a significant direct relationship with each of these medical concerns. There is now a need for studies to differentiate between the potentially unique molecular, physiologic, and clinical effects of too much sitting (inactivity physiology) separate from the responses caused by structured exercise (exercise physiology). In theory, this may be in part because nonexercise activity thermogenesis is generally a much greater component of total energy expenditure than exercise or because any type of brief, yet frequent, muscular contraction throughout the day may be necessary to short-circuit unhealthy molecular signals causing metabolic diseases. One of the first series of controlled laboratory studies providing translational evidence for a molecular reason to maintain high levels of daily low-intensity and intermittent activity came from examinations of the cellular regulation of skeletal muscle lipoprotein lipase (LPL) (a protein important for controlling plasma triglyceride catabolism, HDL cholesterol, and other metabolic risk factors). Experimentally reducing normal spontaneous standing and ambulatory time had a much greater effect on LPL regulation than adding vigorous exercise training on top of the normal level of nonexercise activity. Those studies also found that inactivity initiated unique cellular processes that were qualitatively different from the exercise responses. In summary, there is an emergence of inactivity physiology studies. These are beginning to raise a new concern with potentially major clinical and public health significance: the average nonexercising person may become even more metabolically unfit in the coming years if they sit too much, thereby limiting the normally high volume of intermittent nonexercise physical activity in everyday life. Thus, if the inactivity physiology paradigm is proven to be true, the dire concern for the future may rest with growing numbers of people unaware of the potential insidious dangers of sitting too much and who are not taking advantage of the benefits of maintaining nonexercise activity throughout much of the day. Diabetes 56:2655-2667, 2007 H umans have been increasingly spending more time in sedentary behaviors involving prolonged sitting. This global trend is likely to continue, given the increasing ...

OBJECTIVEObservational studies show breaking up prolonged sitting has beneficial associations with cardiometabolic risk markers, but intervention studies are required to investigate causality. We examined the acute effects on postprandial glucose and insulin levels of uninterrupted sitting compared with sitting interrupted by brief bouts of light- or moderate-intensity walking.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSOverweight/obese adults (n = 19), aged 45–65 years, were recruited for a randomized three-period, three-treatment acute crossover trial: 1) uninterrupted sitting; 2) seated with 2-min bouts of light-intensity walking every 20 min; and 3) seated with 2-min bouts of moderate-intensity walking every 20 min. A standardized test drink was provided after an initial 2-h period of uninterrupted sitting. The positive incremental area under curves (iAUC) for glucose and insulin (mean [95% CI]) for the 5 h after the test drink (75 g glucose, 50 g fat) were calculated for the respective treatments.RESULTSThe glucose iAUC (mmol/L) ⋅ h after both activity-break conditions was reduced (light: 5.2 [4.1–6.6]; moderate: 4.9 [3.8–6.1]; both P < 0.01) compared with uninterrupted sitting (6.9 [5.5–8.7]). Insulin iAUC (pmol/L) ⋅ h was also reduced with both activity-break conditions (light: 633.6 [552.4–727.1]; moderate: 637.6 [555.5–731.9], P < 0.0001) compared with uninterrupted sitting (828.6 [722.0–950.9]).CONCLUSIONSInterrupting sitting time with short bouts of light- or moderate-intensity walking lowers postprandial glucose and insulin levels in overweight/obese adults. This may improve glucose metabolism and potentially be an important public health and clinical intervention strategy for reducing cardiovascular risk.

Moderate-to vigorous-intensity physical activity has an established preventive role in cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and some cancers. However, recent epidemiologic evidence suggests that sitting time has deleterious cardiovascular and metabolic effects that are independent of whether adults meet physical activity guidelines. Evidence from "inactivity physiology" laboratory studies has identified unique mechanisms that are distinct from the biologic bases of exercising. Opportunities for sedentary behaviors are ubiquitous and are likely to increase with further innovations in technologies. We present a compelling selection of emerging evidence on the deleterious effects of sedentary behavior, as it is underpinned by the unique physiology of inactivity. It is time to consider excessive sitting a serious health hazard, with the potential for ultimately giving consideration to the inclusion of too much sitting (or too few breaks from sitting) in physical activity and health guidelines.

We have examined the regulation of lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activity in skeletal muscle during physical inactivity in comparison to low‐intensity contractile activity of ambulatory controls. From studies acutely preventing ambulatory activity of one or both the hindlimbs in rats, it was shown that ≈90–95 % of the heparin‐releasable (HR) LPL activity normally present in rat muscle with ambulatory activity is lost, and thus dependent on local contractile activity. Similarly, ≈95 % of the differences in LPL activity between muscles of different fibre types was dependent on ambulatory activity. The robustness of the finding that physical inactivity significantly decreases muscle LPL activity was evident from confirmatory studies with different models of inactivity, in many rats and mice, both sexes, three muscle types and during both acute and chronic (11 days) treatment. Inactivity caused a local reduction of plasma [3H]triglyceride uptake into muscle and a decrease in high density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration. LPL mRNA was not differentially expressed between ambulatory controls and either the acutely or chronically inactive groups. Instead, the process involved a rapid loss of the HR‐LPL protein mass (the portion of LPL largely associated with the vascular endothelium) by an actinomycin D‐sensitive signalling mechanism (i.e. transcriptionally dependent process). Significant decreases of intracellular LPL protein content lagged behind the loss of HR‐LPL protein. Treadmill walking raised LPL activity ≈8‐fold (P < 0.01) within 4 h after inactivity. The striking sensitivity of muscle LPL to inactivity and low‐intensity contractile activity may provide one piece of the puzzle for why inactivity is a risk factor for metabolic diseases and why even non‐vigorous activity provides marked protection against disorders involving poor lipid metabolism.