Have you ever wondered whether it's worth your while to encourage an older person to start exercising? In 2014, the top-notch journal JAMA published the results of a fantastic research project: a study in which 1635 sedentary older adults (aged 70-89) were assigned to get either a structured exercise program, or a program of "successful aging" health education. The researchers called it the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders (LIFE) study. (You can read the full study here.) During the LIFE study, the two groups were followed for a little over 2.5 years. And by the end of the study, guess which group of volunteers was more likely to still walk a quarter of a mile (without a walker)? That's right. When it came to avoiding "major mobility disability" which the researchers defined as becoming unable to walk 400 meters or more a structured exercise program was better than a program of healthy aging education. Specifically, the researchers found that 30% of the exercisers experienced a period of major disability, compared to 35.5% of the seniors enrolled in the healthy aging education program. This is a very encouraging finding! That said, it's also a bit sobering to realize that even with exercise, almost 1 in 3 older adults experienced a period of limited mobility, of which half lasted 6 months or more. In this post, I'll share some more details on this study, because the results provide a wonderful wealth of information that can be helpful to older adults, family caregivers, and even geriatricians such as myself. Want to know how often the exercisers experienced "adverse events"? (Hint: often!) Wondering just what the structured exercise program involved? (Hint: more than walking!) Let's dig into the details! At the end of this post, I'll share my list of key take-home points for older adults and family caregivers. Who were the study volunteers? Whenever you read about a research study, it's important to understand how the study volunteers compare to the older adults in *your* life. One of... Who has a third of a chance to suffer from a major disability? - Researchers - Caregivers - not enough information - Old people
Old people

In the 1970s I was a student nurse in psychiatry. I was rostered to the brain injury ward in a chronic hospital, where the patients had severe brain damage from tumours, car accidents, strokes, metabolic diseases, degenerative diseases, and alcoholism. Only about half were ambulant. Most had severely impacted recent and long term memories. They could not bathe or feed themselves. The majority sat most of the day in chairs lined along the sides of the day room. They were spoon-fed meals and wheeled into the toilet. One of those patients was Connie S. She was maybe 55 yrs old and she spent a lot of the day screaming in her chair. She could not speak, walk, or cooperate. One nurse was very impatient with her and once I heard that nurse say to her, "You think the water is too hot, do you? Then have it cold!" as she bathed her in cold water. I remember standing up for her to that nurse. I worked that ward for over a year and then, one day, just like that, Connie S. woke up. She suddenly began speaking and walking. She apparently remembered most of the things had had happened to her in the ward. Soon, she walked right out of that ward and never came back. As she left, she appeared dignified and so happy, so relieved. I was too junior at that stage to know what her diagnosis was supposed to have been, but no-one expected her ever to leave. No-one left that ward. It was the end of the line. I remember being really glad that I had stood up for her and thinking how ashamed the nasty nurse must have been. It is now many years later and I often think of this woman and wonder how she fared in her post-hospital life. Her name is not common, but every so often I meet people with the same name and ask them if they know of a relative to whom this happened, but, so far, no-one has known of her. How long ago or what estimated year did this episode occur? - not enough information - In the 1970s - After the 1970s - Before the 1970s
In the 1970s

WHITE HOUSE The United States is escalating trans-Atlantic and North American trade tensions, imposing a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and a 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports from the European Union, Canada and Mexico beginning on Friday. The U.S. also negotiated quotas or volume limits on other countries, such as South Korea, Argentina, Australia and Brazil, instead of tariffs, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross also told reporters Thursday by telephone. China's foreign ministry said on Friday all countries should protect the normal trade order, when asked about U.S. decision. President Donald Trump said Thursday that the days of the U.S. being taken advantage of in trade deals "are over'" in a harshly worded statement responding to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's criticism of new steel and aluminum tariffs. He intensified his criticism of Canada Friday for what he says are the country's "highly restrictive" trade practices. Trump has repeatedly said measures such as tariffs are necessary to protect American jobs and industries in key manufacturing sectors. "The president's actions are about protecting American steel, American aluminum," a White House spokesman, Raj Shah, said on Fox News. "They're critical for national security." But the negative reaction from some of America's most important strategic allies has been quick and fierce. European Union Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said shortly after the tariffs took effect they were illegal and the 28-nation bloc would initiate a settlement dispute case with the World Trade Organization. "We can do so. We have the right to do so. I think we must do so, as well, to show that we cannot just take these tariffs and stand silent and we do not accept these kind of imposed illegal tariffs," said Malmstrom. Without elaborating, Malmstrom also said the EU would explore "rebalancing measures," which typically are retaliatory actions. Trudeau called the tariffs "totally unacceptable" and vowed retaliation. "This decision is not only unlawful, but it is... After the end of the story, Macron probably is - Still President of France - At the O.K. Corral - Does not believe the tariffs are a mistake - not enough information
Still President of France