上班坐累了嗎？來蹲會(huì)兒唄

Resting postures such as squatting or kneeling may be better for health because they require more muscle activity than sitting on a chair, researchers claim.

研究人員指出，蹲或跪這樣的休息姿勢也許更有益健康，因?yàn)檫@些姿勢比靜坐在椅子上需要更多肌肉活動(dòng)。

The findings are based on data gathered from a hunter-gatherer population in Tanzania who wore devices that measured physical activity as well as periods of rest.

該研究發(fā)現(xiàn)基于從坦桑尼亞的一個(gè)游獵采集部族收集來的數(shù)據(jù)，這個(gè)部族的人佩戴了裝置來測量他們的體力活動(dòng)和休息時(shí)間。

Anthropologists from the US found that despite being sedentary for almost 10 hours each day, equivalent to clocking a shift in the office at the desk, the Hazda people appeared to lack the markers of chronic diseases associated with long periods of sitting.

美國的人類學(xué)家發(fā)現(xiàn)，盡管哈茲達(dá)部落的人每天靜止不動(dòng)的時(shí)間將近10個(gè)小時(shí)，相當(dāng)于在辦公桌前上一天班，但他們似乎沒有久坐帶來的慢性病跡象。

They believe this is down to the ‘active rest postures’ used by the tribe.

人類學(xué)家認(rèn)為，這是由于該部落采用的“積極休息姿勢”。

Dr David Raichlen, a professor of biological sciences at the University of Southern California’s Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, and lead author on the study, said: ‘Even though there were long periods of inactivity, one of the key differences we noticed is that the Hadza are often resting in postures that require their muscles to maintain light levels of activity – either in a squat or kneeling.’

該研究的主要作者、美國南加州大學(xué)多恩西夫文理學(xué)院的生物學(xué)教授戴維·瑞奇蘭博士說：“盡管哈茲達(dá)人靜止不動(dòng)的時(shí)間長，但我們注意到一個(gè)重要區(qū)別：他們經(jīng)常采用需要稍微運(yùn)動(dòng)肌肉來保持的休息姿勢——要么蹲著，要么跪著。”

Prolonged sitting has been linked to an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and death, but according to the researchers, this contradicts the evolutionary aspect which favours strategies that conserve energy.

久坐會(huì)導(dǎo)致心血管疾病風(fēng)險(xiǎn)增高和死亡，但研究人員指出，這有悖于偏好保存能量策略的進(jìn)化論。

Brian Wood, an anthropologist at the University of California, and one of the study authors, said: ‘Preferences or behaviours that conserve energy have been key to our species’ evolutionary success.

該研究的作者之一、加州大學(xué)的人類學(xué)家布萊恩·伍德說：“保存能量的傾向或行為對于人類進(jìn)化的成功很關(guān)鍵。”

‘But when environments change rapidly, these same preferences can lead to less optimal outcomes. Prolonged sitting is one example.’

“但是當(dāng)環(huán)境迅速變化時(shí)，這種傾向卻不會(huì)導(dǎo)致最佳結(jié)果。久坐就是一個(gè)例子。”

To find out more, the researchers looked at the data from 28 Hadza adults who wore devices, known as accelerometers, for eight days and compared it with the information gathered from previous studies that measured inactivity in modern working populations.

為了進(jìn)一步了解真相，研究人員查看了來自28名佩戴加速度傳感器長達(dá)八天的哈茲達(dá)成年人的數(shù)據(jù)，并將其與先前測量現(xiàn)代勞動(dòng)人口靜止?fàn)顟B(tài)的研究收集到的信息作比較。

They found that their test subjects had high levels of physical activity for just over an hour a day alongside several hours of inactivity, between nine to 10 hours a day. But despite remaining in resting postures for long periods of time, the Hazda people did not show any signs of the health conditions associated with a sedentary lifestyle.

他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，他們的測試對象一天從事高強(qiáng)度體力活動(dòng)的時(shí)間剛過一小時(shí)，而不動(dòng)的時(shí)間長達(dá)數(shù)小時(shí)，每天有9到10小時(shí)的(清醒)時(shí)間是靜止不動(dòng)的。但是，盡管長時(shí)間保持休息姿勢，哈茲達(dá)人并沒有顯現(xiàn)出任何和久坐生活方式相關(guān)的健康問題的跡象。

The researchers said, it is because the Hazda squatting and kneeling uses more muscle movement than sitting on a chair.

研究人員稱，這是因?yàn)楣澾_(dá)人蹲和跪的姿勢比坐在椅子上需要更多的肌肉運(yùn)動(dòng)。

They believe these active rest postures may help ‘protect people from the harmful effects of inactivity’.

他們認(rèn)為，積極的休息姿勢也許有助于“保護(hù)人們免受靜止不動(dòng)帶來的有害影響”。

Dr Raichlen said: ‘Being a couch potato – or even sitting in an office chair – requires less muscle activity than squatting or kneeling.

瑞奇蘭博士說：“做一個(gè)沙發(fā)土豆——或坐在辦公椅上——需要的肌肉活動(dòng)都比蹲或跪少。”

‘Since light levels of muscle activity require fuel, which generally means burning fats, then squatting and kneeling postures may not be as harmful as sitting in chairs.’

“因?yàn)樯倭考∪膺\(yùn)動(dòng)需要消耗能量，通常這意味著燃燒脂肪，所以蹲和跪的姿勢也許不像坐在椅子上那么有害。”

The study is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Pnas).

該研究發(fā)表在期刊《美國國家科學(xué)院院刊》上。