Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Editorials

Time spent being sedentary: an emerging risk factor for poor health

David Salman, Mustafa Farooqi, Alison McGregor and Azeem Majeed
British Journal of General Practice 2019; 69 (683): 278-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp19X703781
David Salman
Department of Primary Care & Public Health; MSk Laboratory, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Roles: Academic Clinical Fellow in Primary Care
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mustafa Farooqi
Department of Primary Care & Public Health, Imperial College London, London.
Roles: Academic Foundation Doctor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alison McGregor
MSk Laboratory, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London.
Roles: Professor of Musculoskeletal Biodynamics
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Azeem Majeed
Department of Primary Care & Public Health, Imperial College London, London.
Roles: Professor of Primary Care
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

SEDENTARY TIME IS AN INDEPENDENT RISK FACTOR FOR DISEASE

Sedentary time (ST), or time being physically inactive, is an important risk factor for all-cause mortality and a range of diseases including cardiovascular disease and cancer.1 It has a global impact on mortality comparable with tobacco use and obesity.2 Moreover, high volumes of intensive activity only attenuate, and do not reduce, the risk posed by ST.3 Replacing ST with light physical activity (PA) leads to improvements in insulin sensitivity and plasma lipid profiles that are not replicated by simply adding bouts of moderate or vigorous physical activity to a sedentary lifestyle,4 indicating that being sedentary may trigger a distinct disease process.

The UK has high rates of physical inactivity and performs poorly when compared internationally. Approximately 25% of adults achieve <30 minutes of PA a week, and 80% of children under 15 years are not meeting current PA recommendations in the UK.5 The causes are multifactorial, including societal and political drivers. ST is a disease of public health and primary care importance, and primary care clinicians have a key role in educating and guiding individuals at both primary and secondary prevention levels. Unfortunately, recent evidence suggests that there is poor awareness of the availability and use of physical activity guidance in primary care.6

Additionally, there is little current understanding as to what constitutes ‘being sedentary’ and of the mechanisms by which physical activity or inactivity impact on health and disease.

UNDERSTANDING SEDENTARY TIME

Increasing our understanding of these processes is important for several reasons. First, developing knowledge of how physical inactivity or activity contribute to health and disease teaches us about how the human body interacts with the modern world at a cellular level. PA affects homeostatic regulation in almost all systems of the body. Understanding how this translates into health benefits involves investigating how cellular and organ responses to PA and ST are co-ordinated, communicated, and regulated, and how they converge into adaptations at an organ or system level. Indeed, the US National Institute of Health in 2014 identified that uncovering these mechanisms was of crucial importance and discovery potential for human health.7

Second, deciphering the molecular and cellular drivers of ST or PA-induced effects potentially opens the door to personalised exercise medicine in primary care, including biomarkers of activity and targeted, individualised, exercise prescriptions. Finally, a better understanding of the mechanistic biology of ST is crucial to drive informed and structural public health interventions to tackle sedentary behaviours, and to increase awareness of how sedentary-induced biological processes affect different groups. If sedentary time poses as much of a risk to human health as we think it might, implementing effective interventions will require changes to the way we live and work as a society.

WHAT CONSTITUTES SEDENTARY TIME IS ONLY NOW BECOMING CLEAR

Part of the difficulty in investigating the adverse effects of sedentary time is the heterogeneity of terms used to define it. The term ‘sedentary’ is used interchangeably with ‘physically inactive’, ‘sitting time’, and ‘screen or TV time’. Meta-analyses, which included studies measuring inactivity, television-viewing time, and total sitting time, show that ST increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality.1 A more sensitive approach is characterised by the recent Sedentary Behaviour Research Network (SBRN) consensus, which defines sedentary time as ‘any waking behaviour characterised by an energy expenditure ≤1.5 metabolic equivalents (METs), while in a sitting, reclining or lying posture’.8 Use of consensus definitions and measurements such as this one in research studies will help to consolidate future research into the effects of being sedentary. Moreover, as the adverse consequences of being sedentary are only partially abrogated by even high levels of PA,3 24-hour activity profiles, consisting of varying degrees of energy expenditure along with sleep and sedentary time, will develop our understanding of this complex concept further.

WHAT DRIVES ST-INDUCED DISEASE?

ST is increasingly seen as an inflammatory condition. Prolonged ST is associated with endothelial cell dysfunction, which may be related to decreased shear stresses on lower limb vasculature.9 In a recent study, four days of moderate to vigorous exercise regimens significantly lowered biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction when compared to prolonged ST alone, but reduction of ST itself did not.4 This suggests that the adverse effects of ST cannot be explained by dysfunction of the endothelium alone.

However, reducing ST did have a positive effect on metabolic markers of insulin sensitivity and lipids when compared to the vigorous exercise or sedentary group. Indeed, exercise has both short- and long-term effects on plasma metabolic and gut microbiome profiles when compared to sedentary individuals, and established athletes have a more diverse functional gut microbiome than that observed in low or high BMI sedentary controls.10

Finally, ST and PA have implications on immune regulation and function. Toll-like receptor-mediated immune cell activation in response to pathogens is increased in active individuals when compared to sedentary controls,11 suggesting that sedentary behaviour weakens the response to pathogenic insults. In contrast, PA is associated with reductions in systemic inflammation, with muscle-derived cytokines (myokines) providing a potential link between exercise-induced muscle activity and immunological and anti-inflammatory function.12

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

The biological responses to the spectrum of physical inactivity to activity are integrative and likely encompass vascular, metabolic, and immunological systems. The propensity of our current society to sedentary lifestyles means that uncovering these biological mechanisms is important to drive understanding of how modern lifestyles affect health, and of what measures might reverse this. Moreover, research in this field, particularly with developing metabolomics and proteomics technology, can potentially open the door to personalised exercise recommendations and biomarkers of progress. The impact of this public health problem with profound biological implications provides an avenue for research and solutions which primary care and public health professionals are well-placed to deliver.

PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Although much is yet unknown regarding the harmful effects of ST, physical activity promotion in primary care can improve uptake,6 and there are some key messages that primary health care professionals can use to guide patients. First, prolonged sitting is harmful, but we are not yet at the stage to issue guideline quantities or thresholds. Advice to break up sitting time and to increase physical activity can only be positive, such as encouraging people to incorporate cycling or walking into a commute, take regular short breaks from their desk, or hold ‘walking meetings’ while at work. Public Health England infographics5 and the Moving Medicine (Prescribing Movement) resource are freely available to guide structured discussion and motivational interviewing, and campaigns, such as There’s Only One You and Couch to 5K, can be helpful to guide increases in PA levels (Box 1).

TitleWeb addressDescription
Prescribing Movementhttps://www.movingmedicine.ac.ukStructured guidance on conversations with patients about physical activity
There’s Only One Youhttps://www.nhs.uk/oneyouEvidence-based guidance and information for the public regarding health improvement
Couch to 5K: week by weekhttps://www.nhs.uk/live-well/exercise/couch-to-5k-week-by-weekA weekly running programme, including podcasts, aimed at gentle and incremental progress
Start active, stay active: infographics on physical activityhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/start-active-stay-active-infographics-on-physical-activityInfographics explaining the guidelines and benefits of physical activity across age ranges and in pregnancy
  • PA = physical activity. ST = sedentary time.

Box 1.

Resources available to guide consultations regarding PA and ST, and to guide people regarding increasing their own PA

Second, where prolonged ST is unavoidable, the associated increases in mortality can be attenuated by increasing daily physical activity.3

Finally, as primary care practitioners we can lead through example. Simply getting up from our chairs to call our patients from the waiting room is an example of how sitting time can be broken, and of how small interventions can be slotted into busy schedules.

Notes

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Competing interests

The authors have declared no competing interests.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2019

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Biswas A,
    2. Oh PI,
    3. Faulkner GE,
    4. et al.
    (2015) Sedentary time and its association with risk for disease incidence, mortality, and hospitalization in adults. Ann Intern Med 162(2):123–132.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Lee IM,
    2. Shiroma EJ,
    3. Lobelo F,
    4. et al.
    (2012) Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet 380(9838):219–229.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Ekelund U,
    2. Steene-Johannessen J,
    3. Brown WJ,
    4. et al.
    (2016) Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women. Lancet 388(10051):1302–1310.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Duvivier BMFM,
    2. Bolijn JE,
    3. Koster A,
    4. et al.
    (2018) Reducing sitting time versus adding exercise: differential effects on biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction and metabolic risk. Sci Rep 8(1):8657.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Public Health England
    (2014) Everybody active, every day: framework for physical activity An evidence-based approach for national and local action to address the physical inactivity epidemic, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/everybody-active-every-day-a-framework-to-embed-physical-activity-into-daily-life (accessed 9 May 2019).
  6. 6.↵
    1. Chatterjee R,
    2. Chapman T,
    3. Brannan MGT,
    4. Varney J
    (2017) Br J Gen Pract, GPs’ knowledge, use, and confidence in national physical activity and health guidelines and tools: a questionnaire-based survey of general practice in England. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp17X692513.
  7. 7.↵
    1. Neufer PD,
    2. Bamman MM,
    3. Muoio DM,
    4. et al.
    (2015) Understanding the cellular and molecular mechanisms of physical activity-Induced health benefits. Cell Metab 22(1):4–11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Tremblay MS,
    2. Aubert S,
    3. Barnes JD,
    4. et al.
    (2017) Sedentary Behavior Research Network (SBRN) — Terminology Consensus Project process and outcome. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 14(1):75.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    1. Restaino RM,
    2. Walsh LK,
    3. Morishima T,
    4. et al.
    (2016) Endothelial dysfunction following prolonged sitting is mediated by a reduction in shear stress. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 310(5):H648–653.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Barton W,
    2. Penney NC,
    3. Cronin O,
    4. et al.
    (2018) The microbiome of professional athletes differs from that of more sedentary subjects in composition and particularly at the functional metabolic level. Gut 67(4):625–633.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Zheng Q,
    2. Cui G,
    3. Chen J,
    4. et al.
    (2015) Regular exercise enhances the immune response against microbial antigens through up-regulation of toll-like receptor signaling pathways. Cell Physiol Biochem 37(2):735–746.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    1. Benatti FB,
    2. Pedersen BK
    (2015) Exercise as an anti-inflammatory therapy for rheumatic diseases — myokine regulation. Nat Rev Rheumatol 11(2):86–97.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 69 (683)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 69, Issue 683
June 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Time spent being sedentary: an emerging risk factor for poor health
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Time spent being sedentary: an emerging risk factor for poor health
David Salman, Mustafa Farooqi, Alison McGregor, Azeem Majeed
British Journal of General Practice 2019; 69 (683): 278-279. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp19X703781

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Time spent being sedentary: an emerging risk factor for poor health
David Salman, Mustafa Farooqi, Alison McGregor, Azeem Majeed
British Journal of General Practice 2019; 69 (683): 278-279. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp19X703781
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • SEDENTARY TIME IS AN INDEPENDENT RISK FACTOR FOR DISEASE
    • UNDERSTANDING SEDENTARY TIME
    • WHAT CONSTITUTES SEDENTARY TIME IS ONLY NOW BECOMING CLEAR
    • WHAT DRIVES ST-INDUCED DISEASE?
    • FUTURE DIRECTIONS
    • PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • General practice — the integrating discipline
  • Inclusion and diversity at the BJGP and BJGP Open
  • People, humility, and ambition: our vision for the future of general practice
Show more Editorials

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

Tweets by @BJGPjournal

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242