Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Sedentary versus inactive: distinctions for disease prevention

Nature Reviews Cardiology volume 7, page 1 (2010)Cite this article

Subjects

We read with great interest the Perspectives article from Charansonney and Després in the August 2010 issue of Nature Reviews Cardiology (Charansonney, O. L. & Després, J. -P. Disease prevention—should we target obesity or sedentary lifestyle? Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 7, 468–472 (2010)).1 This paper puts forward an innovative model providing a framework for understanding some of the physiological consequences of sedentary behavior. We agree with many aspects of what is proposed. However, as the group that has conducted many of the initial studies identifying the unique health consequences of sedentary behavior, we are concerned that aspects of the Charansonney and Després model might perpetuate the misconception that sedentary behavior is simply 'one end of the physical activity continuum'. That is, people can be classified as either 'active' or 'sedentary' based on their self-reported or objectively assessed physical activity.

The contemporary understanding of sedentary behavior is that it is not merely the absence of health-enhancing physical activity in everyday life. Sedentary behavior is characterized by prolonged sitting or reclining and the absence of whole-body movement. Sedentary behavior has deleterious health consequences that are distinct from the lack of physical activity of moderate-to-vigorous intensity. Put simply, sedentary behavior and physical inactivity are two separate and independent attributes, each with distinct health consequences.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Charansonney, O. L. & Després, J. P. Disease prevention—should we target obesity or sedentary lifestyle? Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 7, 468–472 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Healy, G. N. et al. Television time and continuous metabolic risk in physically active adults. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 40, 639–645 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Population Health Research, Alberta Health Services—Cancer Care, 1331 29th Street NW, Calgary, T2N 4N2, AB, Canada

    Brigid M. Lynch

  2. The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Brisbane, Australia

    Genevieve N. Healy & Neville Owen

  3. Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, 75 Commercial Road, Melbourne, 3004, VIC, Australia

    David W. Dunstan

Authors
  1. Brigid M. Lynch
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Genevieve N. Healy
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David W. Dunstan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Neville Owen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brigid M. Lynch.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lynch, B., Healy, G., Dunstan, D. et al. Sedentary versus inactive: distinctions for disease prevention. Nat Rev Cardiol 7, 1 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2010.68-c1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2010.68-c1

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing