Unfortunately, this starts off with a really bold statement.
> The toll our relatively new sedentary lifestyle takes on our bodies is clear: For the first time in U.S. history, younger generations are expected to live shorter, unhealthier lives than their parents.
This sounds really biased. Obviously exercise is good for you, but to say its the only factor causing a reduction in our life expectancy is quite a reach.
This makes me doubt their interpretation of the other research presented.
I'm no where near an expert on the subject, But I have heard convincing arguments[1] that fructose is very bad for you (especially when concentrated in a fruit drink).
I'm not a biochemistry expert either, so I have to defer to the arguments of others. I find Ray Peat more convincing than Lustig. It also makes sense to me that fructose, especially from fruit, is incredibly healthy to humans, since pretty much every ape gets a good chunk of their calories from fruit.
> The toll our relatively new sedentary lifestyle takes on our bodies is clear: For the first time in U.S. history, younger generations are expected to live shorter, unhealthier lives than their parents.
This sounds really biased. Obviously exercise is good for you, but to say its the only factor causing a reduction in our life expectancy is quite a reach.
This makes me doubt their interpretation of the other research presented.