[braythwayt]

Actually, we do. It's not a cure-all. You shouldn't suddenly become a rabid "big psychiatry and big pharama are frauds, just exercise, eat right, and get 8 hours of sleep" zealot.

But modest improvements in symptoms have been shown time and time again. More modest than many claim, but non-zero.

The link you posted says so:

  > Exercise is moderately more effective than a control intervention for
  > reducing symptoms of depression, but analysis of methodologically robust
  > trials only shows a smaller effect in favour of exercise.

And it also recommends further research to discover what kinds of exercise are most effective:

  > The reviewers recommend that future research should look in more detail
  > at what types of exercise could most benefit people with depression, and
  > the number and duration of sessions which are of most benefit.

https://www.cochrane.org/CD004366/DEPRESSN_exercise-for-depr...

[DanBC]

Just so we're clear: exercise is moderately better than doing nothing unless you only include good studies, when even that modest benefit disappears.

Exercise as a treatment for depression does nothing for most people, and has only a tiny effect for the rest.

[braythwayt]

It would help if you would quote the relevant explanation that explains why their own summary—and I quote it again—does not say what I think it says.

The "Author's Summary" says:

  > analysis of methodologically robust trials only shows a smaller effect in favour of exercise.

The summary does not seem to say that that the effect disappears. The summary seems to say that the effect is smaller when you only include "methodologically robust" studies, which I interpret to be synonymous with what you describe as "good" studies.

Can you please share what you're reading that says that the effect disappears entirely? Or perhaps you are quoting a different review than the one you linked?