William Ashley Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 I think this is a bad move. I'm not the type of person to enforce exercise but think fitness should be a heavy component in the education system - and like the old USSR there should be public fitness areas - and there are in many places in Canada. For instance I think that - as already occurs police and the military and firefighter and other first repsonders should have access to fitness facilities - and that the public should have access to non peak fitness areas. Schools should gear their "jungle gyms" to actually be usable by other people in non school hours. Etc.. http://www.theglobea...article1857880/ I think that bad health practices may have an effect on the cost of health care. I believe whether correct or not that more sedentary health styles lead to an increase in tax dollars spent. So by lowering these standards or ingoring higher ones by not promoting and providing for health, it actually costs Canadians more - and being fat isn't as enjoyable as being fit... life is better relatively healthy. It is promoting a worse quality of life for Canadians - and that is unfortunate, any real man wouldn't want wussies. Why is the conservative party of Canada promoting canadians to be wussies? Quote I was here.
Wilber Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 William, considering the number of your posts and their average length, perhaps you should get your ass out from behind your computer for awhile and practice what you preach Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Bonam Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 I think this is a bad move. I'm not the type of person to enforce exercise but think fitness should be a heavy component in the education system - and like the old USSR there should be public fitness areas - and there are in many places in Canada.For instance I think that - as already occurs police and the military and firefighter and other first repsonders should have access to fitness facilities - and that the public should have access to non peak fitness areas. Schools should gear their "jungle gyms" to actually be usable by other people in non school hours. Etc.. http://www.theglobea...article1857880/ I think that bad health practices may have an effect on the cost of health care. I believe whether correct or not that more sedentary health styles lead to an increase in tax dollars spent. So by lowering these standards or ingoring higher ones by not promoting and providing for health, it actually costs Canadians more - and being fat isn't as enjoyable as being fit... life is better relatively healthy. It is promoting a worse quality of life for Canadians - and that is unfortunate, any real man wouldn't want wussies. Why is the conservative party of Canada promoting canadians to be wussies? Hmm well people not meeting standards is certainly no reason to lower those standards, assuming that the standards have some scientific basis to begin with. That being said, the new standards are certainly more realistic, because they set weekly rather than daily targets. The current standard is "60 minutes daily", which I certainly don't meet, since most weekdays I get little/no exercise. On the other hand, I usually spend 20+ hours hiking/skiing/climbing on weekends, which obviously fulfills the new "150 minutes weekly" guideline. And I can bet you I'm probably in much better shape than a person just meeting the current "guideline". Whether the new guidelines are sufficient or not, a weekly guideline is much more realistic than a daily guideline, since for most people it's just unrealistic to do something physically active every day, while doing a prolonged physical activity a couple times a week is more realistic. As the article points out, the vast majority of people aren't meeting the guidelines anyway. And for those people who are meeting it, having the standard lowered is not gonna make them cut back on their physical activity. Lastly, I think the guidelines are pretty close to irrelevant either way, since most people have likely never heard of them nor cared about them if they did. Quote
William Ashley Posted January 5, 2011 Author Report Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) William, considering the number of your posts and their average length, perhaps you should get your ass out from behind your computer for awhile and practice what you preach I lead an active life style. I jog instead of walk, run instead of jog. When I'm in a place I can hit the gym I do so. I enjoy exercising and playing on the xbox kinnect. Edited January 5, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
Moonlight Graham Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 The old standards had i believe 90m a day of exercise for kids. Wtf??? I was a very spry, athletic kid and i'm not sure if i hit that mark. Maybe on a gym day with 45m of exercise, plus 45 minutes worth or recess. 150m a week for adults = 20m a day. That's very reasonable and people can be pretty fit if you find time for 20m a day of solid sweating activity. Personally i think 30m would be a better goal. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Guest American Woman Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 William, considering the number of your posts and their average length, perhaps you should get your ass out from behind your computer for awhile and practice what you preach Not sure where that's coming from -- he averages one post a day, hardly indicative of someone who's backside is stuck behind a computer all day. Having said that, I can't get the link to the article to open ....... Quote
kimmy Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Having said that, I can't get the link to the article to open ....... That's because Willie's interweb skills are about as sharp as his analytical skills. The specific nature of the screw-up in his post makes me suspect he cut-and-pasted it from another post elsewhere. Here's the article: Canada to ease physical fitness guidelines. Why is Canada lowering the guidelines? The first paragraph of the article says... experts determined that health benefits can be achieved with less effort than demanded by the existing targets that few of us are meeting. There's your answer, William. Glad I could help. By the way, who here actually knows what the government-recommended exercise guidelines are? Who here will be exercising less now that the government has reduced the guideline? Who here would exercise more if the government increased the guideline? Exactly. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Guest American Woman Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 I was curious to read more about the guidelines because I was wondering if it meant schools were reducing phys ed classes, recess time, gym time, etc. accordingly. That I could see as a problem. Quote
kimmy Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 I was curious to read more about the guidelines because I was wondering if it meant schools were reducing phys ed classes, recess time, gym time, etc. accordingly. That I could see as a problem. Why? Less less opportunity for fat-kids to get blasted in the head with soft rubber? Unfortunately, I think that if we're depending on gym class to get kids the exercise they need, they're beyond hope. This has to begin at home. Didn't there used to be a time when being good at sports made you "cool"? -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Guest American Woman Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Why? Less less opportunity for fat-kids to get blasted in the head with soft rubber?Unfortunately, I think that if we're depending on gym class to get kids the exercise they need, they're beyond hope. This has to begin at home. Didn't there used to be a time when being good at sports made you "cool"? Why? Because kids need physical activity. They need the chance to let off steam/excess energy. I think a lot of kids are having problems sitting still in school and being labeled with ADD because they haven't been able to expend their energy. Even if they can run around at home after school, the school day is a long time for some kids to sit still. If they can release some of that energy, I think they are better able to sit, concentrate, and learn. The brain benefits from physical activity too. Quote
Bonam Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Perhaps we should look at this from another perspective. If a bigger and bigger portion of the population become lazy, obese, physically weak, immobile, etc, those few of us who remain fit will have a bigger and bigger relative advantage Quote
Guest TrueMetis Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Why? Less less opportunity for fat-kids to get blasted in the head with soft rubber? Unfortunately, I think that if we're depending on gym class to get kids the exercise they need, they're beyond hope. This has to begin at home. Didn't there used to be a time when being good at sports made you "cool"? -k IIRC most schools use a type of foam for their dodgeballs. Though I remember my elementary school had real rubber dodgeballs it was great. Quote
Molly Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) http://www.cobourg.ca/docs/Community%20Centre/Cobourg%20Context%20Excerpts.pdf Someone did some decent research on participation trends- starting page 12. Precis: participation in pretty much everything sporting is in sharp decline. ............... The recommendations have a great deal to do with urban planning, and will impact things like facilities grants. I shudder at how badly fitness/recreational opportunities are served, now and in the future. How many kids now have a ball diamond, soccer field,bike path, swimming pool to which they have true access? They have enough money to get in the door; thier parents will allow them to go there and will assume they are safe, even without an adult attatched to them; they don't need someone to drive them; they don't have to belong to a league; abide by a schedule; own specialized equipment... etc. Physically active play is increasingly restricted to the well-to-do. Reductions in expectations will further erode access. Edited January 5, 2011 by Molly Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
Michael Hardner Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Obesity is one of those silent issues that is creeping up on North Americans without much fanfare. Again, I will harp on NA's poor information systems, that are great at entertaining us and getting us to fight with each other, but terrible at addressing long term problems. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Shwa Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Obesity is one of those silent issues that is creeping up on North Americans without much fanfare. Again, I will harp on NA's poor information systems, that are great at entertaining us and getting us to fight with each other, but terrible at addressing long term problems. What "poor information systems?" Do you not watch TV, with all those snack food commercials? Other than the ads saying "we're fat" what more do you need? Proof? Go to Walmart and look around. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 What "poor information systems?" Do you not watch TV, with all those snack food commercials? Don't forget to use the <sarcasm> tag when you need to. Other than the ads saying "we're fat" what more do you need? Proof? Go to Walmart and look around. Ok, I guess all of those people are just suicidal then ? Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Shwa Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 http://www.cobourg.ca/docs/Community%20Centre/Cobourg%20Context%20Excerpts.pdf Someone did some decent research on participation trends- starting page 12. Precis: participation in pretty much everything sporting is in sharp decline. Yes, sport participation is declining and I wonder if there is a parallel statistic about computer gaming, Nintendo, xBox and the like. The recommendations have a great deal to do with urban planning, and will impact things like facilities grants. One of the interesting local developments - in Durham - is that a significant percentage of the stimulus grants were oriented toward athletic facilities and parks. I shudder at how badly fitness/recreational opportunities are served, now and in the future. How many kids now have a ball diamond, soccer field,bike path, swimming pool to which they have true access? They have enough money to get in the door; thier parents will allow them to go there and will assume they are safe, even without an adult attatched to them; they don't need someone to drive them; they don't have to belong to a league; abide by a schedule; own specialized equipment... etc. Physically active play is increasingly restricted to the well-to-do. Reductions in expectations will further erode access. From what I am seeing, most national and provincial sporting bodies are moving toward the Long Term Athletic Development model of 'Sport for Life.' However, some of the LTAD recommendations for sports focus on the elite athlete which is kind of backward in my view. Then again, the article says 'active time' and that doesn't mean just sports. It could also mean an hour at the park, playing hide and go seek, wandering around the creek, etc. Quote
Shwa Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Don't forget to use the <sarcasm> tag when you need to. I am undecided about the sarcasm, hence didn't feel the need. Ok, I guess all of those people are just suicidal then ? No, maybe some of them are prefectly happy with the way they are, pleasingly plump and all. I am not making a value judgment about them, other that they're fat. Maybe some of them are big boned? IMO, the "information system" that is working perfectly well are fast food TV ads. How about criticism for something working too good? Quote
M.Dancer Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 My kids school has two periods of gym a week plus one period of swimming. They also have access to swimming at lunch as well as a "Designated Physical Activity" slot (15 min,) per day. On top of that they have a sports programme that is open to anyone who wants to use it. Not sure if anything more than that is needed. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Wilber Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Not sure where that's coming from -- he averages one post a day, hardly indicative of someone who's backside is stuck behind a computer all day. Having said that, I can't get the link to the article to open ....... It came from the fact that when I made that post he was either the originator or last respondent on more than half the threads on the first page of this forum and some of his posts are almost two feet long on my screen. Far to long for my attention span and no one on this forum is that interesting, especially me. I do spend too much time on the computer but this is the only political forum I belong to and except for email and specific uses, this it about it for me. Gave up running years ago because of injuries so we are just heading out on our morning 6 KM walk which we have to do every day rain or shine no matter where we are unless the snow is too deep. An addiction left over from many years of dog ownership. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Michael Hardner Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 IMO, the "information system" that is working perfectly well are fast food TV ads. How about criticism for something working too good? Advertising is part of the information system, and it works well, but the balancing part of the information system doesn't seem to work as well in some cases. Now, we have something called MADD which has used societal shame to reduce drunk driving, and balances out the implicit messages that alcohol is risk free. That works. What should we do about obesity then ? Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Topaz Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 I agree with the Public Health Agency of Canada, some of us aren't as active as we were in the past. Also, the increase in weight also has to do the with processing of food and all the junk they put into and the Health Minister and Industry Minister doesn't seem to care about that as much. Which brings me to our members of the House of Commons. Just look at all those people who are way over weight and the Tories especially, have seemed to bloom even more since they have been there. I will say that one Tory from out West did bring a jogging club together, but the only ones that join we the ones already fit. So my view is, yes its important to exercise to keep healthy, but, that also goes for the FAT CATS in Ottawa who make all these rules. Quote
M.Dancer Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 What should we do about obesity then ? http://www.participaction.com/en-us/Home.aspx?lang=en-us Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Scotty Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 Obesity is one of those silent issues that is creeping up on North Americans without much fanfare. Again, I will harp on NA's poor information systems, that are great at entertaining us and getting us to fight with each other, but terrible at addressing long term problems. I don't think we need information systems to tell us a growing proportion of the population is overweight. We can see it in our daily lives. Nor do we need information systems to tell us being fat is both unpleasant and unhealthy. Everyone must surely know that. What we need is a way to reverse the trend, and I have no idea how to do that other than taking fat kids away from their parents (who are also probably fat) and putting them on forced diets. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Michael Hardner Posted January 5, 2011 Report Posted January 5, 2011 I don't think we need information systems to tell us a growing proportion of the population is overweight. We can see it in our daily lives. Nor do we need information systems to tell us being fat is both unpleasant and unhealthy. Everyone must surely know that. Ok, then they are suicidal or more likely just living in denial. Still, why wouldn't this be talked about more often ? That's a failure IMO. What we need is a way to reverse the trend, and I have no idea how to do that other than taking fat kids away from their parents (who are also probably fat) and putting them on forced diets. Orphanages to hold ... what percentage of kids ? 26 % according to this. Not going to happen. Information needs to be matched to its urgency. Just because people know "there's a problem" doesn't mean they will do anything about it. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.