A Comparison of Physical Activity and Exercise Recommendations for Public Health: Inconsistent Activity Messages Are Being Conveyed to the General Public.

IF 2.2 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES Sports Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.3390/sports12120335
Vincent J Dalbo, Michael A Carron
{"title":"A Comparison of Physical Activity and Exercise Recommendations for Public Health: Inconsistent Activity Messages Are Being Conveyed to the General Public.","authors":"Vincent J Dalbo, Michael A Carron","doi":"10.3390/sports12120335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We examined the similarities and differences between government-supported public health activity recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Health Service (NHS), the Department of Health and Aged Care (DHAC), and one of the most renowned public health activity recommendations, the 10,000 Steps Program. The findings derived from our evaluation suggest a lack of consistency in public health activity recommendations, including the nomenclature used to describe aerobic activity, the amount of time required per week to meet the minimum recommendation for moderate and vigorous activity, and variations in the intensities required to meet aerobic activity recommendations. We also found that moderate-intensity activity (3.0 to less than 6.0 METS) is achieved across the lifespan with normal (i.e., mean), rather than vigorous, walking speeds; this suggests the MET level for moderate-intensity activity may need to be re-examined. The suggested strength activities must also be considered to ensure that the activities maintain or improve strength in the general public. Among the reviewed recommendations, none distinguished between physical activity and exercise, which may contribute to the low levels of exercise participation among the general public. Since exercise is medicine, the most recognized government-supported public health activity recommendations should place a greater emphasis on exercise over physical activity. Moreover, given the low levels of activity in the general public, more care should be given to provide a consistent, clear, and direct message regarding activity recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":53303,"journal":{"name":"Sports","volume":"12 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/sports12120335","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examined the similarities and differences between government-supported public health activity recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Health Service (NHS), the Department of Health and Aged Care (DHAC), and one of the most renowned public health activity recommendations, the 10,000 Steps Program. The findings derived from our evaluation suggest a lack of consistency in public health activity recommendations, including the nomenclature used to describe aerobic activity, the amount of time required per week to meet the minimum recommendation for moderate and vigorous activity, and variations in the intensities required to meet aerobic activity recommendations. We also found that moderate-intensity activity (3.0 to less than 6.0 METS) is achieved across the lifespan with normal (i.e., mean), rather than vigorous, walking speeds; this suggests the MET level for moderate-intensity activity may need to be re-examined. The suggested strength activities must also be considered to ensure that the activities maintain or improve strength in the general public. Among the reviewed recommendations, none distinguished between physical activity and exercise, which may contribute to the low levels of exercise participation among the general public. Since exercise is medicine, the most recognized government-supported public health activity recommendations should place a greater emphasis on exercise over physical activity. Moreover, given the low levels of activity in the general public, more care should be given to provide a consistent, clear, and direct message regarding activity recommendations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
体育活动和运动建议对公众健康的比较:不一致的运动信息正在传递给公众。
我们研究了世界卫生组织(WHO)、疾病控制和预防中心(CDC)、国家卫生服务(NHS)、卫生和老年护理部(DHAC)等政府支持的公共卫生活动建议与最著名的公共卫生活动建议之一“一万步计划”(10,000 Steps Program)之间的异同。从我们的评估中得出的结果表明,公共卫生活动建议缺乏一致性,包括用于描述有氧运动的术语,每周达到中等和剧烈运动最低建议所需的时间,以及达到有氧运动建议所需强度的变化。我们还发现,中等强度的活动(3.0至小于6.0 METS)在整个生命周期中以正常(即平均)而不是剧烈的步行速度实现;这表明中等强度活动的MET水平可能需要重新检查。建议的力量活动也必须考虑,以确保活动维持或提高一般公众的力量。在审查的建议中,没有一项区分体育活动和锻炼,这可能是造成普通公众运动参与水平较低的原因。既然运动是医学,政府支持的公共健康活动建议中最受认可的应该是更强调运动而不是身体活动。此外,鉴于一般公众的活动水平较低,应更加注意就活动建议提供一致、明确和直接的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Sports
Sports SPORT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.40%
发文量
167
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Potential Importance of Maximal Upper Body Strength-Generating Qualities and Upper Body Strength Training for Performance of High-Intensity Running and Jumping Actions: A Scoping Review. Advanced Footwear Technology in Non-Elite Runners: A Survey of Training Practices and Reported Outcomes. Individuality Affects the Efficiency of Basketball Pre-Game Warm-Up on Players' Performance. Occurrence of Injuries in Different Phases of Judo Matches: Analysis Based on International Competitions. Prevalence of Lower Back Pain and Risk Factors in Equestrians: A Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1