Guess who's back? Back again... On Exercise, Water and My Vacation

Hello! I went on vacation, hence the lack of posting. Many exciting things have been happening, including I got new shoes, one of my friends got married, and, oh yeah... I got a new job! Which means I will probably have zero time to blog during the day, i.e. the time when I do the majority of my work (shhh don't tell the boss!). I'm not sure exactly how things are going to turn out, but I will persevere. You can count on that.

And now, 3 random tidbits on exercise, your water, and my vacation.

...Exercise is Worthless...

I know this is so three weeks ago, but I didn't want to completely ignore that Time article published on August 9. You know, Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin.

If you didn't read it, the thesis of writer John Cloud's lengthy piece is essentially this: Exercising to loose weight is worthless. Diet is more important in weight loss because exercising just makes you hungrier. Sure, ok.

The basic problem is that while it's true that exercise burns calories and that you must burn calories to lose weight, exercise has another effect: it can stimulate hunger. That causes us to eat more, which in turn can negate the weight-loss benefits we just accrued. Exercise, in other words, isn't necessarily helping us lose weight. It may even be making it harder.

There are many things about this article that are very ridiculous. Fortunately, the response has been big, so I will defer commentary to two people who are more qualified to criticize than I.

First is Amby Burfoot, blogger at Runner's World. In her August 10 post on the blog Peak Performance, she makes a couple interesting points.

My problem with the story is that it's more an extended blog--a personal essay--than a true research roundup. Even worse, it never examines the reasons why one might want to lose weight. If you want to get healthier, for example, which I hope is most people's prime motivator, there's a ton of research indicating that exercise will make you healthier even if you can't do much to budge the pounds. Many studies have shown that it's possible to be "fat but fit."

I do think its possible to summarize current research in an informal way while including personal anecdote, but only if you do it responsibly. Cloud seems to have good intentions, but he often misrepresents the available information.

Burfoot's second point is interesting as well. What is the motivation to lose weight? Are you less likely to adhere to an exercise program if you're just doing it to look better? There seems to be something to the idea that if you perceive more benefits from exercise, you'll enjoy more benefits.

Burfoot goes on to discuss a 2009 publication by the American College of Sports Medicine that talks about this VERY ISSUE: adults and exercise and weight loss. This document gets into the technical aspects of exercise that the ACSM recommends, like the duration, intensity and frequency of exercise, and how it can be a useful part of a healthy weight loss program. Basically, all the key points that Cloud leaves out of his article... probably because they sort of blow his thesis out of the water.

The second expert I'd like to quote is a friend's father, who is a professor of kinesiology and has two sons who played college football (which I mention to illustrate his personal, as well as professional, interest in these issues). He explained that overall, he agreed with the article's "calories in-calories out" argument. The problem, he said, was that,

They fail to mention that if you examine weight loss programs and look at the rate of recidivism that this is where the differences lie. The rate of recidivism from diet alone is very high, almost 95% of those who lose weight on a diet alone will gain it back. The diet industry thrives on it. If you look at the rate of recidivism for diet and exercise programs of weight loss, the rates are lower.

(Recidivism is the tendency to relapse, FYI.) Exercise is an important part of any healthy weight loss program just like fruit and milk are part of the "balanced breakfast" you hear about from cereal commercials. Lots of people like to talk about exercise and diet as if they are two mutually exclusive ideas: it's either one or the other. It seems though, that both exercise and diet work best when they are working together as a team! Like toothbrushes and floss. Or cheese and macaroni. Or cheese and round, flat dough with tomato sauce on it. (Well, really cheese and any other food...) Anyway. Teamwork. You get the idea.

One last point I'd like to address is Cloud's assertion that exercise makes you hungry. Yes, it certainly does. But is there a reason you can't eat a banana or half a bagel after you exercise if you're ravenous? Does it have to be a Frappucino or a muffin? It's fine to eat if you're hungry, but not every hunger needs to be satisfied with a bacon cheeseburger. Just wanted to throw that out there.

...Water!...

Yesterday I came upon the newly designed Environmental Protection Agency website. (Actually, I have no idea if it's a new design... it seems like the first thing the Obama IT team did was redesign all the websites using Flash and soothing colors, so I'm assuming.) It's very pretty and there are many widgets to entertain you.

My favorite is the MyEnvironment widget. Just enter your zip code and it will show your air quality and UV indexes, some stats about your health (which mean nothing to me... anyone care to define "cancer risk estimates"?) and the most interesting section, information about your local water source. Tap water! Yay!

People seem to always been complaining about tap water and how gross it is. My last roommate used to scold me if she caught me filling up a glass from the faucet... when there was a perfectly good Brita pitcher in the refrigerator! Did I have a death wish?!

I don't mind drinking tap water at all--in fact, I enjoy not experiencing the faint anxiety I get from drinking bottled water. It still seems completely ridiculous to me to buy water, when all you have to do is turn a little knob in your house and it comes pouring out. Gushing, if you wish. Do you remember when they first started selling bottled water? I was in middle school and one of my friends bought a bottle from the vending machine in the cafeteria. I threw a fit. "Seriously?!" I ridiculed. "If you're thirsty, just get a drink from the fountain! Give me the 75 cents!" And then we listened to the Spice Girls. The end.

I do find it interesting, though, that in such a short time we've gone from loving our water supply to tolerating it to loathing it. Why? Has it become more contaminated in recent years? Or are we just that susceptible to marketing?

In truth, I don't know very much about safe levels of contaminants and bacteria in water, but I want to have faith in my municipal water provider. I checked out the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority on the intraweb and was surprised to see that they publish monthly Water Quality Reports here. I have only a basic knowledge of biology, so the report for July was a little over my head.

Still, I am impressed that the MWRA publishes monthly reports. On the EPA website, it says that public water suppliers are only required to publish an annual report, so the fact that the MWRA provides additional reports is a good sign, I think. Transparency is never bad in my book. Also, WBZ reported in March that Boston "may have the tastiest water in the country", although the lack of supporting data leads me to believe that they made that up.

...Vacation...

Lastly, I vacationed for 10 days in my homeland of Oregon, and came to several conclusions:

1. If it is 90 degrees in Portland, it will certainly be 65 and foggy at the coast. Regardless, I will still get burned.
   
2. Lunch tastes better when you eat it outside under the grape vines.
3. I wish my life took place a private karaoke room.
   
4. My certainty of the start time of an event is inversely related to the likelihood that I'm right, i.e. if I'm VERY SURE something starts at 7pm, it probably starts at 6pm.
5. There needs to be about 250% more Happy Hours in Boston (preferably including drink AND food specials).
6. People from high school will always surprise me (for better and for worse).

Fin.

Fitness Links in Honor of the Fairfield Half this weekend!

Ah, yes. The time has come to run great distances, sweat profusely and hopefully avoid injury along the way. Wooohhoooyeaahhhh! The 29th Annual Fairfield Half Marathon is on Sunday, and I have a feeling it's going to be AWESOME.

In the spirit of this athletic event, I've been keeping my eyes peeled for articles that might make running thirteen miles marginally easier. Here are two gems from my files:

To Sit Up or Not To Sit Up (thanks Simone)
How many different sit-up philosophies have you heard in your life? Maybe 5, 10? "Don't sit all the way up" vs. "only flex your abs"; "feet on the floor" vs. "legs in the air," etc. Shoot! I personally adhere to the "crunch" ideology and occasionally I use the exercise balls to do my ab-work.

However, here's another to add to the list! A recent blog post at Newsweek claims that sit ups don't work at all. More specifically -- they hurt more than help.

“We stopped teaching people to do crunches a long, long time ago,” says Dr. Richard Guyer, president of the Texas Back Institute. That’s because the “full flex” movement—the actual “crunch” part of crunches – puts an unhealthy strain on your back at its weakest point. The section with the most nerves (and most potential for nerve damage) is in the back of the spine, which is the very part that bends and strains during a sit-up.

Interesting. I have heard that the best way to do sit-ups/crunches is on the exercise ball with your lower back supported. The article says nothing about whether this is a "safe" way to exercise your abs, but instead they offer this old fave as an alternative:

Consider the pushup. Not usually thought of as a great ab move, the pushup forces you to work several muscles at once: it forces your core muscles to stabilize your trunk as your arms and back work to move the body up and down. “Do you see how a pushup is a full body challenge?” says McGill. “It challenges abdominals, front of your legs, your arms and your back. That is how you use those muscles in real life.”

Woah. The pushup seems to be typically thought of as an arm-only workout, but actually it is one of those amazing exercises where you use ALL THE MUSCLES IN YOUR BODY. I presume that is why pushups are so hard, and not only because my arm muscles are puny. (I don't care what you saw on FB, Laura, they are puny.)

The article also recommends planks, which I have always loved because they are so damn hard.

So if you have back issues (particularly lower back), try laying off the sit ups/crunches for awhile and increase the number of pushups in your workout. Then, report back and tell me your conclusions. Please.

Sleep Loading, something like Carb Loading
Based on a very small study of Division 1 female tennis players, some researchers recently presented findings that suggests sleep has a more significant effect on athletic performance than previously thought.

Then the players were told to extend their sleep to 10 hours a night for five to six weeks. After increasing sleep, the athletes performed better on all the drills. Sprinting drill times dropped on average to 17.56 seconds from 19.12 seconds. Hitting accuracy, measured by valid serves, improved to 15.61 serves, up from 12.6 serves, and a hitting depth drill improved to 15.45 hits, up from 10.85 hits.

When the tennis players cracked down on their sleep debt, they performed significantly better than before... when they were *technically* sleep deprived. Um, awesome? Let's go take a nap!

Furthermore, in this article at Medical News Today, the study's lead author, Cherie Mah, M.S., suggests that it's impossible to physically perform at your best without proper sleep:

"Traditionally, elite athletes dedicate numerous hours to daily practice, strength training, and conditioning as well as work closely with nutritionists in hopes of optimizing their athletic performance," said Mah. "However, very little, if any, attention is focused on an athlete's sleeping patterns and habits. While most athletes and coaching staff may believe that sleep is an important contributing factor in sports, many do not realize that optimal or peak performance can only occur when an athlete's sleep and sleep habits are optimal."

Seriously. Notice that she qualifies her opinion by only including "elite athletes," but I'm just going to go ahead and include those of us who once practiced or played five to six days a week as well. How much better would I have played in college if I'd been able to sleep more than 5-6 hours a night?! Between class, homework, work study, and practice/games/other team crap, there were just not enough hours in the day to get everything done and also get adequate rest.

Now, if only this study had been published about 2.5 years ago... I would have had fantastic support for my one-man campaign against lifting at 6AM three times a week. Ugh, and I'm still mad about it!

Your Workout Forecast

This is cool: The Weather Channel's Fitness Forecast.

Enter your zip code and you'll get the hourly forecast for your area accompanied by a "Fitness Comfort Index". They even tell you how many hours of daylight you have left (so get off your ass soon) and what to wear! Maybe this seems silly--just look out your window, fool --but it's also reassuring.

Similarly, you can search for parks in your area... although they don't tell you WHERE they are, just that they exist.

And, last thing: check out the Hydration Needs Calculator to figure out approximately how much water you should be drinking every day. It only asks your zip code, your weight and how much time you spend working out so it's not going to be totally accurate, but it's funny to see how much water you should be drinking. When I plugged in my info and put 1 minute for duration, it suggested I drink 57 oz. When I put 60 minutes for duration, it suggested 59 oz. Huh.

Are you there Blog? It's me, Chloe.

Oh heeeeeyyyyyy.

It's been awhile. I bet you forgot what it looked like when I updated.

Me too.

There are a lot of things to talk about, but in order to get off the ground and running in the great month of June 2009, let's not write a novel. Let's start with a little something more modest... a paragraph on metabolism? And a list of books for you to read.

Paragraph on metabolism:

I've had this lying around in my Google Notebook and I thought now would be a good time to bust it out. A few months ago I came across The Female Athlete's Body Book by Gloria Beim, MD and Ruth Winter, MS (links to Google Preview! Exciting!) at my local library and geeked out a little. The book offers a whole lot of useful information that is specific to the female athlete, as the title implies. It breaks down typical injuries and concerns by sport and has a great section on nutrition. I'll post the nutrition stuff another time, because it's lengthy and all I promised was ONE paragraph.

On metabolism, Dr. Beim and Ms. Winter write:

Men metabolize energy differently than women. Metabolism is the way you process food into tissue elements and into energy for use in the growth, repair and general function of your body. A women's resting metabolic rate (RMR) is 5-10 percent lower than a man's. If you have developed your muscles through sports, however, your RMR will burn increased calories while you are at rest. If you don't exercise and are on a weight-loss diet, you will deprive your muscles of protein and conditioning, decrease the size of your muscles, and lessen your RMR. So commit yourself to regular exercise. It will increase your metabolism and assist you in maintaining a healthy weight.

Here's some more evidence that it's allllll connected. More developed muscles will increase your metabolism making you burn calories more quickly and easily, and exercise not only burns calories, but increases muscle mass. Coolio.

I'd also like to note the language of the last sentence: "... and assist you in maintaining a healthy weight." Not losing weight, but maintaining it. It's an important distinction to make, because this is not a weight-loss advice book, Couch Potato. It is a tool to learn about the magical wonders of your body, Female Athlete.

And a list of books for you to read:

If you're interested in learning more about food issues (not diet foods that will make you skinny and leotarded), I recently came across this list on a listserve to which I subscribe.

To get started:
- Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser
- The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan (Read it! Awesome.)

To continue the education:
- Animal, Vegetable, Miracle by Barbara Kingsolver (see my review @Goodreads)
- Appetite for Profit by Michele Simon
- Closing the Food Gap by Mark Winne (see my review @Goodreads)
- Diet for a Dead Planet by Christopher Cook
- Diet for a Small Planet by Frances Moore Lappe
- Food Politics by Marion Nestle
- Grub by Anna Lappe and Bryant Terry
- Holistic Management by Allan Savory
- Hope's Edge by Frances Moore Lappe
- Mad Cow USA by John Stauber
- Mad Sheep by Linda Faillace
- Safe Food by Marion Nestle
- Seeds of Deception by Jeffrey M. Smith
- Teaming With Microbes by Jeff Lowenfels, Wayne Lewis and Elaine Ingham
- What To Eat by Marion Nestle

I've only read three of the books, but I've been meaning to read the Nestle books for awhile. Anyway, they're all getting added to the ol' summer reading list. Ha! My eyes are always bigger than my stomach (or reading stomach).

Be sure to give your 2 cents about any of the books on the reading list--I'd love to hear any/all comments! Ok! Back next week.

2009 Fitness Goals: Another Halfsie, Pushups?

In 2008, I joined the YMCA, ran my first half marathon and starting doing yoga.

In 2009, I'd like to add another halfer and some pushups, please?


Last year, I ran the 28th Annual Stratton-Faxon Fairfield Half Marathon in June with my friend Laura and her family. THIS YEAR, Fairfield has upped the ante including MEDALS for all half marathon finishers. As if I didn't need another reason to do it!

This is a big deal. I'm not a distance runner and although I'm athletic, 13 miles is extremely daunting to me. Last year, I tried to train, but there were some extenuating circumstances that kept me from focusing as much as I wanted to (i.e. a stalker, whatever). Before the race, I think the most I ran consecutively was 8 miles. But then again, that's the number I told everyone, and I clearly I would have lied about it, so really think it was closer to 6. I finished the race, but I was running about 10 minute miles, which is not really anything to brag about.

In any case, I'm going to do it better. The race is June 28, 2009, so that gives me just under five months to pull my shit together. Most half marathon training programs are for 12 weeks or so, but I'll need to start getting back into better shape now, especially taking care of my knees.

Also, I'm intrigued by the One Hundred Pushups challenge. Following the posted program, they assert that in only six weeks, you could do 100 pushups. For reals?

I'm going to look into this more and report back. Anyone interested in trying it out?

Winter Propaganda, c/o The Weather Channel

Because there is a major storm heading into Boston tonight, I was checking out The Weather Channel this morning to get the 411 and guesstimate my chances of having a snow day tomorrow (it's looking good). As I briefly browsed TWC's homepage, I found that they're promoting a new feature called, "Why I Love Winter."
Also, if you've checked your Local on the 8's in the last few days, you've probably seen the promo on TV.

TWC Road Crew personality Jeff Mielcarz hosts this piece, albeit reluctantly. According to his Do you love Winter? blog post, Jeff is not a fan of the winter months:

"I feel like you and I have a pretty good relationship and I don't want to ruin that by lying to your face ... so I'll be straight up with you ... winter ... clearly not my favorite season."

Alright, Jeff, whatever you say. After Jeff gets through relating his elementary school snow day experiences (with enough dot-dot-dotting to drive a person mad), he goes on to tell us how other TWC personalities feel about winter. Most of them seemed to have missed the "Why I LOVE Winter" memo because many are luke warm at best about the season. Heather Tesch even goes so far to say, "Honestly, winter is not my favorite month." If winter was a month, that would be harsh.

But seriously... WHAT THE HELL IS THIS CRAP?! Winter sucks and everyone knows it. Why is The Weather Channel forcing this weak propaganda on us?

Also-- why am I getting so worked up about this? I'm not sure. Clearly this is just a very poorly perceived and executed PR stunt by a bunch of weather geeks trying to get people jazzed about Winter and increase their ratings.

But mostly, I think this campaign isn't 100% stupid and it could have been a great opportunity to address some public health issues, namely the "winter blues" or Seasonal Affective Disorder, instead of a plea for people to spend loads of money they don't have traveling to Florida and/or snow sporting.

Seasonal Affective Disorder is the extreme version of the cabin fever, fatigue and irritability that many people experience during January and February. If symptoms are so severe that you can't function, please seek professional advice. Otherwise, there are lots of articles and advice columns for how to deal with the blues, but here are some general tips:

• Exercise 4-6 times a week for 30-45 minutes.
• Take vitamin C supplements to keep your immune system healthy.
• Decorate your living space with bright colors like red, orange and yellow.
• Eat complex carbohydrates like rice and pasta to feed your brain, and simple carbs like fruits and juices for a sweet meal-ender. Strategic eating!
  
• Get some sun exposure soon after you rise in the morning. Opening your shades can be enough!

Personally, I've been cooking, baking and trying to get some sewing projects going to keep me busy. I find that too much idle time can be a hazard to my mental health, i.e. unemployment. A couple weeks ago, I made Beef Barley Soup, which was DELICIOUS and pretty easy. The leftovers were even better the next day. And the next.

So, WEATHER CHANNEL listen up: Stick to what you know, i.e. THE WEATHER. Don't tell me I have to love Winter, because I don't! You're not my mom!

Resources:
Seasonal affective disorder (SAD), Mayo Clinic
Gannett Advice on Beating the Winter Blues, Cornell University
Natural Ways to Beat the Winter Blues, Health.com
Go Away Winter Blues!, DoItYourself.com

Fitness on a budget!

Even though gyms have been slashing prices to attract New Year's Resolutionees, it's difficult to find a decent membership for under $50 a month. Sure, you can use the YMCA or your local rec center or your university's facilities, but if you're like me, it's hard to utilize those money-saving options and still get a satisfying workout. (Issues like overcrowding, sub-standard equipment, and creepy old guys tend to make me a flight risk at the Y.)

That's why I was excited to get last week's e-newsletter from the National Women's Health Resource Center. The feature article was 9 Great Ways To Stay Fit Without Breaking Your Budget. Great timing!

While there aren't any ground-breaking suggestions, it's a really thoughtful article with some good tips. Notable suggestions include:

• Make ordinary moments count. Fitness expert Shirley Archer says, "When you brush your teeth, do a set of 20 to 25 squats, as your fitness permits." Sure! I just stand there awkwardly anyway. Why not throw in something productive?
• Break your exercise boredom cheaply. Check out the programming on the fitness channel (if you have cable), rent new DVDs from the library (Sweatin' to the Oldies!) or go to the American Counsel on Exercise's Exercise Library, a website that I am extremely impressed with and will be highlighting often.
• Look for bargains. They suggest that you do your homework on gym memberships before committing to one, so you get the best deal. If you're in the market for fitness equipment, look on Craigslist or sign up for Freecycle. And personally, I always look forward to nice weather so I can drive through the neighborhoods looking at all the crap people try to get rid of (otherwise known as garage/yard/tag sales). Also, Play It Again Sports. *Note: I think it goes without saying, but it's always a good idea to test drive any item before you complete the purchase.

I've been in a workout slump recently, so these ideas have helped kick-start me back into a schedule. I'm excited to do squats when I brush my teeth tomorrow morning!

Who cares about steroids?

Do you care about steroids? I'm not sure if I do, but it's been a hot topic in the last couple years, what with the Major League Baseball fiasco including the Mitchell Report, congressional hearings and the continuing controversy surrounding Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettitte, Jason Giambi, et. al.

What really prompted this post is a 'roids site (Can you shorten it to "roids", or does that refer to hemorrhoids? Help!) I came across called Steroids Live, a pro-steroids blog that is "intended to inform and educated athletes, bodybuilders and the general public about anabolic steroids." Fair enough.

If anything, "Dr. Stevens" seems to be working against his cause. Besides the obvious grammatical errors (have you heard of a comma?) and nonsensical writing, the ultimate question is never even addressed: WHAT IS THE POINT? Clearly, I'm not of the target audience, but who is? How do you even become someone who is thinking about steroids?

Also, the office where I work get the American Journal of Public Health, which I read when the boss is out of the office (and sometimes take home). The December 2008 issue includes a study that looked at steroid usage in relation to violence.*

The results? They suggest that steroid use is related to "heightened levels of violent behaviors," and that the media attention and public concern surrounding this issue is justified "given its association with violence among males in the United States."

This seems to address Steroid Lives' issue in Roid Rage, Myth or Real Danger???, so I'll just leave it at that.

*Beaver, K., Vaughn, M.G., DeLisi, M., Wright, J.P. (2008) Anabolic-Androgenic Steroid Use and Involvement in Violent Behavior in a Nationally Representative Sample of Young Adult Males in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 2185-7.

Investing in health: Fat-O-Nomics

A blurb about gyms in USA Today caught my eye this morning. First of all, Gyms, spas stress value of fighting stress in hard times is a very terrible headline. I thought I had crossed my eyes when I read it the first time, but no, "Gyms stress stress" is really what they're calling this piece. There may be a section editor job opening up tomorrow at USA Today, if anyone's interested.

Anyway, this article looks at gyms with a different perspective than I was expecting. Since it is in the Money section of USA Today, fitness and health are discussed in a rather dry, cynical way, typical of the manner in which products or profitable services are considered. Which I suppose, makes sense for the assumed audience. We're in the Money section after all.

*Side Note: USA Today doesn't even have a Health or Science section. The closest they get is Life, and the lead story on the website today is "Victoria's Secret brings sexy back to Fontainebleau; video." Yes, very relevant to my Life.

Gyms (and spas) in New York are slashing prices in order to retain membership and lure new members, the article relates. But that's not all they're doing in these tough economic times.

Beyond deep discounts, some are adopting a recession spin: touting services as stress reducers, not indulgences, and highlighting the economic benefits of "wellness."

Ah yes! Give gyms your money and not only will they make you skinny and give you "wellness", (Why is wellness in quotes? Why do the quotation marks seem so patronizing?) but they'll also put money back in your pocket! Some gyms even have catchy names to help the public put two and two together.

A Gold's Gym program — deemed "Fat-O-Nomics" — centers on money people can save by shedding excess weight. One stat: Being 50 pounds overweight burns nine extra gallons of gasoline per year.

Nine gallons of gasoline? Thats IT?! Since gas prices have fallen pretty dramatically since the summer, your yearly savings would be less than $25... that is after you lose the 50 pounds, which could take several months. When you figure that a membership to a decent gym will run you about $80-$100 a month, annualized at $900-$1200, saving $25 in gas is nice, but ultimately your wallet isn't impacted that dramatically. And besides, who wants to admit they're part of a program called "Fat-O-Nomics"? Lame.

It turns out that despite the unfortunate name and much to the chagrin of this USA Today columnist, Gold's Gym is onto something important that is about more than saving nine gallons of gas a year. The Fat-O-Nomics site details the ways in which obese Americans pay for carrying the extra weight. Some of the more interesting statistics:

• Obese men and women earn, on average, $3.41 per hour less than other Americans, which means $7,093 less income across the course of one calendar year.
• Americans spend 4% of their annual income on clothing each year, but obese people pay an extra 25% for their clothes. Obese clothing surcharge: $485
• Obese Americans lose, on average, one-half day of work due to obesity-related ailments. Total lost wages: $93.

When the issue is broken down and considered like this, some important things are highlighted. Why are obese people being paid less? Is it employer's size discrimination, or are obese people less likely to think they deserve (and therefore, ask for) raises? Are obese people poorer employees, or are they more likely to be sick and miss work?

I've read enough literature from overweight people to know that these situations are often more complex than they seem on the surface. Like most minority populations, the relationship that obese people have with mainstream culture is tortured and antagonistic. Society blames the individual for being fat and consequently makes them pay for the extra weight, whereas the individual blames the media, models, McDonald's, high fructose corn syrup, Snickers, etc. Few people on either side will take responsibility and no one wins.

The fact is that there are enormous lifetime health care costs related to obesity. It is commonly known that a sedentary lifestyle and being overweight begets a host of health problems. The US Department of Health and Human Services acknowledges this in the Health, United States, 2007 report.

Of concern for all Americans is the high prevalence of people with unhealthy lifestyles and behaviors, such as insufficient exercise and overweight, which are risk factors for many chronic diseases and disabilities including heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, and back pain. The rising number of overweight children and adults and the large percentage of those who are physically inactive raise additional concerns about Americans’ future health.

Like it or not, there are consequences for being obese. Some come from prejudicial BS, but others, the heart disease, diabetes and such, aren't discriminatory.

So despite the fact that USA Today is annoying and Gold's Gym is primarily in it for the profit, if the financial terms of Fat-O-Nomics appeals to people that have been sitting at home eating Pop Tarts and root beer for 15 years, then by all means, continue the campaign. Ultimately, "wellness" isn't some mystical concept: being healthy and taking care of yourself are practical, obtainable goals... whether or not you are stressed out by our nose-diving economy.

Stretching: The Truth?!

The New York Times published an article last week called Stretching: The Truth. The "truth", of course, is not what is seems.

Columnist Gretchen Reynolds explains that the commonly held belief that static stretching (aka, normal bend-over-and-touch-your-toes) before a workout warms up muscles is dead wrong. Not only is static stretching not an ideal warm up, Reynolds asserts that pre-workout stretching can actually weaken muscles, ultimately hindering performance.

“There is a neuromuscular inhibitory response to static stretching,” says Malachy McHugh, the director of research at the Nicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. The straining muscle becomes less responsive and stays weakened for up to 30 minutes after stretching, which is not how an athlete wants to begin a workout.

Instead, Reynolds proposes that the athlete cut the pre-workout static stretching completely and include "dynamic" stretching instead.

Stretching muscles while moving, on the other hand, a technique known as dynamic stretching or dynamic warm-ups, increases power, flexibility and range of motion. Muscles in motion don’t experience that insidious inhibitory response. They instead get what McHugh calls “an excitatory message” to perform.

Great, fantastic. Dynamic stretching can be an alternately great way to warm up the muscles and joints before an intense workout or competition. I find it curious though, that the article claims to tell the "truth" yet it includes so little empirical evidence. It mentions one study done by the University of Nevada, quotes two experts in the field, and adds something about ripping the legs off rabbits. Helpful! Thank you for that.

In actuality, there are a lot of studies currently being done on the acute effects of stretching, but the data do not completely support one school of thought over another.

A 2007 review article in Sports Medicine by Rubini, Costa and Gomes suggests that the jury is still out on the effects of stretching at any time, before or after, physical activity.

Although most studies have found acute decreases in strength following stretching, and that such decreases seem to be more prominent the longer the stretching protocol, the number of exercises and sets, and the duration of each set have, in general, exceeded the ranges normally recommended in the literature. Consequently, the duration of the stimuli were excessively long compared with common practice, thus making evident the need for further studies.

So basically, while decreases in muscle strength have been reported in some studies (a la the results report by Reynolds), many times those studies required participants to stretch for excessively long times--presumably much longer than an average person would spend during pre-workout stretching.

Moreover, Rubini, Costa and Gomes add that

when recommending flexibility exercises, one should consider other underlying issues, such as the safety of the participants, possible increases in injury risks and the unnecessary time expenditure.

The Moral of the Story: Obviously it's pretty commonplace for the popular media to give fitness recommendations, but it was a bold move for the NYT to claim the "truth" about stretching based on such insubstantial evidence.

Newspaper and magazines can be great places to find new ideas to jazz up a tired workout routine, but be wary of excessive self-assuredness: it's usually symptomatic of a lack of journalistic integrity!