User login
While the increasing prevalence of obesity has been obvious for nearly half a century, it is only in the last decade or two that the focus has broadened to include the associated decline in physical activity.
A recent paper attempts to sharpen that focus by examining the timeline of that decline (Pediatrics 2019 Jan. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-0994.). Using a device incorporating five sensors, one of which was an accelerometer, the investigators collected data from 600 children from five European countries accumulating more than 1,200 observations. What they discovered was that their subjects’ physical activity declined by 75 minutes per day from ages 6 to 11 years of age while sedentary behavior increased more than 100 minutes over that same interval. This observation is concerning because previous attention has focused intervention on adolescents assuming that the erosion of physical activity was occurring primarily during the teen years.
Not surprisingly the authors suggest that more studies should be performed to aid in the design of more sharply targeted interventions. While more information may be helpful, their current findings and an abundance of anecdotal observations suggest that to be effective that intervention must begin well before children reach school age.
What should this intervention look like? Currently, the emphasis seems to have been on programs that encourage activity. The National Football League is promoting its NFL Play 60 initiative. The Afterschool Alliance has its Kids on the Move programs. Former First Lady Michelle Obama has been the spokesperson and driving force behind Let’s Move. And, the American Academy of Pediatrics has recently been encouraging both parents and pediatricians to appreciate The Power of Play to encourage children to get into more physical activity. All of these initiatives are well meaning, but I suspect their effectiveness is usually limited to the public awareness they generate.
We seem to have forgotten that there are two sides to the equation. The accelerometer study from Europe should remind us that our initiatives should also be addressing the problem of epidemic inactivity with equal vigor. Creating programs that focus on increasing activity can be expensive. There may be costs for equipment, spaces to be maintained, and staff to be paid. On the other hand, curbing sedentary behavior requires only an adult with the courage to say, “No.” “No, we will have the television for only an hour today.” “No, you can’t play your video game until after dinner.”
While addressing the disciplinary side of the activity-inactivity dichotomy may be relatively inexpensive, it does seem to have a cost on parents. It requires them to buy into the idea that, given even the most-limited supply of objects and infrastructure, most children can keep themselves entertained and active. There does seem to be a small subset of children who enter the world with a sedentary mindset, possibly inherited from their parents. This unfortunate minority will require some creative intervention to achieve a healthy level of activity.
However, most young children who have become accustomed to being amused by sedentary “activities” such as television and video games still retain their innate creativity and natural inclination to be physically active. Unfortunately, unmasking these health-sustaining attributes may require a long and unpleasant weaning period that many parents don’t seem to have the patience to endure. The longer the child has been allowed to engage in sedentary behaviors, the longer this adjustment period will be, yet another argument for early intervention.
Encouraging physical activity is something we should be doing every day in our offices, but it must go hand in hand with an equivalent emphasis on helping parents create a discipline framework that discourages sedentary behavior.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at pdnews@mdedge.com.
While the increasing prevalence of obesity has been obvious for nearly half a century, it is only in the last decade or two that the focus has broadened to include the associated decline in physical activity.
A recent paper attempts to sharpen that focus by examining the timeline of that decline (Pediatrics 2019 Jan. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-0994.). Using a device incorporating five sensors, one of which was an accelerometer, the investigators collected data from 600 children from five European countries accumulating more than 1,200 observations. What they discovered was that their subjects’ physical activity declined by 75 minutes per day from ages 6 to 11 years of age while sedentary behavior increased more than 100 minutes over that same interval. This observation is concerning because previous attention has focused intervention on adolescents assuming that the erosion of physical activity was occurring primarily during the teen years.
Not surprisingly the authors suggest that more studies should be performed to aid in the design of more sharply targeted interventions. While more information may be helpful, their current findings and an abundance of anecdotal observations suggest that to be effective that intervention must begin well before children reach school age.
What should this intervention look like? Currently, the emphasis seems to have been on programs that encourage activity. The National Football League is promoting its NFL Play 60 initiative. The Afterschool Alliance has its Kids on the Move programs. Former First Lady Michelle Obama has been the spokesperson and driving force behind Let’s Move. And, the American Academy of Pediatrics has recently been encouraging both parents and pediatricians to appreciate The Power of Play to encourage children to get into more physical activity. All of these initiatives are well meaning, but I suspect their effectiveness is usually limited to the public awareness they generate.
We seem to have forgotten that there are two sides to the equation. The accelerometer study from Europe should remind us that our initiatives should also be addressing the problem of epidemic inactivity with equal vigor. Creating programs that focus on increasing activity can be expensive. There may be costs for equipment, spaces to be maintained, and staff to be paid. On the other hand, curbing sedentary behavior requires only an adult with the courage to say, “No.” “No, we will have the television for only an hour today.” “No, you can’t play your video game until after dinner.”
While addressing the disciplinary side of the activity-inactivity dichotomy may be relatively inexpensive, it does seem to have a cost on parents. It requires them to buy into the idea that, given even the most-limited supply of objects and infrastructure, most children can keep themselves entertained and active. There does seem to be a small subset of children who enter the world with a sedentary mindset, possibly inherited from their parents. This unfortunate minority will require some creative intervention to achieve a healthy level of activity.
However, most young children who have become accustomed to being amused by sedentary “activities” such as television and video games still retain their innate creativity and natural inclination to be physically active. Unfortunately, unmasking these health-sustaining attributes may require a long and unpleasant weaning period that many parents don’t seem to have the patience to endure. The longer the child has been allowed to engage in sedentary behaviors, the longer this adjustment period will be, yet another argument for early intervention.
Encouraging physical activity is something we should be doing every day in our offices, but it must go hand in hand with an equivalent emphasis on helping parents create a discipline framework that discourages sedentary behavior.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at pdnews@mdedge.com.
While the increasing prevalence of obesity has been obvious for nearly half a century, it is only in the last decade or two that the focus has broadened to include the associated decline in physical activity.
A recent paper attempts to sharpen that focus by examining the timeline of that decline (Pediatrics 2019 Jan. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-0994.). Using a device incorporating five sensors, one of which was an accelerometer, the investigators collected data from 600 children from five European countries accumulating more than 1,200 observations. What they discovered was that their subjects’ physical activity declined by 75 minutes per day from ages 6 to 11 years of age while sedentary behavior increased more than 100 minutes over that same interval. This observation is concerning because previous attention has focused intervention on adolescents assuming that the erosion of physical activity was occurring primarily during the teen years.
Not surprisingly the authors suggest that more studies should be performed to aid in the design of more sharply targeted interventions. While more information may be helpful, their current findings and an abundance of anecdotal observations suggest that to be effective that intervention must begin well before children reach school age.
What should this intervention look like? Currently, the emphasis seems to have been on programs that encourage activity. The National Football League is promoting its NFL Play 60 initiative. The Afterschool Alliance has its Kids on the Move programs. Former First Lady Michelle Obama has been the spokesperson and driving force behind Let’s Move. And, the American Academy of Pediatrics has recently been encouraging both parents and pediatricians to appreciate The Power of Play to encourage children to get into more physical activity. All of these initiatives are well meaning, but I suspect their effectiveness is usually limited to the public awareness they generate.
We seem to have forgotten that there are two sides to the equation. The accelerometer study from Europe should remind us that our initiatives should also be addressing the problem of epidemic inactivity with equal vigor. Creating programs that focus on increasing activity can be expensive. There may be costs for equipment, spaces to be maintained, and staff to be paid. On the other hand, curbing sedentary behavior requires only an adult with the courage to say, “No.” “No, we will have the television for only an hour today.” “No, you can’t play your video game until after dinner.”
While addressing the disciplinary side of the activity-inactivity dichotomy may be relatively inexpensive, it does seem to have a cost on parents. It requires them to buy into the idea that, given even the most-limited supply of objects and infrastructure, most children can keep themselves entertained and active. There does seem to be a small subset of children who enter the world with a sedentary mindset, possibly inherited from their parents. This unfortunate minority will require some creative intervention to achieve a healthy level of activity.
However, most young children who have become accustomed to being amused by sedentary “activities” such as television and video games still retain their innate creativity and natural inclination to be physically active. Unfortunately, unmasking these health-sustaining attributes may require a long and unpleasant weaning period that many parents don’t seem to have the patience to endure. The longer the child has been allowed to engage in sedentary behaviors, the longer this adjustment period will be, yet another argument for early intervention.
Encouraging physical activity is something we should be doing every day in our offices, but it must go hand in hand with an equivalent emphasis on helping parents create a discipline framework that discourages sedentary behavior.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at pdnews@mdedge.com.