Stressing harms of physical inactivity to promote exercise

Abstract

Exercise has been called a miracle drug 1 Pimlott N The miracle drug. Can Fam Physician. 2010; 56: 407-409 PubMed Google Scholar that can benefit every part of the body 2 Centers for Disease Control and PreventionSurgeon General's Report on Physical Activity and Health. http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/sgr/index.htmDate: 1996 Google Scholar and substantially extend lifespan. 3 Wen CP Wai JP Tsai MK et al. Minimum amount of physical activity for reduced mortality and extended life expectancy: a prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2011; 378: 1244-1253 Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1161) Google Scholar Yet it receives little respect from doctors or society. 4 Walsh JM Swangard DM Davis T McPhee SJ Exercise counseling by primary care physicians in the era of managed care. Am J Prev Med. 1999; 16: 307-313 Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (142) Google Scholar Socially, being inactive is perceived as normal, and in fact doctors order patients to remain on bed rest far more often than they encourage exercise. 5 Lee I-M Shiroma EJ Lobelo F Puska P Blair SN Katzmarzyk PT for the Lancet Physical Activity Series Working GroupEffect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet. 2012; (published online July 18.)http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61031-9 Summary Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (4700) Google Scholar This passive attitude towards inactivity, where exercise is viewed as a personal choice, is anachronistic, and is reminiscent of the battles still being fought over smoking. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancyPhysical inactivity has a major health effect worldwide. Decrease in or removal of this unhealthy behaviour could improve health substantially. Full-Text PDF Promoting increased physical activity and reduced inactivityWe are concerned that the suggestion by Chi Pang Wen and Xifeng Wu (July 21, p 192)1 to develop messages that highlight the consequences of inactivity versus the benefits of either physical activity or reduced sedentary time is inconsistent with research findings on message framing, and therefore could weaken public health messages. Full-Text PDF Promoting increased physical activity and reduced inactivity – Authors' replyWe are pleased to have this opportunity to respond to a recurring misconception prevalent among clinical psychologists that stressing the harms of physical inactivity is ineffective. Full-Text PDF Address physical inactivity, but avoid stressing harms – Authors' replyGjalt-Jorn Peters and colleagues challenge our recommendation1 to inform inactive people about the harms of inactivity, stating that such actions might prove counterproductive. We respectfully disagree. Full-Text PDF Address physical inactivity, but avoid stressing harmsIn their excellent Comment (July 21, p 192),1 Chi Pang Wen and Xifeng Wu make a strong case for investing in behaviour change interventions to promote more physical activity in the inactive population. They list several helpful approaches, such as optimising the available infrastructure and building skills of the inactive. However, their main recommendation is to stress the harms of physical inactivity, and recent evidence indicates that this is a dangerous suggestion. Full-Text PDF