118
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    4
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not?

      , , , , ,
      The Lancet
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Physical inactivity is an important contributor to non-communicable diseases in countries of high income, and increasingly so in those of low and middle income. Understanding why people are physically active or inactive contributes to evidence-based planning of public health interventions, because effective programmes will target factors known to cause inactivity. Research into correlates (factors associated with activity) or determinants (those with a causal relationship) has burgeoned in the past two decades, but has mostly focused on individual-level factors in high-income countries. It has shown that age, sex, health status, self-efficacy, and motivation are associated with physical activity. Ecological models take a broad view of health behaviour causation, with the social and physical environment included as contributors to physical inactivity, particularly those outside the health sector, such as urban planning, transportation systems, and parks and trails. New areas of determinants research have identified genetic factors contributing to the propensity to be physically active, and evolutionary factors and obesity that might predispose to inactivity, and have explored the longitudinal tracking of physical activity throughout life. An understanding of correlates and determinants, especially in countries of low and middle income, could reduce the eff ect of future epidemics of inactivity and contribute to effective global prevention of non-communicable diseases.

          Related collections

          Most cited references108

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects

          The Lancet, 380(9838), 247-257
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The pandemic of physical inactivity: global action for public health.

            Physical inactivity is the fourth leading cause of death worldwide. We summarise present global efforts to counteract this problem and point the way forward to address the pandemic of physical inactivity. Although evidence for the benefits of physical activity for health has been available since the 1950s, promotion to improve the health of populations has lagged in relation to the available evidence and has only recently developed an identifiable infrastructure, including efforts in planning, policy, leadership and advocacy, workforce training and development, and monitoring and surveillance. The reasons for this late start are myriad, multifactorial, and complex. This infrastructure should continue to be formed, intersectoral approaches are essential to advance, and advocacy remains a key pillar. Although there is a need to build global capacity based on the present foundations, a systems approach that focuses on populations and the complex interactions among the correlates of physical inactivity, rather than solely a behavioural science approach focusing on individuals, is the way forward to increase physical activity worldwide.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Changes in energy expenditure resulting from altered body weight.

              No current treatment for obesity reliably sustains weight loss, perhaps because compensatory metabolic processes resist the maintenance of the altered body weight. We examined the effects of experimental perturbations of body weight on energy expenditure to determine whether they lead to metabolic changes and whether obese subjects and those who have never been obese respond similarly. We repeatedly measured 24-hour total energy expenditure, resting and nonresting energy expenditure, and the thermic effect of feeding in 18 obese subjects and 23 subjects who had never been obese. The subjects were studied at their usual body weight and after losing 10 to 20 percent of their body weight by underfeeding or gaining 10 percent by overfeeding. Maintenance of a body weight at a level 10 percent or more below the initial weight was associated with a mean (+/- SD) reduction in total energy expenditure of 6 +/- 3 kcal per kilogram of fat-free mass per day in the subjects who had never been obese (P < 0.001) and 8 +/- 5 kcal per kilogram per day in the obese subjects (P < 0.001). Resting energy expenditure and nonresting energy expenditure each decreased 3 to 4 kcal per kilogram of fat-free mass per day in both groups of subjects. Maintenance of body weight at a level 10 percent above the usual weight was associated with an increase in total energy expenditure of 9 +/- 7 kcal per kilogram of fat-free mass per day in the subjects who had never been obese (P < 0.001) and 8 +/- 4 kcal per kilogram per day in the obese subjects (P < 0.001). The thermic effect of feeding and nonresting energy expenditure increased by approximately 1 to 2 and 8 to 9 kcal per kilogram of fat-free mass per day, respectively, after weight gain. These changes in energy expenditure were not related to the degree of adiposity or the sex of the subjects. Maintenance of a reduced or elevated body weight is associated with compensatory changes in energy expenditure, which oppose the maintenance of a body weight that is different from the usual weight. These compensatory changes may account for the poor long-term efficacy of treatments for obesity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                The Lancet
                The Lancet
                Elsevier BV
                01406736
                July 2012
                July 2012
                : 380
                : 9838
                : 258-271
                Article
                10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60735-1
                22818938
                ad07dfa4-b849-46ad-93da-a660b349ae61
                © 2012

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article