Japan, Seeking Trim Waists, Measures Millions
- Thread starter tjl
- Start date
I saw the TV program 2 weeks ago(in Japan). Pretty much people complaining about invading rights and such. Aka why should the goverment care. Lotsa perople praising this too though.
As a person I think its annoying that someone should bother your lifestyle.
But if I was the goverment, I understand, longterm this will lead to a healty population as well as decreased $$$ spending on your population health concerns.
ironically looking at that picture I just wanted to say sumo are very athletic and extremely flexible, also there was studies done on them, and they are in a good health zone suprisingly.
As a person I think its annoying that someone should bother your lifestyle.
But if I was the goverment, I understand, longterm this will lead to a healty population as well as decreased $$$ spending on your population health concerns.
ironically looking at that picture I just wanted to say sumo are very athletic and extremely flexible, also there was studies done on them, and they are in a good health zone suprisingly.
Wouldn't that be true for all (not just asian) people, at least when considered on an individual basis (as opposed to population studies where the small number of "overweight with muscle instead of fat" people fall into the noise)?
Some studies indicate that waist / height, rather than just waist, may be a better indicator of health:
Wouldn't waist size correlate much better to fatness than BMI, in the case of people who have more than the usual amount of muscle (as well as those who are not that muscular)? Some people are "overweight" but not overfat, while others who are "overweight" are not as overfat as would be implied by how much they weigh (i.e. some excess fat, but also some extra muscle).
Also, 39" is a rather large waistline for most men.
I understand the invasion of privacy concerns and whatnot, but Japan is not too far behind the US in the obesity race (the Aussies are actually leading the race). According to several studies and news reports, current youth generations are not expected to live for as many years as their parent generations here in the states due to cardiovascular disease. That completely crazy.
I think that it is somewhat good that the Japanese may actually be proactively trying to do something about it, because while I understand that a lot of the responsibility for managing fitness and weight control is on the person or the parents of young children (of which it is increasingly clear that their is simply a lack of effort on a large scale), the government here in the states continues to cut programs that would give young children a better shot at maintaining their weight early.
Programs and classes such as P.E., recess, and after school activities continue to be cut. P.E. in particular needs to go through a paradigm shift, transforming it into a fitness curriculum based class in which children can initially be exposed to physical fitness training basics and human anatomy and exercise physiology. This could give P.E. a little more backing when it comes up in some schools for being cut. In the end though, schools here in the US need the funding so that physical activity based programs are not so readily being used as sacrificial lambs, and parents need to take a vest interest in the physical health and well-being of their children in this matter. Feeding a child fast food 3 times a week and allowing children to eat everything they want leading to childhood obesity severely hampers a child's ability to grow into and develop a good training program with lifelong habits.
I think that it is somewhat good that the Japanese may actually be proactively trying to do something about it, because while I understand that a lot of the responsibility for managing fitness and weight control is on the person or the parents of young children (of which it is increasingly clear that their is simply a lack of effort on a large scale), the government here in the states continues to cut programs that would give young children a better shot at maintaining their weight early.
Programs and classes such as P.E., recess, and after school activities continue to be cut. P.E. in particular needs to go through a paradigm shift, transforming it into a fitness curriculum based class in which children can initially be exposed to physical fitness training basics and human anatomy and exercise physiology. This could give P.E. a little more backing when it comes up in some schools for being cut. In the end though, schools here in the US need the funding so that physical activity based programs are not so readily being used as sacrificial lambs, and parents need to take a vest interest in the physical health and well-being of their children in this matter. Feeding a child fast food 3 times a week and allowing children to eat everything they want leading to childhood obesity severely hampers a child's ability to grow into and develop a good training program with lifelong habits.
Physical education is a joke. Weight lifting, nutrition, the concept of caloric deficit/surplus and how weight can be managed were never even mentioned in any of the PE classes I had to take.
They weren't in mine either, not until I was able to take "condition" in high school. I'm merely pointing out that these concepts could easily be added into current phys ed curriculum, giving P.E. courses stronger academic (and grading) basis while continuing to teach entry level sports.
Teachers wouldn't have to take all of the fun out of the class, but the class would become more meaningful, and more useful.
yeah, that'd be a good idea. It'd have to be the right info though. They tried teaching us proper weight lifting technique in middle school. Didn't work out. I never would havel ost any weight taking advice from P.E. teachers
That's why P.E. teachers, like teachers of other subject areas, should have to certify or have specifically studied that area... individuals who have graduated with degrees in kinesiology, exercise physiology, or physical education degrees, so that the aren't just teaching something out of a book that they know nothing about, but have actually committed themselves to those fields of study.
Unfortunately people with those kinds of degrees usually aim for higher paying jobs.
Honestly, sometimes I wonder if the P.E. teachers I had or not even went to college.
That may have used to been the constant truth before, but now the majority of kines programs in the country have a branches dedicated to physical education, in which you either become a teacher with a secondary focus as a coach for school sports or continue to advanced education for research and professorship.
In the end, you're partially right. Teachers are woefully underpaid. They should be paid more, as it's an important and difficult job; at the same time they should all be required to update their education and certification like many other professions.
In the end, you're partially right. Teachers are woefully underpaid. They should be paid more, as it's an important and difficult job; at the same time they should all be required to update their education and certification like many other professions.
agreed.
It's a shame that teachers (at least wherE I go to school) are all paid essentially the same. Some "Life Skills" teacher who has been teaching for 15 years, is paid the same amount as an Advanced palcement science teacher who has taught for the same number of years.
Maybe if there was some sort of income incentive to being a good teacher and having successful students, there would be much greater success in the public school system. Otherwise, it's up to ambitious students themselves to teach themselves, whether it's about math or fitness.
I agree that there should be an incentive system, but I think it should be based solely on the ability to teach. If incentives were based upon teaching a certain subject, you would most likely end up with a majority of teachers trained for the subjects that pay the most. As there would be a surplus of these teachers, and a demand for teachers for non-incentive classes, it's likely that you'd end up with (science/math/ap/etc) teachers teaching classes that they are not formally trained to teach, which could very easily result in further sub-standard teaching practice for those classes.
Instead incentives should be based on success rates of students in classes and on international status testing, and peer review.
I'm not a fan of tenure either, because I think that job security on that kind of level leads to careless teachers, but that's a completely different argument altogether.
But again part of this goes back on the parents, in the classes and in fighting obesity.
Instead incentives should be based on success rates of students in classes and on international status testing, and peer review.
I'm not a fan of tenure either, because I think that job security on that kind of level leads to careless teachers, but that's a completely different argument altogether.
But again part of this goes back on the parents, in the classes and in fighting obesity.
that makes sense, but I mean there are just some subjects that aren't as important as others, especially in today's society. (Life skills, in my opinion, can be a curriculm that is dropped entirely, as most students should definitely already have these basic skills).
Eh, anyway, as to the original issue of japan seeking trimmer waists. I read an article of something like that being required in some city in the U.S. I don't know how well that would work here, as many people are unwilling to suffer the consequences of not meeting such a health requirement, and whatever politician advocating such measures is unlikely to be re-elected as there are far less healthy people than unhealthy people (from what I see anyway).
Also, you have to wonder. What's more motivating for someone to maintain their own health (assuming that being healthy isn't motivation enough ), punishment? or reward?
I know that some healthcare plans are moving toward increased premiums for those that cannot meet certain requirements, such not being able to maintain a healthy weight or not smoking, based on the rational that these individuals end up driving up the cost of health care because of chronic, lifelong health problems. In the short term I think that this is the only mildly workable form of reward (for those that take care of themselves) and punishment (for those that do not).
Unfortunately, when the motivation comes from without, it is often not as effective as when it comes from within. And that is really the only long term solution that I can think of, creating a society that values physical fitness and health over the fast-food, immediate gratification life-style (not just for the 6-pack perfect body mentality, but for the true health benefits), and unfortunately I don't see that happening in the near future.
Unfortunately, when the motivation comes from without, it is often not as effective as when it comes from within. And that is really the only long term solution that I can think of, creating a society that values physical fitness and health over the fast-food, immediate gratification life-style (not just for the 6-pack perfect body mentality, but for the true health benefits), and unfortunately I don't see that happening in the near future.
Ehh... Natural selection, I suppose.
Doesn't really work that well when the diseases and increased risk of early death from obesity, smoking, etc. tend to strike after one's reproductive years.