Exercise: A Simple Preventative Measure Against Heart Disease

In the modern era, twenty percent of people will suffer a heart attack. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention states America’s leading cause of death as heart disease. Heart disease kills approximately 600,000 people each year and affects 11.8% of the population. This translates to approximately 27.1 million Americans having heart disease. To prevent becoming a statistic, citizens can exercise for 30 minutes a day. Exercise can prevent hypertension, hypercholesterolemia (cholesterol in the blood), and even Type II diabetes. Exercise becomes increasingly more important as technology continues to advance because more and more people will live sedentary lifestyles. It is in everyone’s best interest to exercise for 30 minutes a day to prevent the health risks associated with our increasingly sedentary lifestyle.

Over the course of nine years, the amount of cardiologists who prescribed routine exercise as a preventative measure against a second heart attack for patients who had suffered from a heart attack nearly quadrupled, rising from 24% to 83% from 1970 to 1979. The spike in the amount of prescribed exercise programs was onset by studies that showed the routines to be safe for post-heart attack patients, and preferable to alternative measures that could result in the absence of exercise, such as a costly second bypass surgery. This information may seem irrelevant to you; however, exercise not only prevents second heart attacks, it lowers the chances of heart disease and other health risks that can lead to heart attacks. As stated before, there is only a 1-in-5 chance of suffering from a heart attack, but is that chance one you really want to take when your life could be at stake if you are the one of the five?

Hypertension is not directly responsible for heart disease, but if left untreated for long periods of time, it can be detrimental to the cardiovascular system. Those who have chronic hypertension face irreversible damage to their blood vessels and some vital organs, mainly the heart. Hypertension can be alleviated or even averted by exercising. A study by a clinic in Dallas showed a risk factor of 1.52 of developing hypertension between people who aren’t physically fit versus those who are in good physical condition. This is just one of the beneficial results of exercising on a daily basis.

Hypercholesterolemia is becoming quite a problem for many Americans. We all know that too much cholesterol in the blood leads to buildups that can block arteries and induce heart attacks. Most of us also know that there are both a “good” and a “bad” type of cholesterol. The good type of cholesterol is called high-density lipid (HDL). The bad type of cholesterol is called low-density lipid (LDL). LDL levels are directly proportional to heart disease whereas HDL levels are inversely proportional to the onset of heart disease, meaning that the higher the level of HDL cholesterol in the blood, the less likely the person is to suffer from heart disease. Exercise has been shown to have a strong correlation with high HDL levels, and is substituted for diet change or medication for people with high LDL cholesterol levels.

People with either Type I or Type II diabetes can receive beneficial effects from daily exercise as well. For those with Type I diabetes, exercise has been shown to increase insulin sensitivity. This is a good thing for Type I diabetics, as their bodies do not naturally produce insulin. For those with Type II Diabetes, an exercise program is an alternative to insulin treatment. If overweight Type II diabetics exercise regularly with an aim of weight loss, the combined effects of weight loss and increased activity levels are effective replacements for insulin treatments. Exercise can also be a preventative measure for overweight Type II diabetes. If everyone exercised routinely, the percentages of people who develop the condition would drastically decrease.

Obesity is now widely considered an epidemic in America. Roughly 34% of Americans age 20 and older are now considered obese. Obese people are among the most likely to suffer from heart disease. Weight gain and weight loss play important roles in the onset and prevention of heart disease. It has been shown that for each 10% increase in weight, the chance of developing heart disease increases by approximately 30%. As for weight loss, with each 10% weight reduction, the chance of suffering from heart disease decreases by about 20%. Exercise and weight reduction go hand-in-hand.

Heart disease is a growing issue within the United States, yet it is one that is surprisingly preventable. With exercise, one can lower their chances of suffering from heart disease and other factors that cause its onset. All it takes is 30 minutes of exercise per day for a healthier you. Everyone should be able to find 30 minutes in their day, no matter how hectic, to prevent themselves from being the one out of five.

"Cutting Calories" is it Really a Good Idea?

(http://www.howtoloseitfast.com/images/scalesfat.jpg)

            Obese bodies are extremely efficient when compared with “lean” bodies.  An obese body expends less energy while performing daily activities than a “lean” body expends.  Studies show that obese people have a lower resting metabolic rate (RMR) than thin individuals.  This difference means that overweight individuals actually save more calories each day than lean individuals.  The high efficiency level in the obese population caused a calorie restriction study between obese and lean individuals.  This study showed that obese individuals’ resting metabolic rate decreased by about 15%, making them more efficient!  This increased efficiency counteracts the weight loss that is expected to occur (Perkins et al, 293).  Obese individuals should strive to obtain a favorable nutrient balance in their diets instead of restricting calories to reach their desired weight loss goals because calorie restriction makes the body conserve more energy, not lose more weight.              

Maintaining your bodyweight depends on the balance of energy intake and energy usage.  This is understood as the balance on the calories you ingest and the calories you burn.  This relates directly to each person’s metabolic rate.  According to "The Relevance of Metabolic Rate in Behavioral Medicine Research,” “metabolic rate is the rate at which the body converts nutrients into energy, or the rate at which the body burns calories.”  Even more important, a person’s resting metabolic rate is the rate they burn calories while keeping effort exertion to a minimum.  Thus a person with a slow metabolic rate is expected to easily gain weight because calorie consumption will exceed the calories that are burned.

“Cutting calories” is a common plan that often fails to combat a slow metabolism.  Many people who are overweight blame their body composition on their slow metabolism.  Many of these overweight individuals try to change their diet by “cutting calories.”  Initially, they have great results, but soon they hit a barrier that they cannot penetrate.  The reason their diet stops working is because “cutting calories” has been shown to decrease a person’s resting metabolic rate.  This makes their body even more efficient since the body is now conserving calories.  This will result in the body maintaining its weight rather than losing excess weight.

The difference in resting metabolic rate from person to person is someone’s caloric efficiency.  Some people will be more efficient than others and struggle to lose weight.  Losing weight depends on the nutrient composition that is consumed and routinely exercising.  Trying to lose weight by starving yourself only results in your body conserving the calories you consume.  This odd quality of your resting metabolic rate should be understood when trying to lose weight.

Citation:

            Perkins, Kenneth A. et al. "The Relevance of Metabolic Rate in Behavioral Medicine Research." Behavioral Modification 11.3 (1987): 287-307. Web.

              

Training With Aggressive Children

Currently, 42% of child welfare recipients suffer from behavioral disorders. Today, the child welfare system has dramatic effects on the children within the program. Since these children come from conflicted homes, many people expect them to have a behavioral disorder. To try and solve this problem, German child psychologists and psychotherapists conducted a study to test whether TAC (training with aggressive children) affects children in the Center of Child and Youth Welfare. Dennis Nitkowski, Franz Petermann, Peter Büttner, Carsten Krause-Leipoldt and Ulrike Petermann predict that the child welfare system paired with TAC causes less behavioral problems as opposed to solely a child welfare system.

When a child is suspected of being abused or neglected the Child Protective Services are forced to investigate. A child proven to be abused or neglected is taken and placed in an out-of-home care facility. In Germany, parents that are not suitable to care for their children are protected under the German code of social law which “guarantees parents or caregivers support”(Nitkowski, F.Petermann, Büttner, Krause-Leipoldt and U.Petermann 2009). There are three specific ways that the welfare program will intervene. On the first level, the program will offer advice to struggling families. On the second level, the program will offer daycare groups. At this point, the children have not been taken from the household. On the third level, the children are taken to a residential home since the parents are deemed insufficient.

“Behavioral psychology is a branch of psychology that focuses on the study and alteration of people’s behaviors, including their actions, emotions and thoughts” (“What Is Behavioral Psychology?”). This specific study evaluates children with two different types of aggressive behavior, oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder. Oppositional defiant disorder is mostly prevalent in younger children. This behavior causes children to be extremely defiant, angry, irritable and vindictive. Conduct disorder can occur during childhood or adolescence and is a little more extreme than oppositional defiant disorder. This behavior causes children to behave aggressively towards people, animals and property. Some children with this disorder also tend to steal. Because children with these disorders are prevalent within the child welfare system, a study needed to be conducted to solve these behavioral problems.

The German psychologists and psychotherapists took 24 children from ages seven to eleven that were already in the German Child and Youth Welfare Institution. These children were divided into two equal groups of twelve. One group was a combined intervention of TAC and the child welfare system whereas the other group was a control group of just children from the welfare system without any type of behavioral fixing tactic. TAC or Training Aggressive Children is a behavior modification for aggressive children. This training teaches children how to adapt a different mindset when put in conflicting situations. The children are taught how to use self-control in these situations instead of acting out and being disruptive. The children are taught in individual and group therapy sessions and the parents are given counseling.

Throughout the experiment the children were measured using four different techniques: psychiatric diagnosis, psychopathological syndromes, aggressive reaction pattern, behavioral strengths and difficulties. The psychiatric diagnosis used was called Kinder-DIPS. This was a clinical interview done in the German language which would determine different types of psychiatric disorders within the children. The psychopathological syndrome consisted of a child behavior checklist and teacher report form. The Child Behavior Checklist was a questionnaire for parents to complete which allowed parents to tell if their children had symptoms for specific syndromes. The Teacher Report Form measured behavior problems in the classroom. The Aggressive Reaction Pattern was a questionnaire for the children. A child was given different scenarios to read and had to choose how he or she would respond. Based on the answer doctors could see if the child depicted a socially accepted or aggressive behavior. The Strengths and Difficulties questionnaire measured “emotional symptoms, hyperactivity/inattention, peer relationship problems and prosocial behavior” (Nitkowski, F.Petermann, Büttner, Krause-Leipoldt and U.Petermann 2009).

After five months of TAC paired with the German Child and Youth Welfare Institution, psychologists, psychotherapists and parents noticed a decrease in social and conduct issues within the children. Teachers also noted that the children were more socially acceptable in the classroom and knew how to handle conflicting situations. On the other hand, the control group of children continued to have their behavioral disorders. Behavioral disorders within our youth will always be a serious issue. This study was able to find a way to decrease these behavioral disorders and make the children more socially acceptable. All children suffering from behavioral disorders in child welfare systems should be exposed to TAC; this will allow them to better themselves and have better relationships with the people surrounding them.

Works Cited

Nitkowski, Dennis, Franz Petermann, Peter Büttner, Carsten Krause-Leipoldt, and Ulrike Petermann. "Behavior Modification." 1 July 2009. Web. 14 Mar. 2012. <http://bmo.sagepub.com/content/33/4/474.full.pdf html>.

"What Is Behavioral Psychology?" Degreedirectory.org. Web. 14 Mar. 2012. <http://degreedirectory.org/articles/What_is_Behavioral_Psychology.html>.

Elephants In Australia?

“On 7 February 2009 — now known as Black Saturday — a massive firestorm consumed more than 400,000 hectares in southern Australia.” Australia’s terrain is very prone to suffer from wildfires on more occasions than expected. Order and restoration is desperately needed within Australia’s ecosystem. The article, “Conservation: Bring Elephants to Australia,” suggests that introducing an “über-herbivore” will aid in controlling the flammable grasses and its spread across the Australia. Such über-herbivore is later named to be the elephant. Before deciding to introduce a mammal that is not an Australian native to deal with the increasing wildfires that are occurring, the elephants’ normal habitat must be considered as well as their diet and any issues that might arise with the Australia’s population.

While the author did not state specifically which type of elephants, African or Asian, should be introduced to Australia’s continent, it is important to determine risks that are involved with either species. African savannah elephants are found in savannah zones, areas such as western and central Africa, while Asian elephants are found in countries such as Sri Lanka, India and China. The typical climate in the savannah biome ranges from 68 to 86 degrees Fahrenheit and Asia has a tropical-hot, humid climate. Taking these climates into consideration, Australia’s climate must now be examined; survival of the elephants must be considered as well. Australia’s climate is 40% desert with only the eastern and northern areas having temperate weather. Thus, regardless of which species is introduced to Australia, there must be some type of physical boundary that exists in order to prevent elephants going into areas that they are not equipped to survive in. Elephants are already considered as an endangered species and removing them from their native areas may provoke a negative response killing even more elephants.

“80% of an elephant’s day is spent feeding; [consuming] grasses, small plants, bushes, fruit, twigs, tree bark, and roots.” The Nature article, “Conservation: Bring Elephants to Australia” says that a major “source of fuel” for Australia’s wildfires is gamba grass, a giant African grass that has “invaded” Australia’s savannas. While it can be understood that an animal large enough to consume the gamba grass needs to be introduced to Australia, that animal’s diet needs to be carefully examined. Being that the gamba grass, which is the main issue surrounding the wildfires, is an African plant, will Asian elephants respond differently than African elephants? Even if both the Asian and African elephants eat the gamba grass along with all the other vegetation that Australia has to offer, what will be their limit? As earlier stated, elephants spend majority of their day eating grasses. If elephants are introduced to Australia’s continent, there must be some type of barrier present that not only prevents them from going into areas that they are not equipped to survive in but also areas that can not supply their eating habits. Caution must be exercised in order to make sure that there is still vegetation left once elephants are done feeding.

If there are no precautions made surrounding the possibility that the elephants may eat more than expected, then Australia may be presented with yet another problem: barren land. The elephants, depending on how many are introduced to Australia, will eat and eat and eat to the point where vegetation will be lacking in Australia. This may provide even more fuel for the wildfires that occur in Australia. The dry conditions will make conditions even more favorable for wildfires to spark, destroying the rest of Australia’s vegetation.

Since 1990, incidents have been reported including “15 human deaths and more than 135 injuries to humans [due to elephants]”. This data is representative just for elephants that are located in the United States. The only elephants that exist in the United States are those that are held in captivity, whether it is in a zoo or in the circus. If there are so many accidents present in the United States with elephants that are held in captivity, imagine how many incidents there could be with elephants that are free to roam wherever they please in Australia. If the gamba grass that the article stated as being a major source of fuel for the wildfires is anywhere close to urbanization, then elephants cannot be the chosen “über-herbivore” that the article wishes to introduce to Australia.

Elephants that are constantly surrounded by bright lights and the constant roar of the city will become agitated and release their frustrations to near by buildings or even people. Elephants are massive, powerful animals that must be respected and humans must cautiously coexist with them in their own, natural habitats, not introduced habitats that are proposed solutions to fix wildfires.

Australia’s continent is constantly suffering from wildfires, due to the masive spread of gamba grass. Gamba grass is an African plant that is massive and most Australian herbivores are not big enough to consume it. This is the main reason that the Nature article suggests that elephants be introduced to Australia; they are big enough to consume the mass amount of gamba grass that is invading Australia. However, other important factors must be examined including the elephants’ diet and habitat, as well as concerns that Australia’s population might need to consider. Because of the threats that elephants pose to Australia’s population and vegetation, they are not the correct choice to try to eliminate wildfires that are rampant in Australia. More consideration should be placed behind the idea of bringing an “über-herbivore” into Australia in order to the animal that best fits the needs of Australia and that will also keep the animal safe and comfortable.

Sources:
http://www.mediapeta.com/peta/pdf/Elephant-Incident-List-US-only.pdf
http://www.seaworld.org/animal-info/info-books/elephants/diet.htm