Epidemiologists Try Many Ways to Show That Physical Activity Is Good for Seniors' Health and Longevity. Review of Special Issue of Journal of Aging and Physical Activity: The Evergreen Project

1999 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Fozard
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (18) ◽  
pp. 8353
Author(s):  
Daniela Galli

The practice of regular physical activity has been proposed as a determinant in many disciplines, from wellness to physiotherapy; in fact, it reduces the risks of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes [...]


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Karl M. Newell

This paper provides reflections on the progress to date and current status of research in kinesiology. The accompanying overview articles in this special issue of Kinesiology Review show that the contemporary disciplinary/professional foci of kinesiology remain, by and large, the same as the initial research and teaching structures of 50 years ago, as outlined in the inaugural overviews. Nevertheless, within this prevailing disciplinary/professional structure, there have been many new developments in movement-related research, including the juxtaposition of novel alignments and integrations of certain specializations of kinesiology. There is general consensus that the quality and quantity of research in kinesiology have advanced substantially, albeit unevenly, on multiple fronts, both within and between the areas of specialization. The research agenda in kinesiology has benefitted from the growing realization of the centrality of human movement and physical activity in contributing to a healthy lifestyle for individuals and societies.


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Suzanne Kuys ◽  
Jennifer Fleming

The importance of physical activity to promote health is not new. However, the importance of physical activity in people with neurological conditions is increasingly being recognised. With many of the consequences of neurological conditions including difficulties with mobility, balance and strength; it stands to reason that optimising physical activity levels can result in many physical benefits. Physical activity can have many other flow-on effects with benefits seen in reduced mortality, and enhanced community participation and quality of life (Gordon et al., 2004). We are yet to understand the full extent to which physical activity contributes to rehabilitation outcomes; however, there is a growing body of research highlighting that the intensity of activity within rehabilitation environments is often inadequate for therapeutic gains (Kuys, Brauer, & Ada, 2006; McClanachan, Gesch, Wuthapanich, Fleming, & Kuys, 2013; Polese, Scianni, Kuys, Ada, & Teixeira-Salmela, 2014). It is not surprising therefore, that levels of physical activity continue to be poor following reintegration into the community (Morris, MacGillivray, & McFarlane, 2014). It is important that, as health care professionals, we support and encourage physical activity in all our clients. To that end, this special issue of Brain Impairment is devoted to raising the issue of physical activity in people with neurological conditions, and addressing questions such as: Why is physical activity important? How do we measure it? How do we enhance it, and what are the benefits of increased activity? This special issue brings together experts from around the world investigating and promoting physical activity across the continuum of care in various neurological populations including stroke, traumatic brain injury, multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's disease.


2001 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcel Bouffard

This paper is a reaction to Shephard’s (1999) criticism of the July 1998 special issue of the Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly on research assumptions. Shephard’s paper is essentially a defense of the use of the scientific method in adapted physical activity and a critique of his own understanding of the postmodern alternative. He argues that the scientific method is the method adapted physical activity researchers must privilege to know the truth. In this paper, it is argued that Shephard’s description of the scientific method is too general to be useful. In addition, he often confounds traditional modernist issues with postmodernist issues. His depiction of the postmodern alternative is too sketchy to be an adequate critique of the postmodern alternative. This paper highlights key issues unaddressed by Shephard and, as well, outlines some major postmodernist themes so that some of Shephard’s distortions can be corrected.


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 101-102
Author(s):  
Caroline Jane Dodd-Reynolds ◽  
Pernilla Åsenlöf ◽  
Karin Hellström

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document