Category

All Articles

31/05/2021
Lara Gray
In All Articles, Dr Tony Boutagy, Exercise, Nutrition

Expert Q&A: Introducing Dr Tony Boutagy

1) Could you tell us a little about your career and areas of expertise/interest? 

I started working in the fitness and health industry in 1995. Over the years I have worked in a number of related roles, but primarily as a trainer, strength coach and lecturer. My areas of interest are all things body composition, which covers nutrition, strength training, cardiovascular exercise and lifestyle.

 

2) What drew you to this line of work/research in the first place? 

I started work as a trainer while I was studying sports science at university, I immediately found the human body and the way it functioned incredibly fascinating, especially in its application to training and exercise, so my interest was captured and I’ve never looked back.

 

3) How do you look after your own physical and mental wellbeing?

I make exercise and sleep a non-negotiable priority. This means that most other things, other than family, are subordinate to the time I allocate to exercise and keeping regular sleep rhythms. I also cross train over the week, lifting weights, swimming, cycling, running and stretching. This keeps the stimulus and impact diverse and the exercise enjoyable.

 

4) Do you have a favourite post-workout cafe?

In Mosman, The Source Cafe in Raglan St and in the city, Mecca.

 

5) What is one thing you wish people knew about wellbeing? 

Small behaviours which become habits have profound impact on our health and well being. Sleeping 7-9 hours a night. Lifting weights and getting up a sweat with some intervals or a long run. This actions do not require a lot of time or motivation, but when done with consistency, improve our health in a remarkable way.

 

6) What is one of the most ridiculous things you’ve read or seen about wellbeing that you know to be untrue? 

Can I give three?

You can sleep less than 6 hours a night and be healthy.

Carbohydrates make you fat.

Strength training will make me bulky.

 

7) Do you have any favourite books, podcasts or websites on health or wellbeing that you’d recommend?

For a higher level discussion, Peter Attia’s podcast the Drive and Andrew Huberman‘s Lab are extremely good. For practical sports nutrition, I love From Paper to Podium. Matthew Walker’s book Why We Sleep is very good and Michael Hutchinson’s Endure is a great read on endurance exercise.

 

8) What is your top tip for living a healthy and happy life? 

Don’t spend time with boring people.

 

27/05/2021
Lara Gray
In All Articles, Dr Kate Edwards, Exercise, Mental health

Research Review: Mental Health’s Impact on Physical Activity During the COVID-19 Pandemic

In this article, our expert Dr Kate Edwards – Associate Professor in Exercise and Sport Science at the University of Sydney – reviews A mental health paradox: Mental health was both a motivator and barrier to physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic by Marashi et al. 2021 and breaks it down to give us the vital parts we need to know. 

1) What was the high-level summary of the research? 

This study from Canada found worsening of mental health and reduced physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. The proportion of respondents reporting feeling stressed ‘Fairly often’, ‘Often’, or ‘Very often’ increased from 45% pre-pandemic to 67% during the pandemic. Aerobic activity decreased by 22 minutes, and strength -based activity decreased by 32minutes. The authors found that barriers to physical activity shifted from primarily time (from 42% reporting as a barrier down to 16%), to lack of access/equipment (from 5% up to 46%). But results showed an interesting paradox with mental health being both a motivator and barrier to physical activity. People wanted to be active to improve their mental health but found it difficult to be active due to their poor mental health. For example, anxiety relief as a motivation to exercise was reported at greater frequency during the pandemic (+14%), but increased anxiety was also reported as a barrier at greater frequency (+8%).

 

2) How was the study undertaken & what was it trying to measure? 

This simple internet survey was completed by 1669 people, mostly women (82%), and mostly 18-65 years (90.8%). Questionnaires asked about current (during the pandemic) and past (per-pandemic) mental health, stress, physical activity habits and barriers and motivators to physical activity as well as demographics.

 

3) Is there any other research out there that supports these findings or contradicts it? 

Many other studies have shown reductions in physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic across many countries with different lockdown timing and severity, and across all age groups. The relationship between physical activity and mental health is very well established, with studies showing that regular exercise is often more effective than medication at relieving depression symptoms. 

 

4) What’s the key takeaway for us to take from this research?

This study is interesting as it hints that there are divergent effects of the pandemic, for some people the pandemic increased motivators /reduced barriers and they became more active, and their mental health improved. But for others the reverse occurred, physical activity reduced as barriers increased and motivators decreased, and with that their mental health suffered. What we don’t know is why those different effects were seen, and that’s important, because as practitioners we want to know who it’s most important to support.

The research on physical activity effects of the current pandemic are often this style of internet based questionnaire, but they often bring bias. As here, often women are the predominant responders, they are usually highly educated and younger than the general population. This means we are missing a lot of information about other groups in society and need to consider ways to reach those in our work to understand and to support.

18/05/2021
Lara Gray
In All Articles, Dr Nick Chartres, Mental health, Sleep

Research Review: Long Working Hours – The Leading Cause of Death in Workers

In this article, our expert Dr Nick Chartres – Director, Science & Policy, Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, at the University of  California San Francisco – reviews new research by The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) on the impact of long working hours, and breaks it down to give us the vital parts we need to know. 

 

Background

Preventing exposures to occupational risk factors, such as long working hours is critical to the health and safety of workers and should be a priority of governments and the private sector. 

The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates) of the work-related burden of disease and injury for ten different exposures and outcomes (e.g. long working hours and stroke). 

What did the study measure?

The first step of developing these estimates involved conducting systematic reviews (think gold standard reviews) of ALL of the evidence examining the relationship (level of risk) between working hours (a standard, 35-40 hours/week and long, three categories: 41–48, 49–54 and ≥55 h/week) and risk of heart disease and stroke. 

They then calculated the exposed global population by modelling data from more than 2300 surveys collected in 154 countries from 1970-2018. 

Finally they calculated the population-attributable fractions from estimates of the population exposed to long working hours with the risks on the diseases from the systematic reviews. 

What did the study find?

  • A 17% increase in risk of heart disease and a 35% increase in risk of stroke from working more than 55 hours/week when compared to a 35-40 hours/(standard) week.
  • About 9% of the world’s population works more than 55 hours/week.
  • 745,000 deaths from stroke and ischemic heart disease were attributed to long working hours.
  • 72% of deaths occurred among males.
  • Most deaths recorded were among people dying aged 60-79 years, who had worked for > 55 hours/week between the ages of 45-74 years.
  • People living in the Western Pacific (China, South Korea, Australia and Japan among other countries) and Southeast Asia regions were most at risk.

How much weight should we give this research?

A LOT. This is the most rigorous evaluation of the evidence on this topic and cutting edge scientific methods were used to develop the Joint Estimates.

What’s the key takeaway from this research?

With approximately 9% of the world’s population working more than 55 hours/week it makes long working hours the occupational risk factor with the largest estimated burden. Long working hours are killing more people than cancer.

What does this mean for your work/research/industry? 

Governments must introduce and enforce maximum limits on working time. Working hours must become more flexible. The private sector must take collective action to protect the health of its workers.

 

13/05/2021
Lara Gray
In All Articles, Dr Kate Edwards, Exercise, Mental health, Sleep

Research Review: The Mixed Benefits of a Stressor-Free Life

In this article, our expert Dr Kate Edwards – Lecturer in Exercise and Sport Science at the University of Sydney – reviews the mixed benefits of a stressor-free life at Emotion 2021 Charles et al. and breaks it down to give us the vital parts we need to know. 

Background

A life with no stress, that might sound idyllic to some, but new research has shown it comes with some downsides too.

Most stress research has focussed on the effects of lots of stress, and mostly we find that high levels of stress have negative effects on physical and psychological heath. 

But what about no stress at all, would that be the healthiest possible option?

What did the study measure?

In this study researchers asked 2,804 people about their experience every day for a week and identified a group (10% of the whole) who reported no stress events at all. Then they looked at their health. 

What did the study find?

These people were pretty healthy, they reported higher levels of daily well-being (i.e., higher positive affect and lower negative affect) and fewer chronic illnesses than those who reported stressors. 

But they also had less active daily lives and lower levels of cognitive function. So why might a stress-fee life not be the greatest thing? 

Well, in this study the people identified as stress-free had less activity and less social connection. They both offered and received emotional support less often from others and they reported fewer daily positive experiences. 

So, it might be that life was stress free, but also more boring!

It’s not surprising that those with no stressors were less socially active, because it’s known that social interactions are the most common source of daily stress or uplifts. 

How much weight should we give this research?

What this study didn’t measure was participants social network size and they only measured over a one-week period, so more data is needed to generalise the findings further.

What’s the key takeaway from this research?

The finding that cognitive function was lower in stress free people might be related to the lower levels of activity and interaction, the old adage says ‘use it or lose it’ and that could be what’s being found here. If we don’t experience events (both positive and negative) we don’t get to solve problems, resolve an argument or think through the best options, and doing all those things help keep our brains functioning well.

 

03/05/2021
Brad Phillips
In All Articles, Dr Nick Chartres, Exercise, Nutrition

Expert Q&A: Introducing Dr Nick Chartres

1) Could you tell us a little about your career and areas of expertise/interest? 

I currently work in science policy in the United States. I work on environmental health research translation methods and the promotion of evidence-based federal policies to prevent exposures to harmful environmental chemicals.

A lot of my work is monitoring, evaluating and commenting on how the US Environmental Protection Agency regulates chemicals to ensure that they are consistent with the best scientific methods. Think of it like auditing. I look at whether an evaluation of a body of evidence examining a chemical, like asbestos, with a health outcome like cancer, is done accurately. I want to make sure there is no underestimation in the true risk posed by the chemical. This all sounds very esoteric, so why is this important? 

Adopting scientific methods that accurately capture risks is critical to protecting health, particularly for marginalised communities, such as fenceline (a neighbourhood that is immediately adjacent to a company and is directly affected by the noise, odours, chemical emissions, traffic, parking, and operations of the company. Historically, polluting facilities have often been built in or near African American communities) and communities of colour that can face the highest exposures to toxic chemicals and pollutants.

Currently, every year, there’s about 15,000 kgs of chemicals produced for every person in the U.S. and many of these chemicals are persistent and bioaccumulative (so they never break down and just keep piling up in our water, soil and air) and end up in people, who are vulnerable and disproportionately exposed. Our studies have found ubiquitous exposure of pregnant women to more than 43 different industrial chemicals, many with serious health hazards. Babies are born with chemicals in their bodies, and our studies have also found significant links between prenatal exposures and health harms to children like loss of IQ. Leukemia in children has increased by ~40% over the last few decades. I have children and this worries me deeply. 

My other key area of work is examining bias, both methodological and financial conflicts of interest, in research. We know that in multiple areas of research that the presence of industry sponsorship leads to more favourable study outcomes towards the study sponsor, than those without industry sponsorship. So again, why is this important? Well, if the study results we use in things like the dietary guidelines are biased due to food industry sponsorship, then the recommendations that are made may not be valid. So I study this and work on strategies to try minimise its influence in research. I conducted the first in-depth study examining the association between industry sponsorship with the outcomes of primary nutrition research. 

 

2) What drew you to this line of work/research in the first place? 

I have a really deep interest in public health. I have had a privileged life and upbringing so I’m particularly interested in protecting marginalised communities that don’t have access to the same level of health I do. The corporate strategies that industries use to sell products that are harmful to the public’s health, like processed foods, tobacco, chemicals, fossil fuels and alcohol all disproportionately impact low income, indigenous and communities of colour. The products these industries produce are causing the global increase in non communicable diseases and death. The Global Burden of Disease estimates that approximately a third of deaths worldwide are attributable to behavioural risk factors that, at their core, have the consumption of unhealthful products and exposures produced by profit driven commercial entities.

A basic human right is that everyone’s children can grow up in a world that is toxic free, with access to a healthy food system. Unfortunately for 90% of the world that isn’t the case. So I’m interested in trying to make it more equitable. 

 

3) How do you look after your own physical and mental wellbeing?

The $64,000 Question… I’ve always had a pretty good relationship with food and exercise. If I don’t do something physical every morning before work my brain doesn’t work. I’ve always loved meat but as I have gotten older, the more plants I eat, the better I feel. I want to sleep more because that’s when I’m happiest and smartest but it’s not always possible. I try to play with my kids everyday, I’m not good at mindfulness but they make me mindful. I love drinking beer after work on a Thursday (the new Friday since having kids) or Friday night. 

 

4) Do you have a favourite post-workout cafe?

Ha. Yes, my kitchen. I exercise in my garage or go for a run from home so this is where I end up. In San Francisco there’s one place I get a coffee sometimes on a Saturday morning called the Roastery, which is super cool and old school. It has these huge hessian bags of the different coffee beans in the shop, so when you walk in the smell just smacks you. Magic.

 

5) What is one thing you wish people knew about wellbeing? 

That human connection and relationships are the most important thing to a healthy life (although I’m sure many people know this). I think being part of a community, contributing to that community and staying active is critical to anyone’s wellbeing. That’s a partly scientific answer and part anecdotal. Also just eat as many plants as you can. Buy a good recipe book and learn how to make them tasty for you and your kids. You will live much longer if you do.

 

6) What is one of the most ridiculous things you’ve read or seen about wellbeing that you know to be untrue? 

Ha. Other than the Ab Cruncher 2000 (I made that name up but you get the idea) that could melt stomach fat away in only 6 minutes a day! I see bad science everyday in my work. Going back to my work in nutrition I think the most ridiculous thing is that a lot of the food industry, especially Coca Cola have tried to frame the obesity epidemic around a lack of exercise as being the main determinant and not their highly processed food commodities.

They’ve spent a lot of money on funding research, researchers and developing marketing campaigns to confuse the public and persuade policy makers. If we removed highly processed food commodities from our food systems, or regulated their production, we would significantly reduce the number of people that die from diseases related to obesity. The economic impact and thus relief on our health care spending would be astronomical.

 

7) Do you have any favourite books, podcasts or websites on health or wellbeing that you’d recommend?

Marion Nestle Food Politics

Gyorgy Scrinis Nutritionism

Good Mood Dudes Podcast

 

8) What is your top tip for living a healthy and happy life? 

Probably the same as number 5. Being connected with a community and having a purpose (maybe that’s a little too existential for this question!). And eating lots of fruits and vegetables everyday.

 

See some of Nick’s published research here.