76 research outputs found

    Sedentarismo, exercício físico e doenças crônicas

    Get PDF
    A inatividade física é fortemente relacionada à incidência e severidade de um vasto número de doenças crônicas. Assim sendo, o exercício físico torna-se uma das ferramentas terapêuticas mais importantes na promoção de saúde e o profissional de Educação Física, o responsável por sua ampla disseminação. Nesse artigo, discorremos sobre as seguintes questões: Qual o impacto - biológico e socioeconômico - da inatividade física na saúde dos indivíduos?; 2) Qual o impacto da inserção da atividade física vida dos indivíduos?; 3) Qual o papel da profissional de Educação Física na promoção de saúde e quais os desafios que a Educação Física, enquanto ciência ("lato sensu") e profissão, deve enfrentar nas próximas décadas? Tendo como ponto de partida o papel da inatividade física sobre a etiologia das doenças crônicas, pretendemos revelar o imenso potencial do exercício físico como agente terapêutico.Physical inactivity is strongly related to the incidence and severity of a number of chronic diseases. Hence, physical exercise emerges as one of the most important therapeutic tool to health promotion, with the Physical Education professional being the responsible for disseminating it widely. In this manuscript, we will discuss the following questions: 1) What is the social and biological impact of physical inactivity on overall health? 2) What is the impact of physical activity on people's lives? 3) What is the role of the Physical Education professional in the promotion of health and what are the challenges that Physical Education Discipline, as a science ("lato sensu") and profession, will face in the next decades? Having in mind the role of physical inactivity upon the etiology of chronic diseases, we intend to reveal the large potential of physical exercise as a therapeutic agent

    What is the Oxygen Isotope Composition of Venus? The Scientific Case for Sample Return from Earth’s “Sister” Planet

    Get PDF
    Venus is Earth’s closest planetary neighbour and both bodies are of similar size and mass. As a consequence, Venus is often described as Earth’s sister planet. But the two worlds have followed very different evolutionary paths, with Earth having benign surface conditions, whereas Venus has a surface temperature of 464 °C and a surface pressure of 92 bar. These inhospitable surface conditions may partially explain why there has been such a dearth of space missions to Venus in recent years.The oxygen isotope composition of Venus is currently unknown. However, this single measurement (Δ17O) would have first order implications for our understanding of how large terrestrial planets are built. Recent isotopic studies indicate that the Solar System is bimodal in composition, divided into a carbonaceous chondrite (CC) group and a non-carbonaceous (NC) group. The CC group probably originated in the outer Solar System and the NC group in the inner Solar System. Venus comprises 41% by mass of the inner Solar System compared to 50% for Earth and only 5% for Mars. Models for building large terrestrial planets, such as Earth and Venus, would be significantly improved by a determination of the Δ17O composition of a returned sample from Venus. This measurement would help constrain the extent of early inner Solar System isotopic homogenisation and help to identify whether the feeding zones of the terrestrial planets were narrow or wide.Determining the Δ17O composition of Venus would also have significant implications for our understanding of how the Moon formed. Recent lunar formation models invoke a high energy impact between the proto-Earth and an inner Solar System-derived impactor body, Theia. The close isotopic similarity between the Earth and Moon is explained by these models as being a consequence of high-temperature, post-impact mixing. However, if Earth and Venus proved to be isotopic clones with respect to Δ17O, this would favour the classic, lower energy, giant impact scenario.We review the surface geology of Venus with the aim of identifying potential terrains that could be targeted by a robotic sample return mission. While the potentially ancient tessera terrains would be of great scientific interest, the need to minimise the influence of venusian weathering favours the sampling of young basaltic plains. In terms of a nominal sample mass, 10 g would be sufficient to undertake a full range of geochemical, isotopic and dating studies. However, it is important that additional material is collected as a legacy sample. As a consequence, a returned sample mass of at least 100 g should be recovered.Two scenarios for robotic sample return missions from Venus are presented, based on previous mission proposals. The most cost effective approach involves a “Grab and Go” strategy, either using a lander and separate orbiter, or possibly just a stand-alone lander. Sample return could also be achieved as part of a more ambitious, extended mission to study the venusian atmosphere. In both scenarios it is critical to obtain a surface atmospheric sample to define the extent of atmosphere-lithosphere oxygen isotopic disequilibrium. Surface sampling would be carried out by multiple techniques (drill, scoop, “vacuum-cleaner” device) to ensure success. Surface operations would take no longer than one hour.Analysis of returned samples would provide a firm basis for assessing similarities and differences between the evolution of Venus, Earth, Mars and smaller bodies such as Vesta. The Solar System provides an important case study in how two almost identical bodies, Earth and Venus, could have had such a divergent evolution. Finally, Venus, with its runaway greenhouse atmosphere, may provide data relevant to the understanding of similar less extreme processes on Earth. Venus is Earth’s planetary twin and deserves to be better studied and understood. In a wider context, analysis of returned samples from Venus would provide data relevant to the study of exoplanetary systems

    Repositioning of the global epicentre of non-optimal cholesterol

    Get PDF
    High blood cholesterol is typically considered a feature of wealthy western countries1,2. However, dietary and behavioural determinants of blood cholesterol are changing rapidly throughout the world3 and countries are using lipid-lowering medications at varying rates. These changes can have distinct effects on the levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and non-HDL cholesterol, which have different effects on human health4,5. However, the trends of HDL and non-HDL cholesterol levels over time have not been previously reported in a global analysis. Here we pooled 1,127 population-based studies that measured blood lipids in 102.6 million individuals aged 18 years and older to estimate trends from 1980 to 2018 in mean total, non-HDL and HDL cholesterol levels for 200 countries. Globally, there was little change in total or non-HDL cholesterol from 1980 to 2018. This was a net effect of increases in low- and middle-income countries, especially in east and southeast Asia, and decreases in high-income western countries, especially those in northwestern Europe, and in central and eastern Europe. As a result, countries with the highest level of non-HDL cholesterol—which is a marker of cardiovascular risk—changed from those in western Europe such as Belgium, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and Malta in 1980 to those in Asia and the Pacific, such as Tokelau, Malaysia, The Philippines and Thailand. In 2017, high non-HDL cholesterol was responsible for an estimated 3.9 million (95% credible interval 3.7 million–4.2 million) worldwide deaths, half of which occurred in east, southeast and south Asia. The global repositioning of lipid-related risk, with non-optimal cholesterol shifting from a distinct feature of high-income countries in northwestern Europe, north America and Australasia to one that affects countries in east and southeast Asia and Oceania should motivate the use of population-based policies and personal interventions to improve nutrition and enhance access to treatment throughout the world.</p

    Repositioning of the global epicentre of non-optimal cholesterol

    Get PDF
    High blood cholesterol is typically considered a feature of wealthy western countries1,2. However, dietary and behavioural determinants of blood cholesterol are changing rapidly throughout the world3 and countries are using lipid-lowering medications at varying rates. These changes can have distinct effects on the levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and non-HDL cholesterol, which have different effects on human health4,5. However, the trends of HDL and non-HDL cholesterol levels over time have not been previously reported in a global analysis. Here we pooled 1,127 population-based studies that measured blood lipids in 102.6 million individuals aged 18 years and older to estimate trends from 1980 to 2018 in mean total, non-HDL and HDL cholesterol levels for 200 countries. Globally, there was little change in total or non-HDL cholesterol from 1980 to 2018. This was a net effect of increases in low- and middle-income countries, especially in east and southeast Asia, and decreases in high-income western countries, especially those in northwestern Europe, and in central and eastern Europe. As a result, countries with the highest level of non-HDL cholesterol�which is a marker of cardiovascular risk�changed from those in western Europe such as Belgium, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and Malta in 1980 to those in Asia and the Pacific, such as Tokelau, Malaysia, The Philippines and Thailand. In 2017, high non-HDL cholesterol was responsible for an estimated 3.9 million (95 credible interval 3.7 million�4.2 million) worldwide deaths, half of which occurred in east, southeast and south Asia. The global repositioning of lipid-related risk, with non-optimal cholesterol shifting from a distinct feature of high-income countries in northwestern Europe, north America and Australasia to one that affects countries in east and southeast Asia and Oceania should motivate the use of population-based policies and personal interventions to improve nutrition and enhance access to treatment throughout the world. © 2020, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited

    Rising rural body-mass index is the main driver of the global obesity epidemic in adults

    Get PDF
    Body-mass index (BMI) has increased steadily in most countries in parallel with a rise in the proportion of the population who live in cities 1,2 . This has led to a widely reported view that urbanization is one of the most important drivers of the global rise in obesity 3�6 . Here we use 2,009 population-based studies, with measurements of height and weight in more than 112 million adults, to report national, regional and global trends in mean BMI segregated by place of residence (a rural or urban area) from 1985 to 2017. We show that, contrary to the dominant paradigm, more than 55 of the global rise in mean BMI from 1985 to 2017�and more than 80 in some low- and middle-income regions�was due to increases in BMI in rural areas. This large contribution stems from the fact that, with the exception of women in sub-Saharan Africa, BMI is increasing at the same rate or faster in rural areas than in cities in low- and middle-income regions. These trends have in turn resulted in a closing�and in some countries reversal�of the gap in BMI between urban and rural areas in low- and middle-income countries, especially for women. In high-income and industrialized countries, we noted a persistently higher rural BMI, especially for women. There is an urgent need for an integrated approach to rural nutrition that enhances financial and physical access to healthy foods, to avoid replacing the rural undernutrition disadvantage in poor countries with a more general malnutrition disadvantage that entails excessive consumption of low-quality calories. © 2019, The Author(s)

    Advancing measurement of diabetes at the population level.

    No full text
    PurposeThe measurement and estimation of diabetes in populations guides resource allocation, health priorities, and can influence practice and future research. To provide a critical reflection on current diabetes surveillance, we provide in-depth discussion about how upstream determinants, prevalence, incidence, and downstream impacts of diabetes are measured in the USA, and the challenges in obtaining valid, accurate, and precise estimates.FindingsCurrent estimates of the burden of diabetes risk are obtained through national surveys, health systems data, registries, and administrative data. Several methodological nuances influence accurate estimates of the population-level burden of diabetes, including biases in selection and response rates, representation of population subgroups, accuracy of reporting of diabetes status, variation in biochemical testing, and definitions of diabetes used by investigators. Technological innovations and analytical approaches (e.g., data linkage to outcomes data like the National Death Index) may help address some, but not all, of these concerns, and additional methodological advances and validation are still needed.SummaryCurrent surveillance efforts are imperfect, but measures consistently collected and analyzed over several decades enable useful comparisons over time. In addition, we proposed that focused subsampling, use of technology, data linkages, and innovative sensitivity analyses can substantially advance population-level estimation

    Cost-effectiveness of the new 2018 American college of physicians glycemic control guidance statements among US adults with type 2 diabetes.

    No full text
    Objectives: This study aims to estimate the national impact and cost-effectiveness of the 2018 American College of Physicians (ACP) guidance statements compared to the status quo. Methods: Survey data from the 2011-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination were used to generate a national representative sample of individuals with diagnosed type 2 diabetes in the United States. Individuals with A1c &lt;6.5% on antidiabetic medications are recommended to deintensify their A1c level to 7.0% to 8.0% (group 1); individuals with A1c 6.5% to 8.0% and a life expectancy of &lt;10 years are recommended to deintensify their A1c level &gt;8.0% (group 2); and individuals with A1c &gt;8.0% and a life expectancy of &gt;10 years are recommended to intensify their A1c level to 7.0% to 8.0% (group 3). We used a Markov-based simulation model to evaluate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of following the ACP recommended A1c level. Results: 14.41 million (58.1%) persons with diagnosed type 2 diabetes would be affected by the new guidance statements. Treatment deintensification would lead to a saving of 363600perqualityadjustedlifeyear(QALY)lostforgroup1andasavingof363 600 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) lost for group 1 and a saving of 118 300 per QALY lost for group 2. Intensifying treatment for group 3 would lead to an additional cost of 44600perQALYgain.Nationally,theimplementationoftheguidancewouldadd3.2millionlifeyearsand1.1millionQALYsandreducehealthcarecostsby44 600 per QALY gain. Nationally, the implementation of the guidance would add 3.2 million life-years and 1.1 million QALYs and reduce healthcare costs by 47.7 billion compared to the status quo. Conclusions: Implementing the new ACP guidance statements would affect a large number of persons with type 2 diabetes nationally. The new guidance is cost-effective

    Implementing lifestyle change interventions to prevent type 2 diabetes in US medicaid programs: Cost effectiveness, and cost, health, and health equity impact.

    No full text
    Background Lifestyle change interventions (LCI) for prevention of type 2 diabetes are covered by Medicare, but rarely by US Medicaid programs that constitute the largest public payer system in the USA. We estimate the long-term health and economic implications of implementing LCIs in state Medicaid programs. Methods We compared LCIs modeled after the intervention of the Diabetes Prevention Program versus routine care advice using a decision analytic simulation model and best available data from representative surveys, cohort studies, Medicaid claims data, and the published literature. Target population were non-disability-based adult Medicaid beneficiaries aged 19-64 years at high risk for type 2 diabetes (BMI &gt;= 25 kg/m(2)and HbA1c &gt;= 5.7% or fasting plasma glucose &gt;= 110 mg/dl) from eight study states (Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, New York, Oklahoma) that represent around 50% of the US Medicaid population. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) measured in cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, and population cost and health impact were modeled from a healthcare system perspective and a narrow Medicaid perspective. Results In the eight selected study states, 1.9 million or 18% of non-disability-based adult Medicaid beneficiaries would belong to the eligible high-risk target population - 66% of them Hispanics or non-Hispanic black. In the base-case analysis, the aggregated 5- and 10-year ICERs are US226k/QALYandUS226 k/QALY and US34 k/QALY; over 25 years, the intervention dominates routine care. The 5-, 10-, and 25-year probabilities that the ICERs are below US50k(US50 k (US100 k)/QALY are 6% (15%), 59% (82%) and 96% (100%). From a healthcare system perspective, initial program investments of US800perpersonwouldbeoffsetafter13yearsandtranslatetoUS800 per person would be offset after 13 years and translate to US548 of savings after 25 years. With a 20% LCI uptake in eligible beneficiaries, this would translate to upfront costs of US300million,prevent260thousandyearsofdiabetesandsaveUS300 million, prevent 260 thousand years of diabetes and save US205 million over a 25-year time horizon. Cost savings from a narrow Medicaid perspective would be much smaller. Minorities and low-income groups would over-proportionally benefit from LCIs in Medicaid, but the impact on population health and health equity would be marginal. Conclusions In the long-term, investments in LCIs for Medicaid beneficiaries are likely to improve health and to decrease healthcare expenditures. However, population health and health equity impact would be low and healthcare expenditure savings from a narrow Medicaid perspective would be much smaller than from a healthcare system perspective
    corecore