Comments on: U.S. National Physical Activity Plan

U.S. National Physical Activity Plan

jeffmac — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 06:41:33 -0800

The U.S. National Physical Activity Plan was released on May 12th, 2010. Similar plans are in place in several European countries (France, Switzerland, Sweden) and W. Australia. The Compendium of Physical Activities (older thread) categorizes energy expenditure levels of specific physical activities (yes, including sex, but I did not see that activity targeted in the US plan).

By: unliteral

unliteral — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 07:24:28 -0800

WHAT? the first is general the 2nd is French. I'll persevere but.

By: unliteral

unliteral — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 07:26:24 -0800

Third requires Flash. fail iPad.

By: Stagger Lee

Stagger Lee — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 07:48:22 -0800

Up here in Canada, we dropped the bar because we're too fat to meet our previous requirements. Of course our increasing obesity correlates directly to our facebook usage. Hmm.

By: saturday_morning

saturday_morning — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:12:06 -0800

According to that Compendium, "active, vigorous sexual activity" takes the same intensity as "home activities: reclining with baby." I've been doing at least one of these things wrong...

By: explosion

explosion — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:48:44 -0800

Back when I was using WiiFit, it had a feature to track physical activity outside the game. Of the categories, "Team Sports" seemed most applicable for sex. To this day, "Team Sports" ranks just below "snu snu" for my favorite euphemism for sex.

By: kcds

kcds — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:54:16 -0800

Active, vigorous sexual activity rates an MET of 1.5? USC, I do not think those words mean what you think they mean. Something something Gamecocks.

By: dougrayrankin

dougrayrankin — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 10:58:36 -0800

Obligatory

By: !Jim

!Jim — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 17:44:43 -0800

That was not obligatory.

By: !Jim

!Jim — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 17:44:53 -0800

Or even an option, really.

By: Mitheral

Mitheral — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 20:30:15 -0800

Those sex METs do seem pretty low (typing has the same rating as vigorous sexual activity!?). I figured MET was maybe a average over a time period but further investigation seems to say METs are instantaneous and are derived from observations to boot. A lot of the occupation data is like this two where several jobs that seem to be similar have significantly different METs and others that seem quite different have similar ratings.