2012 is an exciting year for us all. We have introduced so many new and updated resources this past year that you are sure to find something to meet your classroom needs!

We invite you to stop by our booth (#902) at the National AAHPERD Convention to learn more about our new resources and to find ones that will work for you. As the saying goes, “never judge a book by its cover” and take this opportunity to thumb through the books in person.

Exhibit hours are as follows:

•Wednesday,  March 13^th, 12:00 noon – 6:00 pm

•Thursday, March 15^th, 8:30 am – 5:00 pm

•Friday, March 16^th, 8:30 am – 3:00 pm

We will have some great specials for you at the booth including 10% off + Free shipping within the US and this year we have our new HK Rewards program that could offer you up to 30% off most titles!

Also, don’t miss out on informative sessions and workshops while you’re there!

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/2012-National-AAPHERD-Convention

Blake Grundman, senior writer for 148Apps, sizes up Go Coach Baseball this way:

“A staple of my youth was always summer youth baseball. The problem was that while I was a decent position player, I suffered from a chronic batting average that could only be seen by a microscope. In other words, I was a HORRIBLE batter. So you know how the old adage goes, ‘those that can’t do, teach…’ and hence my involvement with baseball coaching. While I couldn’t play the game for squat, I understood it inside and out, hence me helping my father coach his youth teams.

But what if there were an app that could help those that are newer to the sport coach more efficiently? Last week Human Kinetics introduced their new program Go Coach Baseball that aims to do just that.

Just judging by what I have seen in then screenshots, all of the specifically tuned training tools could really be irreplaceable in any coach’s lineup, not to mention a steal for only $1.99. When you throw in all of the additional drills that could be gleaned, your team will be playing like big leaguers in no time. If you are still on the fence, check out the trailer below and get on top of your coaching game. Your players will thank you for it someday.”

Blake Grundman
Senior Writer
148Apps Network

Read Blake’s entire review.

Teaching key baseball skills and structuring effective practices is now as easy as accessing an iPhone, iTouch, or iPad. Offering nearly four dozen video clips and animations, the Go Coach Baseball app from Human Kinetics is the perfect tool for first-time and less-experienced coaches trying to organize potentially chaotic practices involving children ages 6-12. 

Developed by the American Sport Education Program (ASEP), a division of Human Kinetics, Go Coach Baseball is endorsed by Babe Ruth League, Inc. and draws content from ASEP’s Coaching Youth Baseball book, with additional content provided by Babe Ruth League, Inc., to demonstrate 34 skills and 26 drills.

Go Coach Baseball is highlighted by a Skills feature that provides coaches with step-by-step instructions for executing a total of 27 skills related to hitting, bunting, base running, throwing, fielding, pitching, and catching. Meanwhile, the video clips and photos accompanying the easily accessible instructions explain proper player positioning and skill execution. 

Also included with Go Coach Baseball are a Drills feature with instructions for implementing 26 practice drills, modified by age group – 6-9, 10-11, and 12-14 – and enhanced by animations that illustrate player and ball movement; an Advice feature that addresses the off-field tasks coaches have to perform in order to make practices and games run smoothly; a Rules feature with basic information on age modifications, field markings, and player positions; guidelines for developing an emergency action plan in the event of an injury or illness; and tips for fostering good sportsmanship and creating a fun atmosphere for coaches and players. 

As the authoritative app for any on-the-go coach, Go Coach Baseball features an assortment of skills and activities combined with supplemental coaching tips and advice, safety guidelines and checklists, and guidance on season and practice plans to help manage team activities beyond the Xs and Os. Experienced coaches will also find the app valuable—especially the drill section—as will parents of players wanting to assist their children in practicing skills. 

Go Coach Baseball is available through the iPhone App Store for $1.99. 

The American Sport Education Program (ASEP) is the leading provider of youth, high school, and elite-level sport education programs in the United States. Rooted in the philosophy of “Athletes first, winning second,” ASEP has educated more than 1.5 million coaches, officials, sport administrators, parents, and athletes. For 30 years, local, state, and national sport organizations have partnered with ASEP to lead the way in making sport a safe, successful, and enjoyable experience for all involved.

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/iphone-app-for-on-the-go-baseball-coaches

Considerable scientific evidence suggests that physical activity reduces the risk of several cancer types with the evidence classified as convincing or probable for colon, breast, and endometrial cancers; possible for prostate, ovarian, and lung cancers; and null or insufficient for other cancers.There is also increasing evidence that physical activity improves some health indicators and quality of life after diagnosis although there have not yet been any reported clinical trials on the effect of postdiagnosis physical activity on the risk of cancer recurrence or survival.Challenges of these trials include the possibility of group differences in prognostic factors and treatments; the stresses of diagnosis, treatment, and recovery on a patient’s ability to exercise; and the need for a large trial to detect statistically significant differences between exercise and control groups.

The following sections review the scientific literature on cancer sites that have been studied most extensively in relation to physical activity. Epidemiologic research relating physical activity to ovarianand lung cancersare described elsewhere (see citations noted here). It is noteworthy that much of the epidemiologic evidence is based on studies that used questionnaires to estimate physical activity levels. Many factors must be considered when selecting a questionnaire,including its validity for the research question being asked.

Colon Cancer

The most consistent and strong evidence for a role of physical activity in cancer etiology exists for colon cancer. An average risk reduction of about 25 to 30% is observed in both men and women who undertake the highest level of assessed physical activity compared to the lowest level of activity in studies that have examined these associations(activity levels were not uniformly defined). These findings are likely to be independent of body weight changes. There is evidence for a dose–response effect with more benefit being observed for higher levels of activity, as defined in each study. These results have been observed in studies conducted in a variety of populations around the world, using varying methods for assessing physical activity and with various study designs.

Although 52 studies of physical activity and colon cancer have been identifiedsome aspects of this etiologic association remain unclear including whether the benefits of physical activity depend on menopausal hormone therapy use, dietary intake, or BMI. In addition, the time in life when physical activity is most beneficial for colon cancer prevention is unknown; greater risk reductions may result from higher activity levels over the lifetime as opposed to more recent activity.It is also unclear whether physical activity has a differential effect on various regions of the colon.64

Based on the overall evidence from studies of recreational activity, about 30 to 60 minutes per day of moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity may be needed to lower colon cancer risk significantly.An even greater benefit for colon cancer risk reduction may exist for vigorous-intensity activity,13 but the magnitude of this benefit is unclear.

Relatively recent research has been conducted on the role of leisure-time activity in improving colon cancer survival.Four cohort studies conducted by Meyerhardt and colleaguesall showed better survival among colorectal cancer survivors who were more physically active postdiagnosis. In addition, in the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study, prediagnosis exercise was associated with better disease-specific survival.

The largest prognostic study to date was conducted in 832 men and women with stage III colon cancer.In that study 18 to 26.9 MET-hours per week of postdiagnosis leisure-time activity lowered the risk of cancer recurrence or death by 49% compared with those who did less than 3 MET-hours per week. Furthermore, significant trends were found relating increasing activity levels to improved disease-free, recurrence-free, and overall survival. A minimum of 18 MET-hours per week of leisure activity improved disease-free survival rates regardless of sex, BMI, number of positive lymph nodes, chemotherapy type, age, or baseline performance status.

Breast Cancer

Extensive research has been conducted on the etiologic role of physical activity in relation to breast cancer risk, with the majority of studies concluding that women who are more physically active have a lower risk compared to sedentary women. Across 73 studies, the average risk reduction was about 25% for the highest versus the lowest activity categories compared,and there is consistent evidence of a dose–response effect, with greater risk decreases observed with higher levels of activity. All types of activity are beneficial, with somewhat stronger effects observed overall for recreational and household activity.As well, the effect appears to be significant more often in postmenopausal women and, on average, and is stronger in normal weight women, non-Caucasians, women without a family history of breast cancer, and women who are parous. Effects are also stronger for activity done over the lifetime or after menopause, activity of moderate or vigorous intensity, or activity of longer duration (hours per week).

Based on previous research, at least four hours per week of moderate- to vigorous-intensity activity may be necessary to reduce risk significantly. A few aspects of this association remain unclear, including whether the benefit of physical activity depends on the histologic type of the tumor, the hormone receptor status, and other molecular aspects.

The role of physical activity in breast cancer survival has been examined in 15 observational studies conducted thus far.Eight of these studies suggested that higher physical activity levels were associated with a significantly decreased risk of breast cancer mortalityor overall mortality,implying that physically active people with breast cancer may have improved prognosis with fewer recurrences and deaths compared with sedentary survivors. The largest prognostic studies to date were conducted in the Breast Cancer Family Registryand the Collaborative Women’s Longevity Studywith each study enrolling more than 4,000 breast cancer survivors. The latter study found a 51% decrease in breast cancer mortality among the most physically active as well as evidence for a dose–response effect of decreasing the risk of breast cancer death with increasing levels of total recreational activity postdiagnosis.In the Breast Cancer Family Registry study, all-cause mortality was decreased by 23 to 29% in women who were recreationally active three years prediagnosis compared to inactive women, whereas no association was found with lifetime physical activity.

Endometrial Cancer

Twenty of the 25 published epidemiologic studiessuggest a protective effect from physical activity in endometrial cancer risk; no association was reported in five studies.Overall, evidence suggests about a 20 to 30% decreased risk for the most active versus the least active study participants; also, activity of light to moderate intensity may lower risk, whereas sitting time may increase risk.Despite these findings, recent reviews of this literaturehave emphasized the need for further research studies that have more detailed assessments of lifetime physical activity and that consider all types and parameters of activity. Furthermore, it remains somewhat unclear how independent this association is from BMI or whether this effect depends on menopausal hormone therapy use.

No observational studies have been published on the role of exercise in endometrial cancer survival, but one randomized controlled trial examined how a six-month intervention of lifestyle counseling could influence physical activity levels, dietary habits, weight loss, and quality of life in endometrial cancer survivors.This study was able to achieve more weight loss and increased exercise levels in the intervention group than in the control group and demonstrated that this type of lifestyle intervention is feasible and could result in sustained behavior change over a yearlong period.

Prostate Cancer

There is inconsistent evidence regarding the association between physical activity and prostate cancer, with about one third (16 out of 42) of the studies conducted thus far indicating a protective effect.The magnitude of the risk reduction is modest, on average around 9%,and there remains a lack of clarity on whether the benefit from physical activity varies according to other factors such as age, race, family history, and BMI. The effect of physical activity may also be more restricted to advanced prostate cancers. Some evidence is emerging that higher levels of lifetime physical activity may decrease prostate cancer risk.Both occupational and recreational activities have been associated with decreased prostate cancer risk.

The inconsistency across prostate cancer studies may be attributed to several factors. First, prostate cancer is a slow-growing tumor with a long latency period, and a large percentage of men die with evidence of undiagnosed prostate cancer. Therefore, some studies may have been unable to detect a difference in physical activity levels between the cancer patients and the “healthy” control populations because of latent, nonclinical prostate cancer among the controls. Second, healthier, physically active men may be more likely to be screened for prostate cancer, and hence more likely to be diagnosed, than less active men. As a result, some study populations might not have accurately reflected the general population of cancer patients, and true risk reductions were attenuated. Finally, it has been hypothesizedthat studies including a greater proportion of screen-detected, early-stage prostate cancer cases might reveal weaker associations between physical activity and prostate cancer risk than studies of advanced prostate cancer. A study by Littman and colleaguesfound a strong inverse association between physical activity and prostate cancer risk in men with no history of recent PSA testing, but no association was found in men with a history of recent PSA testing. Another studyshowed no difference in risk based on PSA screening history, casting doubt on this hypothesis.

Only one observational study has reported on physical activity and prostate cancer survival.In that study of 2,705 nonmetastatic prostate cancer survivors from the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study, men who engaged in leisure-time physical activity postdiagnosis had significantly lower risks of all-cause and prostate cancer mortality; significant trends were noted, with increasing MET-hours per week corresponding with greater reductions in risk. Men reporting at least three hours per week of vigorous activity (versus less than one hour per week) had a 61% lower risk of death from prostate cancer.

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/effect-of-exercise-on-the-risk-of-several-cancer-types

An unhealthy diet could account for up to 30% of all cancers in developing countriesand perhaps 35% of cancer deaths in the United States. Hence, along with tobacco use, diet is one of the most important modifiable risk factors for cancer. Given the diverse and complex nature of the human diet, however, it is also one of the most difficult factors to study in large human populations. Numerous instruments for dietary assessment have been developed and validated.As in physical activity assessment, the choice of instrument depends largely on the intended purpose. A vast body of epidemiologic research has addressed a wide array of research questions related to cancer and diet in an attempt to disentangle individual dietary effects. Here we highlight some of the strongest associations identified thus far,although more associations will undoubtedly emerge in the future.

Sugar, Fast Foods, and Other Energy-Dense Foods

High-calorie foods and drinks are suspected risk factors for cancer given their contributions to weight gain, overweight, and obesity. The risks deriving from specific aspects of an energy-dense diet, however, are not as clear. Foods containing high amounts of sugar, for example, may be associated with increased colorectal cancer risk, and biologic mechanisms have been proposed, but the overall evidence in humans is currently limited and merely suggestive.

In terms of fat intake, evidence from a substantial number of human studies has provided only limited, but suggestive evidence for increased risk of cancers of the lung, breast, colorectum,and possibly prostate.Despite plausible biologic mechanisms for these cancers, the overall findings surrounding fat intake and cancer incidence are inconsistent. Notably, dietary fat has been studied in relation to breast cancer recurrence and survival in two large randomized controlled trials. Findings from the Women’s Intervention Nutrition Studyand the Women’s Healthy Eating and Living studyhave suggested limited prognostic gain from lowering dietary fat, although there may be some decrease in recurrence rates for certain subgroups
of postmenopausal women. More limited evidence suggests that the aggressiveness of prostate tumors and deaths from prostate cancer may be related to higher total and saturated fat intakes.

Fruits and Vegetables

A plant-based diet rich in fruits, vegetables, and whole grains is continually recommended for the prevention of various cancers.In a comprehensive review of published literature on this subject, a variety of fruits and vegetables appeared likely to preventcancer, although the evidence was not fully convincing (see table 3.3).

Compared to cancer incidence, far fewer studies have examined fruit and vegetable intake in relation to cancer prognosis. Very limited data support a decreased risk of recurrence or progression of prostate cancer, for example, with higher intake of tomatoes or lycopene.Vegetable intake has been linked to longer survival from ovarian cancerand advanced lung cancer,but again, these findings are very preliminary. The effects on breast cancer prognosis are also unclear.In the Women’s Healthy Eating and Living randomized controlled trial of breast cancer patients, long-term adoption of a low-fat diet high in fruits, vegetables, and fiber had no effect on breast cancer recurrence or survival.

Fruits and vegetables could prevent cancer through multiple, interrelated mechanisms. Promotion of a healthy body weight, prevention of oxidative stress and DNA damage, and the ability to alter the activities of carcinogen-activating enzymes are just a few possible mediating pathways to prevention. Higher intake may also favorably alter immune function, inflammation, and cellular growth.

Fiber

According to one international report on cancer prevention,a diet high in fiber may well reduce the risk of colorectal cancer. Yet, at least one pooled analysis of research on this subject found no effect from fiber beyond the effects of other dietary risk factors.Part of the difficulty in studying fiber intake in humans may be that intake is too low to observe any benefit.The Polyp Prevention Trial, conducted in the United States, explored the effect of increasing dietary fiber intake over four years (and also lowering fat and increasing fruit and vegetable intakes) in people who had previously experienced one or more colorectal adenomas. Adenoma recurrence was significantly lowered among the most compliant study participants,implying that a high-fiber diet may also lower the risk of colorectal cancer recurrences.

The reasons that fiber may be protective are unclear, but several mechanisms have been proposed.High fiber intake favorably alters the quality of the feces by diluting its contents, increasing its weight, and shortening transit time through the colon. The outcome of these effects is decreased contact between potential fecal carcinogens and colonic cells. As well, fiber fermentation products (e.g., butyrate) produced in the gut can help promote healthy cellular growth. Furthermore, intakes of fiber and folate are correlated, and hence, the observed effects may actually be from folate.

Red Meat and Processed Meat

There is convincing evidence that consumption of red meat and processed meat (i.e., preserved by smoking, curing, salting, or with preservatives) increases the risk of colorectal cancer.Very few studies, however, have examined the effect of diet on colorectal cancer recurrence and survivorship. In one follow-up study of patients with stage III colon cancer, postdiagnosis intake of a “Western diet” (high intake of red and processed meats, sweets, French fries, and refined grains) was associated with higher risks of recurrence and death, whereas a “prudent diet” (fruits, vegetables, legumes, fish, poultry, and whole grains) was not associated with an increased risk.Whether these findings are attributable to meat intake specifically, however, is unknown.

Red and processed meats might increase cancer risk because potentially carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds are formed in the stomach and gut following their ingestion. Cooking at high temperatures produces potentially carcinogenic by-products, and the heme iron content of meats may also promote DNA damage and cancer in the colon. Moreover, processed meats are high in salt, which also encourages the formation of N-nitroso compounds. In addition, higher meat consumption may coincide with low intakes of fruits, vegetables, and fiber, which may decrease cancer risk.

Alcohol

There is now a wealth of convincing evidencethat total alcohol intake, irrespective of the source, increases the risk of cancers of the mouth, pharynx, larynx, esophagus, colorectum (in men)and breast in both pre- and postmenopausal women.With respect to breast cancer, the increased risk from alcohol appears to be the most elevated in women with low folate intake.It is less convincing, but still probable, that alcohol consumption increases the risk of liver cancer and of colorectal cancer in women. Alcohol in small quantities does not appear to prevent cancer as it does cardiovascular disease.The effect of alcohol intake on cancer prognosis has been studied in relation to breast cancer; however, the effect remains uncertain. Alcohol intake has not been associated with breast cancer recurrence or overall survival in most studies of women diagnosed with breast cancer.

Alcohol may increase cancer risk via multiple pathways.Some of its metabolites and by-
products, for example, may be carcinogenic. Alcohol also acts as a solvent, which facilitates the entry of other cancer-causing compounds (e.g., as found in tobacco) into cells. Hence, for certain cancers, the combined cancer-causing effects of alcohol and tobacco are worse than they would be for either substance alone. Furthermore, alcohol may indirectly alter normal cell cycles, affect the metabolism of other carcinogens, increase circulating hormone levels, and reduce folate levels.

Salt

Total salt intake and the intake of salted and salty foods are probably associated with stomach cancer, and intake of Cantonese-style salted fish appears to increase the risk of nasopharyngeal cancer.Salt intake could plausibly cause stomach cancer by damaging the stomach lining, increasing the formation of N-nitroso compounds, which are potentially carcinogenic, or interacting with other carcinogens. It is also hypothesized that salt intake and Heliobacter pylori infection might act synergistically to increase risk. Salted fish may increase the risk of cancer of the nasopharynx because of its N-nitrosamine content.

Dietary Supplements

In their report on diet and cancer prevention, the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Researchdo not recommend dietary supplements for the purpose of preventing cancer. Instead, they recommend that proper nutrition be attained through the intake of foods alone. Although evidence suggests that some supplement use may help prevent cancer, high doses can actually causecancer in certain subgroups of the population. For example, convincing evidence supports a causal role for high-dose beta-carotene supplement use in lung cancer, depending on smoking status and genetics.The American Cancer Society similarly advises cancer survivors to avoid very high doses of vitamins, minerals, and other dietary supplements; they state that although low doses may be useful, they should only be taken with advice from a health care provider.

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/diet-affects-the-risk-of-cancer

Before you begin your strength training program, you need to understand the facts about many aspects of exercise, including cardio training, flexibility, and to some extent, the role diet plays in helping you reach your fitness goals. It takes more than just lifting weights to own the ideal female physique—one that is strong, low in body fat, and high in lean mass, that provides muscle definition, and that functions well in everyday life. Some of the most common misconceptions, or myths, that women believe about exercise are covered here. The following answers to common questions provide simple, unbiased advice about exercise fads, fitness hype, magic bullets, and false promises, as well as information that every female exerciser should know.

If I want to lose weight and tone up, should I be doing more weights or more cardio?

Cardiorespiratory exercise that promotes adequate caloric expenditure is necessary for fat loss, weight management, and overall fitness. But myths about aerobic exercise and energy expenditure abound, as do those about strength training. You probably already know that to lose weight you need to address both diet and exercise. Exercise must include both cardio and strength training. Many women believe that only cardio exercise is needed to lose weight, but nothing could be further from the truth.

We will go into detail about the value of strength training for weight loss throughout this book, but let me say here that cardio exercise is a vital component to any strength training program and weight loss effort. The reason is that it ups the ante on caloric expenditure and improves the health of your heart, blood vessels, brain tissues, and other vital organs. Significant amounts of scientific evidence clearly show that cardio exercise (as well as strength training) can help prevent and manage hypertension, coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, osteoporosis, arthritis, stress, colon cancer, abnormal cholesterol levels, and depression (Hillman et al. 2008).

How do I know when I am in the fat-burning zone?

Perhaps the most popular myth about aerobic exercise is that there is a specific heart rate range in which you must exercise to burn fat as the primary fuel source. Target heart rate has become a buzz phrase. Many cardio machines even display a fat-burning zone on their panels, encouraging people to exercise in a specific heart rate range to burn fat specifically. Because more fat is used at lower exercise intensities, many people assume that low-intensity exercise is best for burning fat.

The truth is that we use both fat and carbohydrate (as well as some protein) for energy during exercise. These fuels provide energy as the body needs it, sort of on a sliding scale. During exercise at very low intensities (e.g., walking at a moderate pace), fat accounts for most of the energy being used. As exercise intensity increases, the contribution from fat decreases, and the contribution from carbohydrate and protein increases. What matters here, however, is the rate of energy expenditure. Where the calories come from is really not the point. When exercising at higher intensities (i.e., closer to the lactate threshold), you are burning more total calories from all energy sources. For fat and weight loss, what matters most is the difference between the number of calories you expend and the number of calories you consume. For the purpose of losing weight, it matters little whether the calories burned during exercise come from fat or carbohydrate. Fat and weight loss is really all about burning lots of calories and cutting back on the number of calories consumed.

Can I strength train to get rid of my belly fat or tighten my upper arms?

Ask any woman what her “trouble” spots are, and she will probably give you a list of all the well-known areas women like to approach through exercise, including glutes, thighs, waist, belly, and upper arms. Spot reduction is the mythical belief that fat can be lost in specific areas or muscle groups. However, fat is lost throughout the body in a pattern dependent on genetics, gender, hormones, and age. Overall body fat must be reduced to lose fat in any particular area. Although fat is lost or gained throughout the body, it seems that the first areas to get fat or the last areas to become lean are the abdominals, hips, and thighs. But, although you cannot spot reduce, you can spot train, meaning that you can strengthen a specific muscle group through aerobic activity and resistance training.

If I lift too heavy of a weight, will I get bulky muscles?

Contrary to many women’s concerns, strength training using heavy weights won’t result in large, bodybuilder-type physiques. However, some women still fear that it will bulk them up in unfeminine ways. Women who strive to become competitive bodybuilders work out for several hours a day using a variety of exercise techniques, and a large percentage of their training combines very heavy weight loads. Some women also take hormones and steroids to increase their muscle mass.

Muscle strength is improved primarily by increasing muscle size (hypertrophy) and the number of muscle fibers recruited. Muscles experience hypertrophy when the muscle fibers increase in size. Increases in muscle size are highly dependent on diet, genetics, muscle fiber types, and the kind of training performed.

Circulating hormones such as testosterone play a large role in the development of large muscles. Men have between 20 and 30 times more circulating testosterone than women, and it is for this reason, as well as the fact that men have more numerous and larger muscle fibers, that men can develop much bigger muscles than women. Keep in mind that genetics and individual differences play a role in the rate and degree to which muscles mass increases in either gender. Men and women who train similarly can increase their muscle strength, but because women have lower levels of testosterone and fewer and smaller muscle fibers than men do, they cannot increase muscle size the way men can.

Can supplements help me get stronger or leaner, develop more tone, or lose weight?

Millions of people rely on dietary supplements for everything from enhancing their sex lives to improving their athletic performances. There is essentially no systematic regulation of the dietary supplement industry, so there is no guarantee that any supplement will live up to its claims. More important, there is no guarantee that any supplement is safe. Some dietary supplements are probably safe and effective if consumed according to the manufacturers’ instructions. An example is the traditional use of vitamin and mineral supplements. Although the recommended doses can improve a deficiency resulting from a poor diet, megadoses can have toxic effects. Because dietary supplements are not regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), there is no guarantee that what is stated on the label is actually in the supplement.

Will certain types of cardio help me burn more calories?

The type of exercise you select will determine the amount of energy you expend and, thus, how many total calories you burn. Many exercise modalities are marketed to women with the claim that they burn more calories, and the fitness consumer is left to wonder just what determines the number of calories burned during exercise. Just because you may sweat more in a particular workout (e.g., a cycle class or a hot yoga class) doesn’t necessarily mean that you are burning more calories. Additionally, acute bouts of exercise do not burn a huge number of calories. It is the consistency of the exercise that results in weight loss.

Understanding what determines how many calories your body burns during exercise and why your body obeys certain rules that dictate the magnitude of caloric expenditure is important when selecting exercises. With this knowledge you can create realistic goals for yourself with respect to fat loss and increased lean mass. In addition, you will be in a better position to discern the truth regarding many of the advertising claims that suggest that a particular exercise modality is best for caloric expenditure and weight loss. The fact is, the more you exercise, the more fit you will become. You will burn more total calories walking briskly or running 5 miles (8 km) than you will just 1 mile (1.6 km). So instead of burning 100 calories for 1 mile, you burn about 500, and that’s a lot more calories burned than if you had stayed on the couch. Bottom line: the harder you work, the more calories you expend, and you have to do this on a regular (ideally, daily) basis.

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/womenrsquos-fitness-myths

Would you like to discard the items in your shopping cart from the previous store and continue shopping in the new store?

Click back to return to your previous basket or click continue to clear the existing items and carry on shopping.

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/sample-exercises

In 2002, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) published a position stand on strength and conditioning variables for active, healthy adults. The position stand provided the recommended quality and quantity of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory and muscular fitness and flexibility in healthy adults. Although this statement was based in research and supported by the entire scientific community, as well as being the basis for all professional fitness trainers’ strength programs, it did not consider all the research on strength training over the preceding decade. This early version of the ACSM position stand for exercise recommendations for healthy adults also did not offer any information on how to progress fitness programs. This opened up a lot of opportunity for people to enter the strength training arena with all kinds of opinions and training protocols without collective agreement as to the best methods to achieve overall fitness. You can imagine how confusing all of this information has become. It is no wonder so many women were led astray and consequently left to sift through literally thousands of exercise programs and routines on their own.

Although the 2002 ACSM position stand provided an outstanding framework for the best practices for strength trainers, the ACSM updated the statement in 2009 to reflect the numerous studies on strength training that had taken place since 2002. This updated position stand is for fitness professionals and those other enthusiasts who want to use strength training research for results-based outcomes. Specifically, the updated guidelines make several modifications to the 2002 position stand to better meet the needs of those who are looking for significant muscle development beyond minimal strength gains. The updated ACSM position stand addresses several more variables, as well as the importance of progressive adaptations (i.e., periodization) to increased muscle strength and performance.

The 2009 ACSM document indicates that people looking for increased strength and better health by decreasing fat mass and increasing lean tissue through resistance training should follow strength-specific programs. These should include the use of concentric (muscle shortening), eccentric (muscle lengthening), and isometric muscle actions and bilateral and unilateral, as well as single- and multiple-joint exercises. Programs should also address weight selection, exercise selection and order, the ideal number of sets and repetitions for attaining particular goals, the frequency of exercise, and recovery, all of which are covered next in this
section.

The 2009 ACSM guidelines can help decrease training plateaus and significantly improve performance to achieve a higher level of muscle strength, endurance, and overall fitness. Any woman new to strength training should follow these guidelines. She can then expect to take this information forward into intermediate and advanced training.

Frequency

The frequency of exercise refers to how often you need to train to see the results you are looking for, without compromising your recovery time between training sessions. Remember that the body needs to go through a process of rebuilding and repairing to replenish the energy reserves that are consumed during exercise. Frequency is actually a balance between providing just enough stress for the body to adapt to the resistance, and allowing just enough time for recovery and repair to occur.

The appropriate frequency between strength workouts depends on the per-iodization phase you are in (this is covered later in this chapter) and the type of workout you are performing. Frequency also has to take into account the training variable known as volume (covered later in this section) because how often you exercise depends on the type of program you are using. In general, though, the recommendation for training frequency is two or three days per week for beginning levels, three or four days per week for intermediate, and four or five days per week for advanced. Your frequency for cardio training can be daily, but you will need to change the intensity of the cardio workouts frequently, particularly as you become more fit. The guideline for cardiorespiratory training is a minimum of three sessions per week, and the guideline for flexibility training is no less than two sessions per week.

Remember that each time you complete a strenuous strength training session (regardless of the body part), you are taxing your body as a whole—including all of the physiological systems and major organs. Keep in mind that your body does not distinguish days of the week. It only understands time between sessions. You may need more recovery between sessions depending on how hard you work, as well as your level of fitness.

Intensity

Intensity refers to the amount of effort invested in a training program, or in any one training session. The weight you lift should challenge you. It should be heavy enough that you feel muscle exhaustion as you approach your last two repetitions. Exhaustion means that your muscles are so tired that you can’t do another full repetition in good form or without assistance. Many women do not lift heavy enough, or in other words, to exhaustion. This is mostly because they don’t know that they are supposed to! They tend to simply perform the number of repetitions that they think is good, or they choose light weights because of that age-old myth of getting too big as a result of lifting heavy weights.

In resistance training, the workload is the primary measure of intensity. The workload can be determined by any one of the following:

• The amount of weight lifted during an exercise
• The number of repetitions completed for a particular exercise
• The length of time to complete all exercises in a set, or the total training session time

You may choose to increase your workload by lifting heavier weights or by performing more repetitions with the same weight. Another option is to lift the same weight for the same number of repetitions, but decrease the rest time between sets. As a general rule, increase the intensity using only one of the previous three parameters. For example, don’t increase weight and decrease rest time in the same session. This will only serve to prefatigue you and may result in injury.

Also, you should sequence your exercises to optimize intensity. For example, perform large muscle group exercises before small ones, multiple-joint exercises before single-joint ones, and higher-intensity exercises before lower-intensity ones.

Time

Time in this context refers to the length of time of your overall training session. The common consensus for the duration of resistance training sessions is no longer than 60 minutes. Any longer than that can set you up for boredom and burnout. Cardio training should last 30 to 45 minutes, and flexibility training, 20 to 30 minutes. As you become more advanced and your intensity increases, your sessions will become shorter. Particularly grueling strength training sessions should last only 20 to 30 minutes. Regardless of the time frame you need to achieve your goals, you should approach each exercise session with focus and purpose.

Many women fail to take full advantage of their training time. They allow themselves to be distracted and use their time poorly. If you are in the gym to work out, that should be your primary goal. Do not allow anyone or anything to limit you or sidetrack you from accomplishing your goal.

Interval-Based Exercise Training

Interval training is a unique and powerful way to train that is time efficient and burns more total calories than regular training. It involves the performance of higher-intensity exercise followed by recovery periods in a very specific time frame. The purpose of performing short bouts of high-intensity exercise is to reach overload, or uncomfortable intensity levels, throughout your training routines. Obviously, it would be impossible to exercise at such high intensity levels for an entire 30-minute workout. This is why there are built-in rest periods—not enough to allow you to fully recover, but enough to challenge you appropriately during these quick-paced, time-efficient workouts.

The interval training formulas outlined here are based on the body’s energy systems (anaerobic and aerobic) to offer you a scientific approach to interval training. The best ratios are those that are related to the ATP-PC, anaerobic glycolysis, and aerobic energy systems. Because these systems become depleted in very specific time frames, we use ratio intervals to follow their energy depletion and consequent recovery. The work in work-to-restratiois anaerobic; that is, you work until you become breathless or close to it (this uses the ATP-PC, or anaerobic glycolysis, system), and then recover aerobically so you can catch your breath enough to prepare you for the next interval.

Most important with interval training is to remain consistent. If you decide to run on the treadmill at a 2:1 work-to-rest ratio, you need to stay true to the intervals and not decide halfway through that you need more time to rest or can wait another minute. The training benefit comes from the overload that results from the consistency of the ratios. For example, if you decide that the hard part will take two minutes and your recovery will take one minute, stick with that routine during the entire workout to the best of your ability.

You have the flexibility to select any work-to-rest interval range you would like within any of the three heart rate zones. Use the following ratios to determine which works best for you depending on how long you need to work hard and how long you need to recover. Also included are some examples of activities using the ratios. If you understand the work-to-rest ratio design, however, you can devise your own ratios and choose any activity you like (e.g., cycling, outdoor walking, or
jogging).

1:1 Work-to-Rest Ratio

A 1:1 work-to-rest ratio means that you work and recover for the same amount of time. Following are sample 1:1 work-to-rest ratio activities:

• Treadmill: Alternate five minutes of running (at 5 mph, or 8 km/h, or faster) with five minutes of walking (at 3.5 to 4 mph, or 5.6 to 6.4 km/h) for a total of 30 to 45 minutes.
• Elliptical trainer: Alternate two minutes at a high intensity (as hard as you can work while still maintaining good form, posture, and control) with two minutes at a moderate intensity for a total of 30 to 45 minutes.

2:1 Work-to-Rest Ratio

A 2:1 work-to-rest ratio means that you work for twice as long as you recover. Following are sample 2:1 work-to-rest ratio activities:

• Treadmill: Alternate three minutes of running (5 to 7 mph, or 8 to 11.3 km/h) with 90 seconds of jogging (5 to 5.5 mph, or 8 to 8.9 km/h) for a total of 30 to 45 minutes.
• Elliptical trainer: Alternate 40 seconds at a high intensity (as hard as you can work while still maintaining good form, posture, and control) with 20 seconds at a moderate intensity for a total of 25 to 30 minutes.

3:1 Work-to-Rest Ratio

A 3:1 work-to-rest ratio means that you work three times as long as the recovery. Following are sample 3:1 work-to-rest ratio activities:

• Treadmill: Alternate 15 minutes of running (5 to 6 mph, or 8 to 9.7 km/h) with five minutes of jogging (6 to 7 mph, or 9.7 to 11.3 km/h) for 30 to 45 minutes.
• Elliptical trainer: Alternate nine minutes at a high intensity (as hard as you can work while still maintaining good form, posture, and control) with three minutes at a moderate intensity for 30 to 45 minutes.

Remember, too, that you can change the work-to-rest ratio into a rest-to-work ratio, if you need to. For example, if working hard for two minutes with only one minute of recovery (2:1) is too much for you, simply flip it and use the ratio as a rest-to-work ratio instead—working for one minute and then recovering for two minutes (1:2).

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/strength-training-program-essentials

Resistance exercise training has been effective in improving muscular strength and endurance in cancer survivors,with the majority of research being in those with breast cancer,prostate cancer,and head and neck cancer.Muscular strength has been measured as 1-repetition maximum (1RM) or 6- to 7-repetition maximum to estimate 1RM. Muscular endurance has been measured as the number of repetitions of a certain weight in a set time. Assessing baseline muscular strength and endurance is important for developing the most appropriate and effective prescription for cancer survivors.

Research studies with cancer survivors have used a variety of resistance prescriptions,as follows:

• Frequency: One to five sessions per week (primarily two or three)
• Number of exercises: Varied numbers involving large muscle groups (primarily five to nine)
• Sets: One to three sets
• Repetitions: 8 to 12 reps
• Intensity: 25 to 85% of 1RM
• Duration of program: 3 to 52 weeks

The 2010 ACSM roundtable guidelines for resistance training exercise for cancer survivors are also consistent with the 2008 U.S. DHHS “Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans.”Cancer survivors are encouraged to meet the U.S. DHHS guidelines of two or three weekly sessions that include exercises for the major muscle groups,as able.

Strong evidence of the benefit of resistance training has been reported in breast cancer and prostate survivors during and following cancer treatment.1 The role of resistance training following surgery for breast cancer has been controversial; traditionally, practitioners have advised people not to lift more than 10 pounds (4.5 kg) and to limit repetitive upper-extremity activities. These limitations were aimed at reducing the risk of developing upper-extremity lymphedema, swelling that can affect the arm and trunk following breast cancer surgery and treatment. Results from recent research have suggested that progressive resistance training improves muscular strength, muscular endurance, and functional ability, without increasing the risk of developing upper-extremity lymphedema or exacerbating preexisting lymphedema.

Schmitz and colleaguesstudied breast cancer survivors with preexisting lymphedema. The exercise group had an increase in strength, measured as 1RM, of 29.4% for the bench press (versus 4.1% in controls) and 32.5% for the leg press (versus 7.6% in controls). The exercise group reported a significant improvement in lymphedema symptoms. Also, exacerbations of lymphedema were nominal in the exercise group, which also had fewer exacerbations compared to the control group. The key message stressed in this study was adhering to proper form and progressing the exercises slowly. To achieve this, the study included supervision by trained instructors for the first 13 weeks. Also, the intensity started low and progressed slowly by the smallest increment to reduce the risks of worsening lymphedema. In addition, participants wore compression sleeves during their resistance exercise sessions, and symptoms of worsening lymphedema (i.e., swelling, feelings of heaviness) were closely monitored.

Resistance training has also been encouraged for prostate cancer survivors undergoing androgen deprivation therapy, which lowers testosterone levels. The treatment-associated reduction in muscle mass and muscle strength can compromise physical function, particularly in older men.In a study that compared a 12-week resistance training program and a usual care group during ADT treatment, the exercise group had a significant increase in upper- and lower-body muscular strength (1RM) and endurance (number of repetitions of 70% 1RM) compared to the control group, 36 with an 11% improvement in 1RM chest press (versus 1% in controls) and 37% improvement in the 1RM leg press (versus 7% in controls).

Resistance training has also been studied in head and neck cancer survivors. Resistance training in this population may be particularly important because of the associated shoulder dysfunction, which is a well-recognized complication of the neck dissection surgeries commonly used. The shoulder dysfunction is due to damage to or resection of the spinal accessory nerves and surrounding muscles, such as the trapezius muscle. A small randomized controlled trial compared a 12-week standard care program that included range-of-motion, stretching, and shoulder-strengthening exercises with elastic resistance bands with a 12-week progressive resistance program based on individual baseline strength testing. Both groups improved muscular strength and endurance, but the individualized, progressive program resulted in greater improvements in 1RM for the seated row (37% versus 15% in the standard care group) and the chest press (45% versus 24% in the standard care group).

Timing

The majority of resistance training programs for people with cancer have been undertaken following cancer treatment and have reported benefits.However, research on the benefits of resistance training during chemotherapy treatment is limited. During chemotherapy, an improvement in strength was reported in breast cancer survivors who were randomized to a resistance exercise program compared to those randomized to an aerobic exercise program or control group (the only group to maintain their usual lifestyle).In addition, the resistance group in this study also had a better chemotherapy completion rate than the aerobic exercise or control group did. A better chemotherapy completion rate means that people were more likely to receive their prescribed chemotherapy dose on schedule, instead of experiencing the delays commonly seen with chemotherapy. A better chemotherapy completion rate is an outcome that may be of particular interest to the clinical oncology community (i.e., oncologists) because delivery of the prescribed chemotherapy dose is linked to improved clinical outcomes. Improvements in upper- and lower-body strength were also noted in prostate cancer survivors who took part in a resistance program during radiation therapyand during androgen deprivation therapy.

Specificity of Training

As with aerobic interventions, issues with specificity also exist for resistance interventions. Baseline testing has not been used universally. A generic approach to prescribing resistance exercise that does not take baseline strength into account may result in an exercise prescription that is too easy (and therefore results in less improvement) or too hard (limiting improvement and possibility increasing the risk of injury).

The 1-repetition maximum (1RM) test has been employed during recent exercise studies with breast, prostate, and head and neck cancer survivors to determine the appropriate exercise prescription for program.This information has then been used to develop an exercise prescription in a variety of ways. The initial intensity for head and neck cancer survivors was set at 25 to 30% of 1RM and progressed to 60 to 70% of 1RM. The protocol included both double- and single-limb (arm) exercises, because strength was disproportionally reduced on the treatment side as a result of surgery or radiation.32 This study included both men and women, making an individualized approach even more important than in studies of a single sex. For breast cancer survivors with or without lymphedema, the goal of the program by Schmitz and colleagues35 was to progress slowly to avoid acute injury to the arm. Damage to the arm has been suggested as a risk factor for lymphedema (see chapter 6). The authors did not set an upper limit for resistance.

Supervision is another key feature in achieving specificity of resistance training. Supervision initially or for the entire study can ensure that clients use proper form and an appropriate progression. Home-based programs are more difficult to monitor for proper form or appropriate progression of resistance, which may limit clients’ gains in strength and endurance.

Finally, adherence and compliance to the prescribed intensity and progression have not been well documented in the literature, which limits the ability to determine the overall expected effect of resistance programs for cancer survivors. Further research is needed to continue the development of feasible and effective resistance programs for cancer survivors.

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/muscular-strength-and-endurance-in-cancer-survivors

The elements of fitness include agility, speed, coordination, flexibility, strength, and endurance. Before clearing a cancer survivor for participation in a specific program or developing an individualized exercise prescription for that person, the fitness professional must understand what the exercise program will require of the survivor with regard to each of these elements, and whether the survivor is capable of participating in that component of exercise. For example, if a specific mode of aerobic exercise requires the ability to sustain an intensity level of 7 to 9 METS, but the maximal aerobic capacity of the client is 8 METs, it would not be appropriate to prescribe that particular mode of aerobic exercise. It is important to match the programming with the ability of the client.

One particular challenge in working with the cancer survivorship population is the interaction of aging with cancer. Cancer is more likely to occur in older people. Also, those who are diagnosed with cancer seem to experience an acceleration of functional aging. However, a healthy, fit 70-year-old diagnosed with early-stage cancer that requires minimal surgery, no chemotherapy, and a short round of radiation therapy could be ready to join a masters running club three months after treatment. By contrast, a sedentary, overweight, diabetic 40-year-old diagnosed with stage III colon cancer that requires extensive surgical resection, an external ostomy (e.g., a bag outside the body that stores waste), and a long bout of chemotherapy might need physical therapy just to return to functional mobility and independent living prior to beginning a basic walking and weight training program. The point is to evaluate survivors according to their current abilities and prescribe appropriate exercise programming according to the
findings.

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/cancer-treatments-effect-all-elements-of-fitness

Because fruits and vegetables are loaded with both fiber and water, they enhance satiety, are low in calories, and may promote healthy weight management. Fruits and vegetables contain multiple nutrients and phytochemicals related to cancer reduction, and although it is not yet known which combination provides the best protection, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, along with the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Cancer Institute, recommend at least seven daily servings for women and nine for men.

Fresh, frozen, and canned fruits and vegetables can all be nutrient-dense food choices. Fresh produce typically has the greatest nutritional value, but long periods in transit, in grocery stores, and on home shelves all contribute to nutrient loss. For this reason, produce frozen immediately after harvest may contain more nutrients than some fresh produce. Canning and drying processes reduce heat-sensitive and water-soluble nutrient content, although foods preserved with these methods may pose less of an infection risk for patients undergoing immunosuppressive cancer treatment.4 Immunosuppressed patients also should avoid eating unpeeled raw fruits or vegetables because they may contain pathogens, which are destroyed in the cooking process. In terms of cooking methods, microwaving and steaming, instead of boiling, avoids nutrient losses that occur when nutrients leach into cooking water that is then discarded.

Juicing provides a means for increasing fruit and vegetable intake, particularly for those who have difficulty chewing or swallowing. For those concerned about overeating, however, juices do not match the satiety value of whole fruits and vegetables; additionally, when large juice servings are consumed, excess calories can contribute to weight gain. Only 100% juices should be chosen—added sugars detract from the nutrient density of any beverage.

Pesticides

The use of pesticides and herbicides has increased tremendously since the 1940s, and although many have been phased out, their residues may still be in foods eaten today.5 There is no epidemiological evidence that current exposure levels cause cancer,5 but for those interested in a cautionary approach, fruits and vegetables may be peeled or washed in lemon juice or vinegar baths to reduce residual surface pesticides. The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a research and advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C., has identified “Dirty Dozen” fruits and vegetables (pears, apples, bell peppers, celery, nectarines, strawberries, cherries, kale, lettuce, and imported grapes and carrots), which may have comparatively higher pesticide residues than other fruits and vegetables; as a result, consumers are advised to buy those raised organically. In contrast, they deem the “Clean 15” (onions, avocados, sweet corn, pineapples, mangos, asparagus, sweet peas, kiwi, cabbage, eggplant, papaya, watermelon, broccoli, tomatoes, and sweet potatoes) to be relatively free of pesticide residues. Given shifting patterns in agriculture and large-scale buying in the free market, it is unknown whether these categorizations will be useful to those seeking to minimize their exposure to pesticides over the long term.

Organic Foods

The term organic commonly refers to plant foods grown without pesticides or genetic modifications, or to meat, poultry, and dairy products from animals raised without antibiotics or growth hormones. The FDA sets limits for produce exposure to agricultural chemicals, but as stated previously, it is unknown whether the choice of organic versus inorganic foods influences cancer incidence, recurrence, or progression. With regard to nutrient quality, a recent 50-year systematic literature review found no difference between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs.

Article source: http://www.humankinetics.com/news-and-excerpts/news-and-excerpts/fruits-and-vegetables-relation-to-cancer-reduction