Restricted physical activity research in older women: does this represent additional risk to health?
- Authors: Viljoen, Janet E , Christie, Candice J
- Date: 2015
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/143682 , vital:38273 , https://ischp.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/ischp_2015_abstract_booklet.pdf
- Description: Post-menopausal women are at great risk of developing cardiovascular disease due to the loss of endogenous estrogen at menopause. This risk can be mediated via medication, but this route is costly and carries the risk of side effects which can reduce quality of life experience. The benefit of a lifestyle management approach to such risk, particularly via physical activity, is the emotional wellbeing that accompanies the physical health improvement. Research has not focused on women post-menses in this regard, and the existing science has preferred investigations of low intensity, aerobic type exercise. Our research engaged women, post-menses, in a high frequency, high intensity resistance training programme for 12 weeks in a supervised setting. Apart from clinical health benefits, the participants reported feeling empowered by the intervention. This paper will argue that the predominating research focus has tended to reduce choices for women, and thus restrict independence, individuality and self-confidence.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
The importance of Banting research and why withholding it costs us lives:
- Authors: Remsing, Sandra , Viljoen, Janet E , Christie, Candice J
- Date: 2015
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/143672 , vital:38272 , https://ischp.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/ischp_2015_abstract_booklet.pdf
- Description: Increased attention is being paid to the low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet, (LCHF) or ‘Banting diet’, as an effective method of managing insulin resistance and type ll diabetes. Randomised controlled trials have shown benefit, and anecdotes support the need for further investigation. Considering the prevalence and severity of type ll diabetes, effective non-pharmaceutical treatment options, such as LCHF, are crucial. However, current guidelines do not include the LCHF lifestyle, and in fact this option is generally opposed by the medical profession. Given the evidence, ignoring an alternative treatment must be considered an injustice to patients. This paper will present the opposing theories for the lifestyle treatment of type II diabetes, in particular, and critically argue that medical and scientific opposition to research into and application of an alternative treatment for insulin resistant individuals may be harmful rather than helpful.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015