E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSTeens who play on more than one sports team during the year are far less likely to become overweight or obese, a new study suggests.
In fact, Dartmouth College researchers concluded that the obesity rate among high schoolers could be cut by more than 26 percent if all teens signed up for multiple team sports, according to the study, published today in the journal Pediatrics.
The researchers also found that kids who bike or walk to school are less likely to become obese. If every kid in the country biked or walked to school at least four days a week, then obesity could be cut by 22 percent, they reported.
“I know that coordinating schedules can be difficult in terms of getting kids to practices and games,” said study co-author Keith Drake, a post doctoral research fellow at the Hood Center for Children and Families at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth.
“But it does look to us like getting kids involved in sports may be the best chance we have to get them physically active and to help them maintain a healthy body weight.”
Playing on a single team didn’t appear to have a strong effect. Still, Drake said: “Playing on one team is probably better than playing on none.”
Drake and his colleagues surveyed 1,718 New Hampshire and Vermont high school students and their parents for the new study. The new report is part of a seven-year review of adolescent health that started in 2002 and included five separate surveys of the kids and their parents.
In each survey, the kids were questioned about a variety of topics, including their diet, academic performance, weight, and time spend on physical activities. By the end of the study, most of the teens were in ninth or 10th grade.
Almost three-quarters of the teens reported playing on sports teams: 17 percent played on one team, 19 percent on two teams and 33 percent on three or more teams.
When the researchers accounted for factors such as weight at the beginning of the study, diet, gender and race, they found that the kids were much less likely to become overweight or obese if they played on two or more teams during the year.
Dr. William Stratbucker, a pediatric obesity specialist, isn’t surprised that kids needed to play more than one team sport to lower the risk of becoming obese. He said that teens who participate in only one sport shouldn’t consider themselves active.
“The problem is that families often assume that if they put their kid into a soccer program that that is enough,” said Stratbucker, an associate professor at Michigan State University and director of the Healthy Weight Center at the Helen DeVos Children’s Hospital in Grand Rapids, Mich. “But that’s only eight weeks a year. What about the other 44 weeks a year when they’re going about their same nutrition habits. Maybe a few weeks in the sport they’ll maintain their weight, but they will gain weight during the other weeks.”
Kids need to be doing activities all year long that will raise their heart and respiration rates, he said.
Stratbucker is particularly concerned about girls who seem to be eschewing sports more and more these days.
“There seems to be a cultural expectation of girls now,” he said. “They’re being encouraged to do things that don’t cause them to breathe hard or work up a sweat.”
Getting kids to sign up for sports may not be a panacea, Stratbucker said, “but I applaud the authors of the study for worrying about this issue and getting the discussion going,” he added.
More on Vitals:
Leave a Comment:
I don't mean to be rude, but duh. Of course if they are playing sports all week and/or walking to school they are more fit. BUT, that doesn't work for many families. There are costs associated with school and neighborhood sports, and if you have more than one child it can be impossible to get kids so many places. That doesn't even take into consideration that parents may not have the transportation available to get them there or be able to with work schedules. Also, kids have homework to do, and that comes before sports teams...sorry, but grades come first.
Yes, it is very important to keep them active, but a goal of two sports isn't often practical. Besides, kids may not even like two sports enough to be on two teams. If they aren't athletic kids they may not like one, actually. So yes, keeping moving is really important, but two sports just won't happen for many families, in my opinion. There is no way even for our 8 year olds we could afford and get them each to two sports each. And yes, playing on one team does make a difference. It is better than them not being active.
Sorry, but as parents we can't be at work, practices for two sports each, pay for all of it, and fix healthy foods, maintain our home, make sure they get schoolwork done, and of course we are supposed to stay fit ourselves somewhere in there. We take them swimming, but they are on no team. Eat healthy and stay active. You don't have to be on a team to do that...I understand it could help, but it isn't necessary in my opinion. Also, with four teams between them and how I see coaches push kids sometimes, I can see injury rates increasing. It is a good thing to point out they need exercise all year, but that doesn't have to be on two sports teams.
No offense, but don't have children if you don't have the time and money to spend on them.
Thank You!
Amazing to me how much 'organized' stuff parents are supposed to be doing - feeding your kids a balanced diet and staying active as a family as well as an athlete is a heck of lot more realistic than coming up with these 'perfect world' scenario's.
I see a constant parade of overweight parents with their overweight children - eat better and go do something - hike, kayak, walk, swim - anything. Active families tend to be healthier. Get rid of the video games, potato chips, 1000's of cable channels - it builds togetherness.
I am so SICK of having the perfect image pushed on me - love yourself, love your family - let that lead you.
There's also the hurdle of the kids being able to join the sports teams anyway, and if the kid's obese (unless it's football) all bets are probably off. I tried for 4 years to become a cheerleader to no avail..
@Firefly: I don't know if you have kids or how much you make, but when I was a teenager not too long ago, playing a sport could cost over $1000/year for equipment, fees, etc. not to mention the medical costs associated with any sports injuries.
All you people complaining about the cost of playing sports kill me; how about thinking outside the box? Why do they have to play on ANY teams? I never played on any "team" as a teenager. As a middle class teenager, i played tennis (public courts), threw the football around with my friends, played pick up baseball, we rode our bikes, fished, camped...most of these activities cost VERY little. In the winter months we still threw the football around and played "pick-up hockey". Wake up people!!
Now kids are too busy tweeting, facebook posting, downloading music/ movies...etc
@trifectapat Because that's what the article is talking about...
First of all, I would love to know what kids they interviewed. For a statement to be made that soccer is only 8 weeks out of the year is absurd. This report has many flaws and too many obvious answers. Many sports are played for long seasons and several go year round so the individuals who participated either A are on teams that are not of a competitive nature or B are too young to be on such teams when they started the survey. They stated how the kids were either 9th or 10th grade when they finished. If these kids are playing at that age, there is a good chance they are playing on their high school teams and then in the off season playing for their club teams. It always amazes me how we spend money to find out inaccurate or obvious bits of information. Hell, if everyone walked four days a week the obesity rate would be lower but I dont know about where you live, but most of our communities do not even have sidewalks and kids are told they cannot walk to school because of that. Next time spend the money for something that matters like I dont know: sidewalks, bikes for underpriviledged kids and the list goes on.
Christine, "rec" soccer is only 8 weeks or so. "travelling" is much longer.
The rule in my house was "I don't care what sport you do, but do but either do something or get a job b/c I don't want to hear you whining that there's nothing to do."
As a result, the kids tried tennis, soccer, baseball, football, hockey, tae-kwon-do, basketball and lacrosse. Both of them settled on hockey and soccer.
As a result, dad became a baseball and soccer coach, and was on the board of the hockey, baseball and soccer clubs. And before someone says something stupid, no, I never got my kids a "leg up" or anything. My kids earned their spots on their teams - whether B or C (never played A-level sports).
Vacations were whatever tournament the kids were playing in.
I spent enough on lessons, fees, equipment, etc over the years to pay for a few years of community college. But it was worth every penny and I'm glad I was able to afford it.
As to the article, how about kids start off with one sport and then see about a second sport...
So what you're saying is.....if you play more sports than someone else, you are more likely to be healthier??
Mind = Blown
Soccer only lasts 8 weeks? In what universe? Soccer is a year-round sport. Many other sports are either year-round or 3 seasons. Basketball can be year-round. Baseball is spring, summer, & fall.
As for biking to school - have these people ever seen how far away people live from schools in rural districts? It can take up to an hour by bus. How long do they expect kids to bike each way? 3 hours? 4 hours? In the dark?
Not every school has year-round sports for every team. In high school I was a cheerleader in the Fall and Winter and also played lacrosse in the Fall (before I moved to a school that didn't have lacrosse). I believe at both of my high schools soccer was a spring sport only. It definitely was not year-round. I guess it's not like that at every school though.
Why does it have to be a team sport? Isn't the answer just "stay physically active all year"? Much more manageable goal for lots of families...
Not to mention for the terminally klutzy kids like I was!
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to kids and health.
They can all play sports til they're all blue in the face but if obese teens keep stuffing their pieholes all day long...there's no amount of exercise that can burn off 3,000 plus calories a day....
Just saying that physical activity needs to be paired with a proper diet in order to work.
Agreed. A proper, healthy diet is so important in addition to being active!
Agreed that proper diet is important. However, the statement that there is "no amount of exercise that can burn off 3,000 plus calories a day" is wrong. I have friends who were on swim teams (when we were in high school) who had to eat 5,000-10,000 calories per day just so they wouldn't lose weight. Even Michael Phelps has said that he has to consume more than 10,000 calories per day to maintain his weight. There are year-round sports (like swimming) which are fabulous exercise.
I see. The answer to obesity is to become perpetually exercising in every spare moment of every day. When do children do homework? Homework is like a 20 hour week job in addition to the school day. On top of that, they are to participate in several year-round or nearly year-round sports at a time???
Who reviews this junk??? NBC should send its editor to do a little research at places such as the Mayo Clinic who will unreservedly tell you you can't exercise it off, you have to stop eating it.
When I look at what mothers and fathers buy their families to eat in grocery stores, it's no wonder they are having an obesity problem. The kind of regime this article suggests is one of the reasons these families buy the atrocious convenience foods needed to keep up the insane schedule this article suggests.
Human diets were meant to be predominately protein and vegetable based. Instead, we have turned to a diet of grains and starches, all of which create a tremendous carbohydrate load and enormous caloric intake. Convenience foods have massive carbohydrate content. All those carbs, the ones that can't be turned into energy in an hour or two, get stored as fat which is then more difficult to turn into engergy than the next incoming supply of more carbohydrates. This is the cycle of obesity. Add to this the supposedly healthy sports energy drinks that have huge carb contents that typically go with this kind of sports regime, and it compounds the problem further.
The amount of serious, high-exertion exercise it takes to eliminate 500 extra calories is an adult running, continuously, 5MPH for more than an hour. For children, it is even longer. To lose one pound of body fat, it would take more than seven continuous hours of running at that rate. It's completely ridiculous to talk about exercising to eliminate calories and body fat unless it goes with reducing caloric intake to less than what one uses so that body fat gets consumed. Furthermore, a balance of proteins, vegetables and certain low-glycemic index fruits is necessary instead of fast-carbs that, unless immediately used by the body, get stored as fat. Your grandparents knew that too much rice, corn, potatoes, bread or anything resembling them would make you fat. So, why is it that the almost pure fast-carb breakfast or it's first-cousin, the continental breakfast considered so healthy??? It's an abomination. And any amount of common unsugared breakfast cereal bigger than half an adult closed fist is more than a serving size. Think about that when you look at your breakfast cereal bowl and fill it. No amount of exercise can make up for the over-eating of fast-carbs in the typical American family diet.
In addition, these same parents have their youngest children on low or no-fat diets which are killing their brain growth. The human brain is mostly lipids, which are fat. The severe restriction of fat intake stunts brain development. Children, especially young ones, should not be on a low or no-fat diet unless put there for serious medical reasons, and then, monitored closely to prevent stunting other body development, including the brain, that requires fat intake.
The saddest part of this thread is that 'sports' is equated to 'team sports'. The all holy grail that the goal of 'sports' is to get an athletic 'scholar'ship, and then a lucrative professional contract.
Whatever happened to those sorts like onewall handball, association or touch football, stickball, kick the can, hide (run) and seek? None of those sports needed coaches, none of those sports ever resulted in permanent injuries, none of them required uniforms, equipment, or even parental supervision. The rules were usually made up locally, by the kids themselves. A football team could be anywhere from 3 on a side to 12, and it often varied during the game as other kids either arrived or had to go home for dinner. Sports meant fun, period.
And I doubt if there were baskets of goodies, or buckets of gatorade, on the sidelines to stuff your face with during 'timeouts'. When will we ever learn to let kids be kids again.
This is the stupidest study I have ever heard, of course exercise will reduce obesity but it's impossible for every student to play on the schools sports teams. Besides not all parents can afford uniforms and the time to take junior to practice. If young people would put down the Dorritos and stop sitting on their butt playing video games they would lose weight. When I was in middle and high school I rode my bike to school(I also was a paperboy), my parents didn't let me sit around all day eating junk food.
How about this: Limit them to one 8-12 oz soda or juice and one 8-12 oz 1% milk per day and then let them play. You know, unstructured play, which is good for the brain too. I did no organized sports as a kid, but we rode bikes, played hoops, skateboarded, played two hand touch football, and generally walked or biked to one another's houses. There was maybe 1-2 hefty kids per class...not even clinically obese, I'm sure. These kids are more likely to die from obesity conditions gettinghit by a car or gettingabducted. I hate to say it, but it sounds like a new parental disorder: obsessive protective disorder. Unless it's 20 degrees or 95 degrees, those kids should be outside moving around!
No need to talk about kids sitting on their ass all day playing video games. When I was that age I was playing video games and still went out and just wandered around the area I use to live. Kids have imaginations and they can use those imaginations outside and create their own playground. The sad thing is that now our kids won't even have the space to even randomly run around and create their own playgrounds and people are to afraid to let their children run around their own neighborhoods. When my kids are old enough I will have them go out and play on their bikes and chill with their friends outside. I will not push my kids into sports only if they really really want to be in them; that is the problem with most parents they force their children to do stuff they don't want to do at all. We don't need to put our children in sports to have them not gain massive amounts of weight.
Today's kids don't walk or pedal anything. Most of the kids, even the 5 year old on my block have motorized everything. Imagine a 5 year old with her own electric scooter, car, and fake riding lawn mower. The kid has over $1k in just power toys alone. To save money the school district wanted the kids that live less than one mile from the K-8 to walk instead of providing them buses. The parents had a sh!t fit because there kids would have to walk 5 blocks on sidewalks in a low traffic subdivision. One mother actually drives her kid and waits with her 8th grade son for the school bus on my block. The kid woulldn't even have to cross a street or leave the sidewalk to get there. Jeez the kid can't even walk two blocks but his dad rang my bell to ask me to sign a petition to reinstitute football at the high school! The dad was out ringing bells NOT THE KID!!!!! Another dad put training wheels on a 75cc motorcycle for his 4 and 6 year old kids.
Those parents need to be slapped in the face, and told to start thinking smartly and stop sheltering their children. >.<
"Sheltering their children": this type of thinking falls to the wayside when reality rings true; there have been literally dozens of abductions and attempted abductions in the town where I live alone in the past year(www.pantagraph.com look up attempted abduction). Including many driving around in our neighborhood, which is considered the "good" part of the city. So, it's such a GREAT idea to encourage my two, 15 and 12, to go outside all day every day to every area, isn't it? Oh, yeah, thinking of the perverted souls meandering on the city-wide trail. Yes, those who try to grab kids quite often. That's where I'll encourage them to go next! (/sarc)
Good grief, people, this isn't a Mayberry life we lead. It never will be again; and that's reality. Reality is, kids need to be in some sort of organized activities to be safe going out. Playing ball with the neighborhood population, and then walking home/riding bikes by themselves just is out of the picture due to safety concerns, and anyone that claims they are not valid concerns does NOT have a child under the age of 20!
Miskaffon, yes bad thing happen to kids. But contrary to what the nightly and 24 hour news hucksters would have you believe it is very rare. People do get hit by lightning but it is at a lottery win level. Stranger danger to kids is the same.
In 1999, only 115 children were abducted by strangers with the intent to keep, kill or hold them for ransom.
Though horrifying for those 115 and for society as a whole, the number does seem small, especially considering that there are 40 million children in the US. This would place the odds of a child being kidnapped and held or killed by a stranger at 1 in 347,000.
Read more at Suite101: Statistics on Child Abduction: Parents Fear Kidnapping More Than Car Accidents - What are the Odds? | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/statistics-on-child-abduction-a147599#ixzz20tcL3uc4
I wonder if this study took economic factors into account at all? In my experience, you had to be pretty well-off to have your kid in a sports program even through the public school, because the district did not subsidize the cost of the programs very much. That is not to mention all the time parents must take picking their kids up after school (because buses don't run after practice), taking the kids shopping for equipment and to go have their sports physicals. I also suspect that parents who had enough time and energy to dedicate to governing their kids' extracurricular activities were also more attentive about things like nutrition. In my experience there was definitely a correllation between fit kids and wealthy kids.
And walk to school? What a joke. It would have taken me 2 hours to walk to my middle and high schools, across 2 highways. There was no possible for me to get there by foot or by bike. In college, where I lived on or near campus and did walk everywhere, I was in the best shape of my life. It's no coincidence that my health has gone downhill since I graduated.
The lifestyle many Americans live, and its expansive suburbinization, just aren't conducive to physical fitness. Most of us do not live in areas where walking to and from our destination is possible, and some don't live in areas where it's possible to get easy, affordable access to nutritious foods. Saying that much of this problem can be fixed by enrolling more kids in sports is like saying that we can deal with a pest problem by digging up the yard. Yeah, it'd probably work, but it's not the best way to go about it.
In our community the Boys & Girls Club offers a lot of sports programming and subsidies so that families who are struggling are able to keep their kids in programs. Their goal is not only fitness and learning the sport itself but sports literacy - teaching the kids the rules of the game and how to work as a team. They are aiming the programming at kids grade 3 and under because the school board does not start sports until grade 4 and then it is all teams. The B&G Club has also been working to reintroduce pick-up games for the middle and high school kids because most of the have no other opportunity to play if they aren't on teams.
Hockey is the big sport in our area (two practices plus 2 games a week starting at age 5) and there is no subsidies for that.
Just more backwards thinking. We've created a lazy society with our fast paced electronic world.
Kids don't need to be taking more than one sport, they need to be concentrating on the tons of homework they receive. You want them to get active? Take away the electronics games and make them go ride a bike. Stop driving through McD's or picking up a pizza because your too busy and cook healthy meals and teach your kids healthy habits. Kids need at least 30 minutes of exercise a day all year round, then schools should make sure they have gym class every day. Look at how families lived 50 years ago compared to today and you'll find the problem.
Ah, so Dartmouth College has arrived at the conclusion that the solution to child obesity is to increase funding for school sports?
Am I shocked to find any school spending science money to justify expanding sports programs? Not at all.
Perhaps the educational system around the world should simply end education itself and be nothing but a giant profit-making X-Games system. Doctors and lawyers could be eliminated and peoples' condition and legal standing could simply be judged by Simon Cowell and Paula Abdul.
Kids simply need to get away from the crap snack foods, away from the fast food lines, go outside and play like most people did in the 70's and 80's and play some sports to learn how to be a team member and they wont be fat. Enough looking at the numbers...lets be honest...video games (and I play them enough to be considered a "gamer") and crap TV are what is making this latest generation of humans fat tired and lazy. We are on a collision course with WALL-E's vision of people in the future.
Organized sports, are you kidding me. Organized sports is one of the problems in this society. Look at the colleges, graft, cheating, child abuse. They don't teach sportsmanship or how to be a good looser. They teach win at any costs, ignore the injury, be tough. If kids want to be in organized sports, fine, let the parent monitor their activity. Activity is the key, along with other things.
So my 16-year-old is in Color Guard (not a sport, but believe me they work out!) for the Fall semester and then usually an aerobics/weight training class for the Spring semester. Oh, and she's supposed to be running, yes we have a treadmill AND elliptical machine so no real excuses there. My point is, it doesn't HAVE to be sports, there ARE other activities. Btw, high school sports aren't FREE, parents have to kick in as much as $300 for their kids to participate - same goes for Color Guard. So maybe a better solution is to bring back mandatory PE classes, and limit the cost to workout clothes & shower supplies.
One of the things that makes me steaming mad about this article is this: This so called survey says I need to join multiple sports teams so I can maintain a healthy weight. But one thing they didn't consider was try-outs. When I started high school I tried out for soccer, but I couldn't make the 11 minute mile. About halfway through high school I went out for tennis. But wasn't good enough to make the team. So tell me, if I am supposed to join a sports team to stay fit, but said sports team is too concerned about winning a stupid hunk of gold painted plastic that I can't be on it. What should I do?
Join martial arts.
Most kids that play sports are considered obese according to the BMI scale.
Enroll every child in two sports... how ridiculous and unrealistic! "Disgruntledstudent" hit the nail squarely on the head! School sports are unconscionably competitive, and the last thing on the mind of coaches and fans, is the health status of every student in the school. I don't claim to have a crystal ball to congure up a "solution," except perhaps an impossible trip back in time, but this is a societal problem and one with complexities unimagined a few decades ago.
A high school near me has about 3500 kids. (no kidding) Roughly about 50/50 boys/girls. good luck being one of the 12 girls that makes the varsity volleyball team or the 15 that make the basketball team.
This isn't a conclusion, it's a hypothesis. More than likely one based on faulty study techniques. In my neighborhood, the heaviest kid on the block was the one who played softball and soccer and rode her bike or walked everywhere. A day didn't go by that child wasn't running up the street with her friends, with a baseball bat, a skateboard, or a catcher's mitt while my much thinner daughter hung out in the house reading books. Metabolism determines weight, not the amount of sports someone participates in.
JCA. If the government is so concerned about obesity in children, perhaps the hormones should be taken out of food, i.e. meat and milk. That would help a lot for healthier Americans.
Not every child is gifted, coordinated, or interested in competitive sports. This study is flawed in that it equate fitness with only team (i.e. competitive) sports. The emphasis should be on healthy physical activity, particularly activity that can be done at any age. We ought to be teaching and encourage the enjoyment of healthy physical activity. This would lead to more sustainable and realistic life long habits. The habits learned as children and teen will directly affect them as adults. Team sports is not the answer for life long physical health.
Very true. It does help, however, to enroll kids when they are young in some sort of sport or active hobby. Localities frequently have programs to help even those with a lower income; our local programs are inexpensive, offer a great variety of programs and offer scholarships to those who need help.
I started my daughter when she was very young in gymnastics, dance, and ice skating programs. From that she developed a passion and is now totally devoted to her sport. She isn't the top winning athelete in her program, not even close, but I continuously remind her that winning prizes isn't the reason she's passionate about the sport. She loves it and that's the point! She competes against herself, and no one else. She's not likely to need to worry about anything even remotely close to obesity in her life. She is far too used to moving! :)
Look around you...More than 50% of adults R OBESE or MORBIDLY O>>>Poast Docs, Experts, 8 weeks of soccer, all poppycock! 1st exercize is PUSH AWAYS, from the table, DON"T EAT white bread, USELESS crap, sodapop, poison, causes strokes. Eat whole grain evything. Walk, run, ride, climb...get movin or die fat.
We must appreciate the intended purpose behind the study, and data can be easily collected on individuals who are currently physically active in high school. The easiest group, I assume, would be students who are involved in high school sports.
Personally, I have two boys who enjoy playing sports, but this may not be the case for everyone. Juggling sports schedules is not always possible, and is at moments counterproductive. I agree that not every young woman or man is interested in competitive sports. And, is playing sports really addressing the issue?
There can be many benefits to playing competitive sports, but I would hope obesity could be eliminated by teaching children how to be good citizens as well. Our community, and I would assume every community in the US, has opportunities for students to serve. Much of this work involves physical labor, but skill learning as well.
If unable to participate in community events, what about around the house? I may be the only one, but at our house the list of home improvements goes on and on and on.....I would be willing to conserve my own personal sweat for the sake of my children!