Our Better Health

Diet, Health, Fitness, Lifestyle & Wellness


3 Comments

The Best TV Show To Feel Joy, Amazement And Awe

The study compared TV show genres to see which makes people happiest.

Watching nature documentaries — like being out in nature itself — can help you feel happier.

The survey of 7,500 people around the world found they felt happier after viewing clips from BBC nature documentaries.

The study compared watching the documentary to the news or a popular drama show.

People reported that after viewing the nature documentary they felt more:

  • joy,
  • amazement,
  • awe,
  • and curiosity.

At the same time it reduced feelings of anger, tiredness and stress.

Professor Dacher Keltner, who teamed up with the BBC for the study, said:

“I have long believed that nature and viewing sublime and beautiful nature in painting, film and video shifts how we look at the world, and humbles us, brings into focus our core goals, diminishes the petty voice of the self and strengthens our nervous system.
When the BBC approached me about working together, it was a no-brainer.
I think their video content inspires green tendencies in viewers.”

Professor Keltner said:

“The importance of the Real Happiness study is that brief exposures to Planet Earth II content bring greater awe, positive emotion, and wellbeing to people in six countries.
The results also show that younger people are highly stressed out, and that viewing videos about the natural world reduces their stress, which tells me that we can turn to other kinds of new social media content to find calm during these highly stressful times.”

The study was part of the Real Happiness Project.

source: PsyBlog
Advertisements


Leave a comment

Does TV Hinder Kindergarten-Readiness?

Lower-income kids harmed more by excess screen time than affluent children, study finds

One big factor holding kids back as they enter kindergarten may sit in the family living room: the television.

New research suggests that youngsters who watch a lot of TV – or other screens – are less ready for school than those who don’t.

“Given that studies have reported that children often watch more than the recommended amount, and the current prevalence of technology such as smartphones and tablets, engaging in screen time may be more frequent now than ever before,” lead author Andrew Ribner said in a New York University news release. He’s a doctoral candidate in NYU’s department of applied psychology.

In the new study, Ribner’s team tracked the school-readiness of 800-plus kindergarten students, testing their thinking, memory, social-emotional, math and literacy skills.

kids-watching-tv

Watching TV for more than a couple of hours a day was associated with lower skills, according to the study. The finding was especially strong among low-income children.

The researchers suggest that parents limit children’s TV time to less than two hours a day. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends less than an hour a day of TV viewing for children aged 2 to 5.

Ribner’s group couldn’t say why poorer children seemed harmed more than richer kids by excess TV time. However, the researchers noted that earlier studies have found that kids in higher-income homes watch more educational programming and less entertainment. Affluent parents may also have more time to watch TV with their children, discussing and helping them understand what they’re viewing.

“Our results suggest that the circumstances that surround child screen time can influence its detrimental effects on learning outcomes,” said study co-author Caroline Fitzpatrick, of the University of Sainte-Anne in Canada.

The study was published March 1 in the Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics.

By Robert Preidt      HealthDay Reporter    WebMD News from HealthDay
WEDNESDAY, March 1, 2017 (HealthDay News)
source:     New York University, news release, March 1, 2017      www.webmd.com


Leave a comment

TV Ads May Spur Snacking in Kids as Young as Two

Mindless snacking in front of the television set may start long before children know how to work the remote control, a U.S. study suggests.

In an experiment with 60 kids aged 2 to 5 years, researchers focused on how advertising influences what’s known as eating in the absence of hunger.

They gave all the children a healthy snack to make sure they had a full belly, and then sat the kids down to watch a TV program with ads for Bugles corn chips or for a department store.

All of the kids had Bugles corn chips and one other snack in front of them while they watched the show. Children who saw ads for the corn chips ate 127 calories on average, compared to just 97 calories for kids who didn’t see Bugles on the screen, researchers report in Pediatrics.

“This is the first study to show that exposure to food ads cues immediate eating among younger children – even after they had a filling snack,” said lead study author Jennifer Emond of Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire.

“Young children average up to three hours of TV viewing a day,” Emond added by email. “If kids are exposed to food ads during that time, they may unconsciously over consume snacks which can lead to extra weight gain.”

More than one third of U.S. children are overweight or obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends against any screen time for children younger than 18 months and suggests no more than an hour a day for kids aged 2 to 5 in part to encourage language development, support healthy sleep habits and limit sedentary activity that can set preschoolers on a path toward obesity.

The type of TV program matters too. The AAP encourages educational programming like “Sesame Street” that can support language learning.

For the experiment, researchers sat kids down to watch a 14-minute segment of “Elmo’s World” that included three minutes of advertising.

kids-watching-tv

Before the show started, all of the kids could snack as much as they liked on banana, sliced cheese and crackers. They also got water to drink.

Children were randomly assigned to view ads for national department stores or to watch Bugles spots that showed kids playing and eating the corn chips.

While the shows played, kids were given bowls of Nabisco Teddy Grahams and Bugles corn snacks.

There wasn’t a meaningful association between how much kids ate during the program and their age, weight or the way their parents typically supervised mealtime at home.

In particular, researchers looked at whether parental feeding restrictions – which can include things like pressuring kids to eat or prohibiting certain foods – and didn’t find any association between these practices and the amount of snacks kids consumed in the experiment.

One limitation of the experiment is that it included mostly white, affluent rural kids, which may make the results less relevant to the broader population of U.S. children, the authors note.

Young children can also be unreliable when they tell adults whether they are full, so it’s possible some children who claimed they had enough to eat before watching TV were actually hungry, the researchers also point out.

Even so, the findings should give parents another reason to limit children’s exposure to media that comes with advertising, said Dr. Julie Lumeng, a researcher at the University of Michigan’s C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital who wasn’t involved in the study.

“Many children’s programs are now instead using product placement to advertise,” Lumeng added by email. “Parents should also pay attention to how product placement occurs in the television programs or other media their young children may be watching.”

Age 2 may be too young to understand how ads can influence behavior, Lumeng noted.

“But parents can consider gradually introducing the power of advertising to young children as a strategy for helping their children resist the effects of these ads,” Lumeng said. “Ultimately limiting the child’s exposure to the ads is the key strategy.”

 By Lisa Rapaport    Reuters Health

 SOURCE: bit.ly/2fCqsMF Pediatrics, online November 21, 2016.

 source: http://www.reuters.com


Leave a comment

Sitting 8 Hours A Day? An Hour A Day Of Physical Activity Could Offset The Health Risks

Brisk walking or cycling found to eliminate the increased risk of death associated with prolonged sitting

Office workers and others who sit for eight hours a day can avoid the health risks associated with that inactivity by doing an hour of physical activity a day, a new study suggests.

The research team behind the study wanted to know if it was possible for people who sit all day at an office job to compensate for the harmful effects of that lack of activity by getting some exercise. In short, the answer is yes.

Researchers arrived at their findings by analyzing data from 16 studies involving more than a million people. They found that people who were physically active, but sat for eight hours a day, had a much lower risk of death compared to people who weren’t physically active, even if they sat for fewer hours.

cycling
The researchers found that doing at least one hour a day
of moderately intensive physical activity a day
was enough to completely offset the increased risk
of death from sitting for eight hours a day.

“This suggests that physical activity is particularly important, no matter how many hours a day are spent sitting,” the study’s authors said.

The researchers found that doing at least one hour a day of physical activity a day was enough to completely offset the increased risk of death from doing all that sitting.

By physical activity, researchers said walking at 5.6 km/h meets the standard, as would cycling at 16 km/h.

“Our message is a positive one: it is possible to reduce — or even eliminate — these risks if we are active enough, even without having to take up sports or go to the gym,” said lead author Ulf Ekelung, a professor at the Norwegian School of Sports Sciences and the University of Cambridge.

That message was welcome news for Toronto lawyer Kiran Gill, who often bikes to and from work. “I am surprised it only takes one hour to mitigate the effects of eight hours of sitting. I would think that would take a lot more,” she told CBC News.

While an hour a day of physical activity is ideal, researchers said getting less than an hour of daily exercise can still reduce the health risks of sitting for hours.

The key message from the study is that if long periods of sitting each day can’t be avoided, it’s crucial to be physically active.

Heavy TV viewing

Researchers also looked at the health risks of one particular type of sedentary activity — watching a lot of television.

They found that those who sat and watched at least three hours of TV per day had an increased risk of death for all groups, except those who engaged in moderately intensive physical activity for 60 to 75 minutes per day.

But for those watched at least five hours of TV per day, even high levels of physical activity were not enough to eliminate higher mortality risks.

Why does TV watching for hours at a time seem to be more unhealthy than a similar amount of time sitting at a desk?

Researchers suggest that watching a lot of TV may be a marker of a more unhealthy lifestyle in general. They also suggest that because people tend to watch TV in the evenings after dinner, it may affect their metabolism. People also tend to snack while watching TV.

The study was published Wednesday in The Lancet.

With files from the CBC’s Christine Birak and Melanie Glanz
CBC News        Posted: Jul 27, 2016 

source: www.cbc.ca