Only so many hours in a day
written by lunarcom , September 03, 2008 (06:33:40 AM)

I would suggest you head to your child's school and ask your questions, attend a PAC ( Parent Advisory Council ) and get heard in your child's school.
My understanding of your questions is that all schools have to accommodate this initiative from the Ministry of Education and each school and school district is doing it differently.
Yes your child will be going into final exams with less instructional time, but now final exams are no longer mandatory and most Universities in BC no longer require them.

...
written by peterson , September 03, 2008 (10:40:40 AM)

Just one more reason for parents to yank their kids out of public school.More wasted time on more useless programs.Physical fitness or the ability to read...hmmm...thats a hard one.The schools push kids through as it is when they havent got a grasp on spelling or mathematical basics.Now it will be even harder for these kids.Phys ed is important but all theyre doing is following the latest fad....why arent they doing more to inform parents about packaged and processed foods,thats whats causing the problems.It doesnt matter how much you exercise ,if you stuff your face with crap youre not going to be healthy.
How about mandatory random drug testing for ministry workers.

...
written by rambleon , September 03, 2008 (07:55:26 PM)

I understand the discontent behind cutting of class time, but it should be considered whether or not routine physical activity enhances a teenager's ability to learn. Unfortunately in today's age it seems that making it a requirement for some children to be active is the only way to get them to do so. Perhaps a slight deduction in instructional time could actually result in a more efficient day of learning?

Just a thought, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was data to support the idea.

...
written by D.K. Ross , September 03, 2008 (09:20:20 PM)

If you want your children to excel academically you must be the one holding the torch (so to speak). I see nothing wrong with getting these children off their butts and running about in the great outdoors rather than sitting alone playing whatever the newest, coolest piece of technology is. One on one instruction is a thing of the past and if you want your child to succeed you will have to either hire a tutor or make time for the extra lessons yourself. Fit kids scampering about - GOOD! Fat kids lolling about - BAD!

Eating slower also aids in weight loss,its been proven.
written by peterson , September 04, 2008 (11:33:44 AM)

Maybe many of these kids wouldnt be fat if they were given enough time to actually taste their food.Thanks to the Ministry of education kids are forced to wolf down food or eat half or less than half of their lunch.From the time the lunch bell rings to the time they are literally kicked out they are given 15 minutes. As far as I'm concerned its child abuse.By the time the child maybe goes to the bathroom ,washes their hands,gets their lunch and settles in they maybe have 5-10 minutes to eat.Which explains why my kids usually bring food home that has to go in the garbage.Maybe the ministry would take another look at their stupidity if parents sought a lawyer to recover the hundreds of dollars that are wasted every year on uneaten lunches that are a direct result of their policies.Not to mention the harm done to a child that hasnt had a proper lunch.
I dont eat my lunch in 15 minutes.How can they expect a child to eat that fast.Its not even human.

...
written by ccurle01 , September 04, 2008 (12:34:40 PM)

Why would they deduct time from everyones classes? This does not make any sense, what they should have done is kept the 20 minutes that they deducted from the day so that the students can continue to get the education they need to succeed in this world. They are already taking time away from these children for this routine they are bring in (which is a great idea), however, they are now taking even more away from them with this deduction in time.

...
written by tw1362 , September 04, 2008 (01:50:21 PM)

Seems like some people have a one track mind here. Doesn't anybody have some sense of basic economics? Everything is a trade off dear, you have to realize the sacrifices on the human condition when a child has no exercise. I think the idea of forced excercise is what is needed for these kids, especially the ones (majority) who spend more time with the latest video games and high-definition t.v. And youve got to be kidding yourself to believe the only way to succeed in this world is education only.

Exercise
written by P val , September 04, 2008 (03:27:36 PM)

So all you people against this move to get the kids into some SMALL part of an exercise program dont seem to care about thier future. With all the medical complications from being overweight being brought into to our society these days its amazing that people are against it. Just think of costs to our medical system due to this. If we take a positive look at this it could mean..

Healthier kids..in turn healthier adults
Longer lives to enjoy time with family/friends
Less costs for hospitals and doctors.
So more money to go back into education.

...
written by peterson , September 04, 2008 (03:56:14 PM)

They do get exercise,its called PHYS ED.Most kids these days have after school activities wich requires physical fitness and when kids are bogged down with exessive homework because they lost 20 minutes they no longer get to do those after school activities.I for one have had enough of a government system stealing time from my family.How about the medical complications from sports injuries.How about permanent knee or neck damage that many of us walked away with after highschool that can often result in multiple surgeries.I have friends who are very overweight and friends who are thin.Funny, the thin one is always sick,shes 35 has early osteoporosis,has had multiple surgeries and cysts removed from breasts and ovaries,she had 2 babies and gestational diabetes with both,and high blood pressure.My overweight friend is perfectly healthy and had 4 perfectly normal healthy pregnancies.People need to start doing some actual research instead of quoting bias doctors.To say that all overweight people are a burden to the system is ignorant to the extreme.Just because someone has low body fat,doesnt make them healthy.

overwieght
written by P val , September 04, 2008 (04:49:31 PM)

Overweight friend is perfectly healthy ? Please explain that to me ? Also are the kids MADE take Phys ed or is it an elective ?

http://www.spiked-online.com/A...0CADA2.htm
written by peterson , September 04, 2008 (09:42:11 PM)

Perhaps you need to visit a hospital sometime or see people waiting for surgery.The majority are THIN!Youre a good sheeple,believe everything the money grubbing med industry says.If you knew anything you would know that the majority of overweight people dying prematurely are doing so because they have been harassed by people like you to believe that they are flawed and need drugs,so they use these drugs and aspartame/splenda which screws with your system.The diet drugs make their blood pressure go up,next thing theyre on more and more drugs for side effects.Next thing theyre dead and the pharma industry blames their weight.Funny you had nothing to say about the skinny people who are a drain on the system.
Its a fact, fat active people have half the mortality rate of thin sedentary people, and the same mortality rate as thin active people.

The 'war on fat' is a witch-hunt masquerading as a public health initiative.
by Paul Campos

Death by Harassment
written by P val , September 05, 2008 (08:02:28 AM)

Okay..so now we have perfectly healthy overwieght people that are dying from harassment. Peterson you are hilarious.. please keep your hilarious comments coming :)

...
written by ccurle01 , September 05, 2008 (08:25:29 AM)

I think that I was misunderstood, and I don't blame anyone for that, I worded that wrong.

I am all for this fitness that they are bring into the schools, what I am not for is the cutting back time in the classes. The fitness program is a great idea, but understanding why they are cutting class time makes not sense to me whatsoever.

Why not keep the 20 minutes per day and put that towards fitness for ALL grades rather than just the select few. Do it at different times in the day during the gym classes for the grades, that way the learning in the classes is not cut and the children are getting the fitness that they need to live longer, healthier lives.

...
written by Mike S , September 05, 2008 (08:28:30 AM)

Well Peterson I have an overweight friend who has had her health problems increase as she gained weight. Worsening back pain, thyroid is now 'shot' and she requires medication for life, respiratory problems and on and on. Oh oh... our examples don't match up. Whatever can we do, while avoiding science as you prefer? Can anyone break this impasse with some other meaningless and irrelevant anecdotes of friends and their weight?

...
written by Reality , September 05, 2008 (08:44:24 AM)

Kids need exercise. Not only does it benefit them physically, it is a huge stress buster, benefiting them mentally / emotionally. Not all kids are in after school activities, for various reasons. Parents need to stay involved and play a vital role in their child's education. So many don't even ask questions about homework, or look at their children's work to see how they are doing, and then report cards come and parents complain that the teachers aren't doing their job. Be interested, be involved and be vigilant - both with physical and non physical education.
I have no idea if this is true or not, but I did hear at one time that if a child is in a legitimate competetive sport outside of the school curriculum, they can skip the PE and still get the credit - giving them more time for their studies. If anyone has any info regarding this - I would be interested.

As far as the overweight being healthier than the average or below weight debate (or vice versa), I think it is ridiculous. An active overweight person can be perfectly healthy, sure - but it is because their activity is lessening the negative impact the excess weight has on their health. A thin person with multiple health problems obviously has other issues and perhaps a genetic component to go with it. The mandatory PE for children is exactly that "physical activity" for the thin, the heavy and the obese. education re food choices, etc is a great idea, but I believe this should be taught at home, by example, by responsible parents. Teaching kids at school what to eat or not eat is useless if parents do not provide a good example and continue to provide nothing but crap to eat at home.

...
written by peterson , September 05, 2008 (08:50:46 AM)

Maybe your overweight friend eats frozen and processed junk food.My friend doesnt eat fast food or anything processed and they walk everyday and take lots of herbs and vitamins.They have a healthy lifestyle.Nothing like a plethera of chemicals to screw with ones thyroid and cause respiratory problems.My thin friend on the other hand,the one with the major health problems lives on junk.
Put it this way an if an overweight woman developes gestational diabetes the doctor automatically WITHOUT QUESTION blames her weight.If a thin woman has the exact same problem they say its just one of those things.The majority of so called science is based on bias doctors reports. Start doing some research on Candida for your friend.

...
written by dhood , September 05, 2008 (08:54:24 AM)

So what is the price of rice in China??

...
written by peterson , September 05, 2008 (08:55:07 AM)

P val youre ingnorant.Do some research.The gov really doesnt need to worry about population control.All they need to do is get doctors to tell everyone that a study showed that jumping off of bridges will result in a longer life.SHEEPLE.

...
written by Mike S , September 05, 2008 (09:02:06 AM)

Peterson you just answered your own question. ".. My thin friend on the other hand,the one with the major health problems lives on junk...". While the overweight one is aware of healthy choices. Duh. Enough with the ludicrous anecdotes please.

No one is saying that weight is the only issue. But ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, being overweight, especially obese, has definite health risks. You, definitely, are the one that needs to do research.

...
written by Reality , September 05, 2008 (09:09:47 AM)

Gestational diabetes is a condition develops during pregnancy and usually resolves itself after delivery - and diet and genetics plays a role in this. Type I or II Diabetes developed later in life is also a result of a combination of diet and genetics. It is a fact that excess weight is detrimental to your health. If someone's weight is not causing them a problem, then great - carry on and be happy. But, if there are health issues, there is no doubt that the weight is likely a contributor. Your thin friend obviously has a genetic makeup allowing her to remain thin despite her eating habits - but her eating habits are catching up to her and having the same effect on her that obesity might.
The fact remains, if someone is overweight, and ends up with a health issue, such as diabetes, elevated cholesterol, breathing problems, heart problems, muscles, joints and bones, the first thing the doctor is going to do is suggest weight loss. It's a no-brainer.

...
written by ccurle01 , September 05, 2008 (09:10:56 AM)

Just a point. The guy who created the 5 factor health thing, he was said to weigh 210, and that is considered obese. I personally don't think the scale should matter more than what the measurments of body fat, cholestral, muscle mass and overall health are.

...
written by dhood , September 05, 2008 (09:21:28 AM)

I do know that the calories in rice is very high and a portion is either 1/3 cup of brown or 1/2 cup of white. Brown flour has more calories than white and also far more vitamins than white. Same for rice. People eat too many calories and not enough green veggies or salads. If you put in more than you use up then naturally you are going to put on weight. If you watch your calories and eat more salads and veggies you'll be fine. Seniors in a care home are given approx. 1200 calories a day to maintain their weight. Most of us use between 1500 and 2000 calories a day if we aren't too active. If students have exercise first thing in the morning they will burn more calories than if they sit all day and then try to burn calories. (I am not a professional but I have learned a few things over the years.) Lazy kids get fat as do lazy adults. I do not condone the use of sugar subs unless you're a diabetic and your doc says so. (I get absolutely horrible headaches from them as well as processed cheeses.) (Migraines)
I believe the amount of meat a person is supposed to eat is 2 1/2 to 3 oz. a few times a week. Red meat has a substantial amount of calories. Chicken and fish not so many.

So like they say "everything in moderation". And don't forget that 1/2 hour walk a day. (preferrably fast.)

...
written by Mike S , September 05, 2008 (09:28:13 AM)

'210' in itself is not considered obese. The person you mention may have been obese, but more knowledge is needed such as height, age, build, etc. Many people weigh 210 and are average depending on their height.

...
written by dhood , September 05, 2008 (09:29:24 AM)

That 210 lb guy is just too short for his weight! If he was 7 ft tall he would be fine.

...
written by travhops , September 05, 2008 (10:59:24 AM)

I don't understand why people are complainingabout 20 minutes a day for physical exercise. It is healthier, makes them more alert and is beneficial to health. As a child I played outside morning to night, a luxury kids don't have now, for safety reasons, my personal opinion as to why there is more obesity in children. I can't see 20 minutes a day seriously cutting into anyone's education.

...
written by Mike S , September 05, 2008 (11:12:26 AM)

Travhops I agree with your common sense. Healthier, fitter kids, will be more alert. I would guess that the 20 less minutes will not be missed if they are more productive with the learning time they have.

The only thing I disagree with is the reason for sedentary kids nowadays. I don't think it has anything to do with actual safety (although I would agree parents are more vigilant and maybe even paranoid). I think it is more to do with so many 'indoor toys' being available. For some reason, street hockey now has a hard time competing with xbox and ps2 hockey games played with fingers and thumbs.

As far as obese kids, I think it is simple. Genetics, diet and exercise are the factors. Genetics has likely not changed in one or two generatations. That leaves exercise (much less now), and diet (generally worse now). As an example, most kids from my generation (70's), didn't have the money that kids seem to have today for junk food. Even if someone had the money, they didn't have the option of buying a 'slurpee' the size of a beer keg.

Confused
written by LadyHeather , September 05, 2008 (11:37:40 AM)

Don't these kids already have PE class? Can't we focus on fitness in there? If they don't have PE than this new fitness class is replacing PE, so there's no reason any extra class time need be cut. Is there something I'm missing?

PE (or sports as I called it) was mandatory 3 days a week for me when I was in school. I think we did about 30 minutes each time in elementary school and 45-60 minutes when we were older. We did not have a big obesity problem. So if kids are already doing that and still getting fat, obviously there is another factor at work. 20 daily minutes of exercise will not attack these other factors (diet, parental attitudes, hobbies, etc.). There seems to have been a widespread societal shift in the past 20 years and it's going to take more than this to revert to the old way.

Mike S, I agree
written by travhops , September 05, 2008 (12:12:59 PM)

about the video games, indoop toys, slurpees, etc. When I was talking about safety, I was referring to much younger children. Sorry I didn't clarify myself better.

...
written by ccurle01 , September 05, 2008 (12:27:07 PM)

The point is that the school has deducted 20mins per day from classes to accomodate this program, when they should have kept the extra 20mins

...
written by rambleon , September 05, 2008 (12:49:33 PM)

Whoa whoa! How did this get turned into a discussion on how this 20 minutes is going to get kids in shape/the man is bring the abnormally healthy fat people down?

Isn't it obvious that the intent of the 20 minutes of exercise per day will aid in making students better receptive to learning?

...
written by ccurle01 , September 05, 2008 (04:04:52 PM)

"I was very concerned to see my son’s Grade 10 timetable at a local high school. In it, his schedule has been cut from five hours of instruction per day to four hours and 40 minutes. Now 20 minutes per day may not seem like a significant amount, but keep in mind that in the past, schools have had to add two or three minutes to each day to make up for a couple lost days of instruction during the year. This 20 minutes per day amounts to more than 12 days of instruction."

So now, instead of the students getting out of classes and going home lets say at 330, they are now getting out of school at 310 to accomodate this program.

What is next, another stirke because the teachers are not getting paid enough again?

...
written by travhops , September 06, 2008 (06:28:49 PM)

After sitting for hours in a classroom, some physical exercise wakes kids up, makes them more attentive. I think this is a great idea.

20 minutes a day, what a loss!
written by D.K. Ross , September 07, 2008 (02:07:48 PM)

If I am not mistaken, by the time the average student gets to grade 11, most of their class time is either spent taking notes or listening to lectures. I remember very few spirited debates in my grade 12 classes but we could hear the kids from the "ëasy" courses down the hall having lots of fun. I would consider myself a happy man if I never had to gaze at an over-head projection of some subject that I knew would have no further bearing on my future. Kids need to frolic!!! Make them play if you have to!

Exactly DK.
written by travhops , September 08, 2008 (10:13:41 AM)

Remembering my high school days, a chance to get up from that desk, uncramp my note taking hand and move around would have been wonderful! I remember how we loved the welcome interruption of a fire drill!

Physical education
written by White House , September 09, 2008 (05:58:25 PM)

This should be a requirement to graduate. I am not certain if it still is, but it was when I went to high school. There are far too many people suffering from illness related to obesity and lack of physical activity, which are straining our medical system and resources. I am very happy that my children have this as part of their curriculum, to help ensure their physical well-being in addition to their mental well-being. Physical activity has been proven to stimulate the brain, due to the increase in blood flow.

For the parents who are concerned this is taking away from the education time of their child(ren), perhaps you should also be looking at the amount of time spent playing video games instead of partaking in the activities that will keep them healthy. Something as simple as jumping on a trampoline for 20 minutes is excellent aerobic activity that will help for the long-term.

Life has become far too serious for today's children & it is time for them to have some fun & take part in team activities that will also help them excel as adults. And yes, participating in a gym class is a team activity.

...
written by pgboy , September 09, 2008 (06:57:53 PM)

remembering my highschool days of 8 am to 3 pm with a half hour lunch and 5 minutes between 8 courses....wow only 5 hours of school now for highschool....jeesh and to think i was still bored at how slow school was going then...

I had to take PE...and am better for it, i think that if parents were really concerned for their children they would stop complaining about exercise since most kids now are going to be living at home swearing and cursing at their parents till they thirty anyways