move more, live longer

March 30, 2012 4 Comments »
move more, live longer

As parents, we’ve heard the expert’s opinion that because of poor life habits, today’s children may not live as long as their parents. This hasn’t been the case since medieval times.

Last June, we launched the Active for Life campaign with a 30-second television spot titled “Recess”. In that video, children share alarming statistics about their lack of exercise and declining health.

Recess struck a chord in parents and generated a lot of response. Watch it again and you’ll see why.

Here are four trends that might affect your child:


Trend 1: Where does your child’s day go?

For children ages 3 - 12:

For children ages 3 – 12:

Source: Kaiser Family Foundation

Trend 2: Sport participation in steady decline

Trend 3: Weight going up and up

Trend 4: What your child’s health costs

Source: Canadian Diabetes Association The report from the Canadian Diabetes Association states that by next year, there will be 2.5 million Canadians with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes; by 2020, that number will rise to 3.7 million. Read more. Many patients spend between $1,000 and $15,000 a year on products such as test strips and medication, forcing some patients to abandon aggressive treatment. Those decisions end up costing the public health system, since it can lead to expensive complications and even more expensive medication costs. Read more.

 

 

Related Articles

4 Comments

  1. Neil Farmer August 25, 2012 at 4:46 pm - Reply

    Total Garbage!

    You know full well the World Health Organization and Statistics Canada both show the life expectancy for a child born today is the highest it has ever been in Canada.

    Your “Recess” ad is a lie and discredits any information you provide as an organization promoting healthy lifestyles for Canadians.

    If you had any ethics, you would print a retraction and apologize for your fear mongering “Recess” ad.

    • Blaine Kyllo
      Blaine Kyllo October 16, 2012 at 10:27 pm - Reply

      Neil, the data from the World Bank is quite clear: the life expectancy of Canadians has, for the first time, declined.

      See the values for yourself:
      World Bank
      Life expectancy at birth, total years, Canada
      2002: 79.6
      2003: 79.8
      2004: 80.1
      2005: 80.3
      2006: 80.6
      2007: 80.8
      2008: 81
      2009: 80.7

      And don’t think that the difference between 81 and 80.7 isn’t significant. It corresponds to about four months of life. And given that the life expectancy of Canadians had steadily increased every year for more than a decade, the fact that it’s trending down is of concern.

      The data no longer predicts an increase in life expectancy for Canadians.

      For what it’s worth, we’re not the only ones trying to bring this alarming fact to light. Nike’s Designed to Move initiative also reports that “today’s 10 year olds are the first generation expected to have a shorter life expectancy than their parents”. That claim is supported by a number of health and activity experts.

      We’ve always said that the information at Active for Life is based on science, research and the facts. That’s not going to change.

      • Neil Farmer April 12, 2013 at 1:11 pm - Reply

        Thank you for confirming my point.

        The original claim in the “Recess” ad is:

        “we now have a shorter life expectancy than our parents”

        From the World Bank – The life expectancy for a Canadian born in 1980 is 75 years and for a Canadian born in 2009 is 80.7 years. This is an increase of over five years in life expectancy. Thus a child born in 2009 to a parent born in 1980 has a life expectancy over five years greater than the parent.

        Obviously from the World Bank data you reference the claim in the “Recess” ad is garbage. Children born today have a longer life expectancy than their parents.

        Whether the current life expectancy for Canadians is increasing or decreasing is not at issue. Please focus on the original claim in the “Recess” ad.

        As to Nike using the same lie to sell their products to gullible individuals, no shock there.

        • Blaine Kyllo
          Blaine Kyllo May 25, 2013 at 4:43 pm - Reply

          Neil, we agree with you if we only compare the life expectancy of a child with the life expectancy of their parent based on the historical data.

          But the reversing trend in life expectancy means more than that.

          Health and medical experts in Canada, the U.S., and around the world agree that predictions of a child’s life expectancy must take into account the trends in health and mortality of children today. Among children there’s been a steep decline in activity levels and a dramatic and dangerous rise in obesity.

          The tragedy here is that after decades of increases, the life expectancy trend has for the first time in history reversed. And because we’re talking about the health and well being of our children, we think the reversal is something to be worried about.

          And we want Canadians to take action with their children to get that trend going up again.

What do you think?