Why giving children more opportunity to exercise is unlikely to put a dent in rates of obesity

I can across this report today. It’s based on a study which finds that British children are generally most active between 5.00 and 8.00 pm. Between late March to late October, here in the UK we run on British Summer Time (Greenwich Mean Time minus 1 hour). From late October to late March we revert GMT. The suggestion is if we ran on British Summer Time all year around, it would be lighter at the end of the day, and kids would be more active, and they’d be slimmer too.

However, as is often the case, things are not as straightforward as they seem. I know it makes sense that being more active will help with weight control by burning more calories, but study after study has shown that aerobic exercise has little or no bearing on weight in the long term. I’ve written about this a few times.

The natural reaction some have when faced with the evidence is to deny it and believe it must somehow be flawed. One observation many will cite to ‘prove’ the research is wrong is to point to, say, elite marathon runners as an example of what happens as a result of regular distance running – you end up looking like a marathon runner (slight in stature and very lean).

Here’s the problem though – just because leanness and regular distance running go hand-in-hand, does not mean running causes leanness. Could it be the other way round? Could it be, in other words, that people who are naturally lean are more likely to end up as marathon runners?

I anecdotally know many who have lost little or no weight clocking up the massive mileages while in training for a marathon.

If we’re at least a bit open to the idea that leanness may ‘cause’ marathon running or greater levels of activity, then we should also be open to the fact that being obese might cause sedentary behaviour (rather than the other way round). So, when we witness an obese child slouched in front of the TV or X-box, it’s easy to conclude that such sedentary endeavours are contributing to their weight issue (and that all would be well if they spent more time running around). But, again, could it be that the weight problem caused the sedentary behaviour?

Far-fetched though this may sound to some, there is some evidence for it in the form of a study [1] which was published on-line last year and I reported on here. In this research, the relationship between physical activity and body fatness in children were assessed over a 3-year period. Basically, the most sedentary children were most likely, also, to be carrying excess body fat. Following children over time allowed the researchers to ascertain that lower levels of activity did not lead to increased body fatness. In fact, it was the other way round: children appeared to accumulate fat first, and then this was followed by them becoming more sedentary.
The authors note that this finding “may explain why attempts to tackle childhood obesity by promoting PA (physical activity) have been largely unsuccessful.”

I’m a fan of exercise and rate it highly as a lifestyle factor for enhanced health and wellbeing. However, the idea that extending daylight hours will help tackle childhood obesity is not rooted in science. A better strategy, I believe, would be for kids to consume less foods with added sugar as well as relatively crappy starchy carbohydrates like bread, rice, pasta and breakfast cereals.


1. Metcalf BS, et al. Fatness leads to inactivity, but inactivity does not lead to fatness: a longitudinal study in children (EarlyBird 45). Arch Dis Chil 2011;96(10):942-7

7 Responses to Why giving children more opportunity to exercise is unlikely to put a dent in rates of obesity

  1. tom dolan 11 November 2011 at 10:13 am #

    dear john,

    really enjoy your site. barking mad is all i can say to this new recommendation to combat obesity. it is clear when studied, that obesity is an issue of upside down body chemistry caused by eating bad, factory produced, sugar laden food. or better said, rubbish. as simple as that and your site always brings this fact home. keep up the good work.

    all the best,
    tom dolan

  2. Feona 11 November 2011 at 12:54 pm #

    Er – British Summer Time is GMT PLUS one hour,not minus one hour! I don’t understand the push for lighter evenings at all, as that would mean even darker mornings. As a fellow sufferer with Dr Briffa of SAD, I would hate to have darker mornings and I can’t see that lighter evenings would have any effect on children’s active behaviour anyway. Stop stuffing them with junk food and sugary drinks is the only sure way to tackle obesity!

  3. BrianL 11 November 2011 at 4:13 pm #

    At work, I sit next to a gentleman who can be heard saying how much time to spends at the health club performing aerobic activities such as running on a treadmill and using a stationary bicycle. Guess what? He’s still very overweight. After seeing what he east during the day it’s no wonder.

  4. sam 11 November 2011 at 7:52 pm #

    It’s amazing though isn’t it that cultures that have based their diets on these ‘crappy starches’ and have lived to be the oldest in the world and have less diseases…

    But since the ready availability of fatty fried meat, dairy products which were scarce prior to the industrial revolution… people have become ill and fat…but no, it can’t be the meat and animal products…it has to be plain boiled rice making people fat..

  5. Helen Mould 12 November 2011 at 12:42 am #

    Can there be any genetic component? My little 3 year old grandson eats very little. So little that its a constant worry that he is getting enough nutrition to develop and grow. He just does not want to eat at any meal. However, when you look at him ready for the bath it is plain to see he has chubby little thighs and does not look under nourished.
    He was very keen on sucking on a dummy. It will be interesting to see if he devolpes and appetite and puts weight on now that, as a big 3 year old, he no longer has a dummy.

  6. Christine Lawson 14 November 2011 at 5:51 pm #

    Some children are just naturally chubby for a few years, are they not? One of my sons was decidedly so, from about age 9 to 12. Whenever I expressed concern, my stepfather (who had raised 5 sons) would point to my son’s belly and say “this will turn into shoulders, mark my words” He was right! My chubby, slightly shorter than average boy is now a strapping 6’5″ at 24 yrs old, and a lean, strong construction worker. Perhaps we are not taking natural changes in metabolism into account? I was fairly strict about “growing food before junk”, but he still had his fair share of the bad stuff – and played a lot of video games. So what made him so lucky, Dr. Briffa? Any thoughts?


  1. Why We Get Fat - Page 2 - Sherdog Mixed Martial Arts Forums - 18 February 2012

    […] giving children more opportunity to exercise is unlikely to put a dent in rates of obesity" Why giving children more opportunity to exercise is unlikely to put a dent in rates of obesity | Dr … & "Study reveals that women need to exercise for 77 hours to lose a kg of fat, and why […]

Leave a Reply