The physical activity paradox: six reasons why occupational physical activity (OPA) does not confer the cardiovascular health benefits that leisure time physical activity does
University of Southern Denmark · National Research Centre for the Working Environment · +4 more institutions
Abstract
Physical activity (PA) is well documented to improve health. However, this documentation is restricted to leisure time physical activity (LTPA; eg, sports, recreation and transportation). Increasing evidence shows that occupational physical activity (OPA) does not improve health.1 Actually, OPA can be detrimental. These contrasting health effects of LTPA and OPA constitute the so-called PA health paradox.2 For a considerable fraction of the adult population, work constitutes the main setting for PA. Workers in many occupations, such as construction, cleaning, refuse collection, elderly care, farming and manufacturing, are physically active for large parts of their working days, for most of the year. Despite…
Citation impact
- FWCI
- 21.88
- Percentile
- 100%
- References
- 8
Authors
4- AHAndreas HoltermannCorresponding
University of Southern Denmark, National Research Centre for the Working Environment
- NKNiklas Krause
University of California, Los Angeles, Fielding Graduate University
- AJAllard J. van der Beek
Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
- LSLeon Straker
Curtin University
Topics & keywords
- Recreation
- Cardiorespiratory fitness
- Socioeconomic status
- Medicine
- Physical activity
- Environmental health
- Gerontology
- Epidemiology