Home

Last night on Insight on SBS there was a debate about the competence of personal trainers and the fees that are charged.

The fitness industry like other industries such as the health supplements industry requires more in depth regulation and educational requirements other than completing an 8 week vocational learning course.

A fitness professional is given the responsibility to provide fitness services in a safe environment without causing harm or injury to their clients.

I spent time with a personal training studio that had degree qualified staff that was invaluable in furthering my basic knowledge. Unfortunately undertaking an 8 week course does not prepare you adequately to immediately start to give unsupervised instruction or have a sound understanding of the basic principles of human movement.

Health screening is conducted prior to any clients undertaking our bootcamps. If a prospective client has specific medical conditions or injuries they are referred to the appropriate practitioner. At no point do we give advice on any conditions or injuries.
With our sessions, our trainers are not standing around giving instruction only, we are constantly monitoring and correcting poor exercise technique.

The government needs to take a more active role in regulating the industry. Ultimately the fitness industry is about increasing physical activity. With obesity related deaths set to overtake smoking related deaths, the fitness industry needs to be acknowledged and supported by medical practitioners, insurance companies and the allied health services. This requires confidence in the fitness industry which starts with being more regulated and extending the curriculum to a diploma rather than an eight week certificate.

Like any industry, there are rogue operators that can skew the public’s perception away from the great work performed by the industry.

Great to see smoking is banned in cars where there are children. As there is an acknowledgment by the government about the dangers of smoking in confined spaces, this ban should be introduced/extended across any confined public space.

Yes it is fantastic that it will be illegal to smoke while a minor or person under 18 years old is in the car as it is assumed that a minor is powerless to stop an adult from smoking.

I find it strange how smoking is still allowed in cafe’s, restaurant’s and bars where there is a wall missing, ie the window and front wall has been removed with the wall being reinstated further back to create an pseudo open space.

Is it possible for 100% of the smoke in these pseudo courtyards to miraculously rise without disturbance to the ceiling and travel out towards the street and towards the heavens? NO I don’t think so. We have this situation in Australia where the smoking lobby puts undue pressure on the government and the addiction to sales tax revenue on cigarettes is too string, the public are subjected to this health threat.

There has been some movement with the Moreland Council proposing a 5 meter smoking ban from Childrens playground that highlights the dangers of secondhand smoke. More importantly that the council acknowledges that exhaled cigarette smoke does not necessarily travel towards the sky.

We need to follow the leadership taken by the Queensland government in introducing more appropriate anti smoking laws.

When it comes to health, smoking is one aspect that has a huge impact. Unlike other staes in Australia, Queensland has shown true leadership in introducing smoking bans that actually reduce the exposure of secondhand smoke to innocent bystanders.

Pretty simple stuff, outdoors means no roof or a ceiling or enclosed by a solid covering, surrounded by walls (as my example), high fences and timber palings.

Pretty logical stuff, while there are always loop holes in these definition, it catches most places in Victoria that are legally defined as outdoor but really are enclosed.

So what’s stopping Victoria from adopting these tougher smoking laws in public spaces?

The Rudd Government is looking to change the labeling laws of fast food.

It’s a great idea to have food labeling for fast food but probably a simplified version that people can understand with a more detailed version underneath.

Similar to what City of Melbourne is introducing with the red, stop, go and amber light signalling keyed system to determine what is good to eat and what isn’t. The problem is today if people don’t have adequate knowledge of nutrition, what is acceptable levels of carbohydrate, protein and fat salt, then people may think that something alone fat is acceptable to eat without having an understanding of high carbohydrates or sugar levels, they also lead to increased energy intake if the sugars aren’t burnt. What needs to be is a standardisation of nutritional panelling so it’s a consistent measurement across all types of food groups and packaging sizes. Labeling of food is broken down to average serving size, servings per packet or per unit of food or product. It starts getting confusing to make a comparison based on other foods so having 100mls or 100grams is a good way of standardising what is adequate and what can be consistent across all nutritional panels.

So it will be interesting to see what happens with the labeling of fast food

House of Representative’s Health Committee’s report Weighing it up released last night makes recommendations in all the key areas of creating better designs of our cities to encourage exercise, teaching children about eating well and the importance of exercise and encouraging more cycling and walking.

Also included for both adults and children is the importance of eating fresh fruit and vegetables with emphasis being placed on eating less salty, high fat and sugary foods.

Committee Chair Mr Steve Georganas MP (Member for Hindmarsh) commented on the cost to the Australian economy “Evidence to the Committee suggests that obesity cost the Australian economy over $8 billion in 2008. This includes the costs to the health system as a result of rising rates of diabetes, cardiovascular disease and the complications associated with surgery and other interventions.”

The report also tackles the issue of marketing of advertising of unhealthy food and beverages to children, restrictions of other types of marketing of unhealthy food to children and bans on the sponsorship of sports clubs and children’s sport by unhealthy food companies.

The report makes the recommendation of self regulation, the interesting point here is even a regulated industry such as the general advertising guidelines are breached, for example Coke saying Coke will not contribute to weight gain.

So how will an unregulated industry manage to be responsible???

The accountability of weight loss programs is also examined as many are in a grey area under the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA).

The full report can be viewed online