text:
Gorilla Biscuits
March 17 @ Reggie's 42nd Street Tavern
Formed 30 years ago while its members were still in high school, this New York City hardcore band has recorded few albums but influenced countless bands. Their 1989 album "Start Today" is considered a hardcore classic. Details: 7:30 p.m. doors, 8:30 p.m. show, Friday, 1415 S. 42nd St., Wilmington.
Founded by Maurice White, this super group of the 1970s bridged funk, soul, rock, pop and R&B that crossed over to different audiences. Nominated for 20 Grammys, the band has hits that will last forever, including "September," "Fantasy" and "Mighty Mighty." Details: 7:30 p.m. Friday, 703 N. 3rd St., Wilmington. $55-$165 + taxes and fees
March 18 @ CFCC Wilson Center
In a concert billed as "Operatic Orchestra," violinist Kevin Lawrence joins the symphony for Antonin Dvořák's "Violin Concerto." Also on the program are selections from the world of opera, including Richard Strauss's "Dance of the Seven Veils." Details: 7:30 p.m. Saturday, 703 N. Third St., Wilmington. $25-$35 plus taxes and fees.
New Politics
UNCW's Association for Campus Entertainment brings in Spotify superstars New Politics, a high-energy Danish pop and rock band, for its annual spring show. Details: 7 p.m. Saturday, UNCW campus. $20 in advance, $25 day of show for students, $12 and $18 for students.
The Outlaws
March 18 @ Throne Theater
Formed in the late '60s in Florida, this rock band made radio staples "There Goes Another Love Song" and "Green Grass and High Tides." Though considered Southern rock, their mix of guitar interplay and soaring harmonies sets them apart as players rooted in country-tinged rock. With Brad Parsons. Details: 7 p.m. doors, 8 p.m. show, Saturday, 208 Market St., Wilmington. $25-$250
Mammoth Cannon
March 19 @ The Whiskey
Gritty rock with a pop sound from this Decatur, Illinois, four-piece. With a singer that echoes Kevin Martin of Candlebox and a raw yet catchy sound, they hit hard and have fun. With Bridge to Breakdown. Details: 8 p.m. doors, 9 p.m. show, Sunday, 1 S. Front St., Wilmington.
Mike Love
March 20 @ The Calico Room
Born and raised in Oahu, Hawaii, this reggae singer injects his songs with a variety of influences (classical piano, beat boxing, rock bands) and techniques to make positive music with depth. With Signal Fire. Details: 9 p.m. doors, 10 p.m. show, Monday, 107 S. Front St., Wilmington. $10 in advance, $12 day of show.
Ann Wilson
March 21 @ CFCC Wilson Center
The lead singer of Heart goes it alone, but you can expect to hear some of that band's hits from the '70s and '80s as well as covers and music from her solo EPs. A powerhouse vocalist, she's an iconic voice of those decades. In the '90s she joined sister Nancy in The Lovemongers and worked with Alice in Chains. Details: 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, 703 N. 3rd St., Wilmington. $42-99 + taxes and fees
Onward, Soldiers
Wilmington band that blends indie rock with alt-country and other styles plays UNCW's early-evening Rush Hour Concert series. Frontman Sean Thomas Gerard is one of the Port City's most prolific songwriters, and he has a new solo album, "While We're In the Blue." Details: 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, UNCW campus. $10, $5 for students.
3 Comments
Uhm… it isn't the ACTUAL Gorilla Biscuits, you dumbas*es. It's a tribute show… Idiots.
Good to know, thanks for the heads up
No, when this was written, not when it posted to the newspaper website, the event said Gorilla Biscuits. Nothing about a tribute show or additional bands. It was updated later.
GB toured last year and both DRI and The Dwarves are playing Reggie's this summer. It seemed reasonable at the time of collecting show info GB was playing.
What's not reasonable is not giving someone benefit of doubt but instead throwing insults from your computer. Perhaps that's what an idiot is.


text:
All the victims were shot with the same semi-automatic weapon by a gunman who fled on a motorbike, recalling the attacks of a scooter-driving Islamist extremist killed by police in southern France last month after murdering seven people.
The latest victim, Nadjia Boudjemia-Lahcenea, 47, of Algerian descent, was shot dead in the entrance hall to her block of flats in the Grande-Borne district of Grigny, south of the capital on Thursday. Interior minister Claude Guéant vowed to hunt down the killer.
Unlike the Mohamed Merah Toulouse killings, there is no suggestion of any political or religious motives in the shootings.
But with ballistics analysis showing that the same small-calibre 7.65mm gun had been used in all attacks, police now suspect a serial killer may have been behind all four deaths in a six-mile radius of the southern outer suburbs.
Prosecutor Marie-Suzanne Le Queau said the last three murders bore similarities, in which the victims were shot in the head. The first was shot in the body.
All the attacks appeared to have been committed at the same time of the day, between 4pm and 6pm, she said, adding that around 100 investigators were working on the case and that identity checks would be stepped up.
Several witnesses said they saw a tall, thin Caucasian man wearing a black motorcycle helmet in the vicinity, according to Le Parisien newspaper. They said the suspect wore a dark leather bomber jacket and a small bag. He is believed to drive a blue and white Suzuki GXSR 750 made in 2001 with an "R from the red model".
"We are putting every effort into finding out who is behind this," Mr Guéant told Europe 1 radio.
The first victim was Nathalie Davis, a 35-year-old laboratory assistant who was also shot dead in her building in Grigny on November 27.
An unemployed man who said he was her ex-boyfriend was arrested and placed under formal investigation. Michel C, as the press called him, confessed to having considered taking her life but later retracted.
On February 22, Jean-Yves Bonnerue, 52, Miss Davis' neighbour who had found her mortally wounded, was shot from behind as he opened his car boot in their building's car park.
Then, on March 19, pensioner Marcel Brunetto, 81, was killed by a shot to the head with a weapon of the same calibre in the entrance to a similar block of flats in Grigny's neighbouring suburb of Ris-Orangis.
The family said he had no connection with the first two victims or Michel C.
None had a criminal record or had received any threats.
The latest victim, Mrs Boudjemia-Lahcenea, was a widow who worked at Orly Airport and lived with her 18-year-old son.
"Everyone is in shock," said a neighbour. "She didn't feel threatened.
She's a normal person, simple, no history."
Mr Guéant noted that the man arrested in connection with the first killing was in jail when the latest murder took place.
"That said, this series is worthy of all our attention and we have put all our means at our disposal behind it," he said.
Many in France are still coming to terms with the Merah killings in and around Toulouse.
Police killed him in a shoot out after a 32-hour siege following attacks in which he murdered three off-duty paratroopers, three Jewish children and a trainee rabbi.
The killings have prompted two high-profile police operations in which dozens of Islamist suspects were arrested across France.
Mr Guéant yesterday warned the French to be vigilant. "We are observing in certain Islamist circles the desire to avenge the death of Mohamed Merah," he said.
Opponents of President Nicolas Sarkozy accused him of stage-managing the arrests to boost his chances of re-election in April and May.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
One of Metro's most prestigious and ambitious projects to date, Newstead Central will be a development of a calibre on par with the landmark Central Village, under construction in nearby Fortitude Valley. Upon completion, Newstead Central will comprise 920 luxury apartments, spread across five stunning towers.
In addition to the Gasworks Plaza and Riverpark, the area is home to iconic retail centres such as The Emporium and the fresh food markets, cafes and bars of James Street. Here residents will be less than 3km from the CBD and enjoy a smorgasbord of fine dining, superb shopping, exhilarating entertainment and transport options on their doorstep.


text:
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Feedback Forum' started by tightbidness, May 4, 2005.
feedback for tightbidness
Seth was great to do business with.. Cab arrived on time and was packed very well.. It was also just as described..
Thanx again ... Steve...
Seth. A pleasure doing business with you!! The strings arrived quicker than I expected. Thanks for the great deal!! -- Jerry
Quick response, excellent packaging, the strings were brand new as advertised. In short: perfect transaction. Thanks, Seth!


text:
The trouble with women is that they never put the toilet seat back up.
Women needs only two tools in life: WD-40 and duct tape. If it doesn't move and it should, use WD-40. If it move and shouldn't, use the tape.
Now that a women are jockeys, baseball umpires, atomic scientists, and business executives, maybe someday they can master parallel parking.
She was one of those women who go through life demanding to see the manager.
A women could never be President. A candidate must be 35 or over, and where are you going to find a woman who will admit she's over 35?
Show me a woman who doesn't feel guilty and I'll show you a man.
There is no bigger fan of the opposite sex than me, and I have the bills to prove it.
The most important things to a Southern girl are God, family and hair almost never in that order.
Women, can't live with them, can't bury theme in the back yard without the neighbours seeing.
Intuition is the strange instinct that tells a woman she is right, weather she is not.
The only reason they say 'women and children first' is to test the strength of the lifeboats.
I'd rather be a woman than a man. Women can cry, wear cute clothes, and they're first to be rescued off sinking ships.
If women ran the world, there would be not wars, just intense negotiations every twenty-eight days.
I thought I had PMS, but my doctor said, I've got good new and bad news. The good news is, you don't have PMS. The bad news is, you're a bitch.
Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes.
Women complain about PMS, but I think of it as the only time of the month I can be myself.
You don't know a woman until you've met here in court.
I love women, though I couldn't eat a whole one. But I think I know where I'd start.
The great and almost only comfort about being a woman is that one can always pretend to be more stupid than one is and no one is surprised.
A women is like a tea bag - you can't tell how strong she is until you put her in hot water.
One of the great mysteries to me about women is the fact that they can pour hot wax on their legs, rip the hair out by the roots, and still be afraid of a spider.
Good created women because sheep can't type.
We have a saying in Russia: 'Women are like buses.' That's it.
I never panic when I get lost. I just change where it is I want to go.
Women are like elephants to me. I like to look at theme, but I wouldn't want to own one.


text:
Katrina Kaif HD Wallpapers Free Download 4 is a high resolution desktop wallpaper posted in Katrina Kaif category. Free Download this hd wallpaper 1050×719.
You can download free covers created from original image or you can create a latest and Unique Facebook Cover, Twitter Cover or Google Plus Cover using our cropping plugin, just click on the buttons from below the image to preview ready made covers or to cut a new cover from Katrina Kaif HD Wallpapers Free Download 4.
Also you can choose a resized Katrina Kaif desktop backgrounds to fit to your 4:3 or 6:9 screen. or download original Katrina Kaif HD wallpapers 1050×719 with a click on the green button preview and download original image.
You can also find related images in full hd wallpapers download, full hd wallpaper 16 9, free widescreen wallpapers hd, most sexy bollywood actresses, hottest actress images, Katrina Kaif wallpaper, bollywood actress 3d pics, Widescreen Indian Actress Wallpaper, Beautiful Bollywood actress tags.


text:
Would YOU let another woman breastfeed your baby? It's the most intimate maternal act. Yet growing numbers of mothers are delegating it to friends - and even strangers
- Cat breastfed her friend Natasha's baby when she was unable to
- Natasha doesn't feel the bond with her daughter was compromised
- Some mothers are so desperate they seek strangers online for breast milk
- But one expert said mothers shouldn't feel guilty about bottle feeding
At first glance, the scene appears to encapsulate the precious bond between mother and newborn. As four-week-old Esme starts grizzling, Cat Homer instinctively unbuttons her top and tenderly puts the tiny baby to her breast.
After Esme has finished her feed, sated with milk, she dozes off in the woman's arms. But soon it's time to go back to Mummy, who has been looking on with pride. Because Cat is not Esme's mother. That role belongs to Natasha Batsford, who has just watched her newborn being breastfed by another woman.
It's a scene some will find unnatural. After all, there are few activities more intimate than breastfeeding your child and many mothers feel this time together is the most cherished of all. But Natasha is one of an increasing number who turn to other women to provide their babies with breast milk when they can't.
Precious gift: Cat, right, breastfed her friend Natasha's baby daughter, Esme
Informal arrangements like Cat and Natasha's are on the rise in the UK as the breast-is-best lobby exerts increasing pressure on mums to eschew formula milk, while the NHS promotes as 'ideal' the ambitious - and seldom realised - target that all new mums should breastfeed for the first six months.
Some desperate mothers place requests on Facebook for someone - anyone - to feed their baby. And a website, Human Milk 4 Human Babies, unites lactating mums who have surplus breast milk - and are either offering to express it or act as wet nurses - with mothers who are unable to feed their own babies.
Human Milk 4 Human Babies has several online offshoots targeting women in different countries, including Canada and the U.S., but its British network is by far the busiest in the world, with many thousands of users. It estimates that at least 3,000 women in the UK have used the site to share milk. However, Natasha and Cat reached their arrangement after becoming friends through a National Childbirth Trust group when their first children were born.
Natasha had no milk after suffering health complications during Esme's birth. But Cat, whose son, Rory, is seven months older than Esme, had a surplus she was willing to share.
Expanding family: Natasha is now pregnant with her third child and will seek help again if she is unable to breastfeed. Meanwhile, Cat doesn't feel a closer bond with Esme because she was her wet nurse
The two women discussed the possibility of wet-nursing and then, one day when Esme was about a month old, they seized the moment at a coffee morning.
'Esme was hungry,' recalls Natasha, 35. 'She'd lost a lot of weight because I hadn't been able to feed her and she was grumbling for food.
'I'd been telling everyone how my health visitor had been putting pressure on me to formula feed to get her weight up, when Cat just said: "Do you want me to feed her now?"
'So I said: "Actually, yes please," and passed Esme to her. Esme latched on and started to feed at once. She was utterly content; blissed out. She fed till she was milk-drunk.'
Natasha, an IT manager, insists she did not feel that the bond with her daughter had been compromised.
'It did not occur to me to feel jealous that Cat was providing what I could not,' she says. 'I just felt she had made an incredibly generous and life-affirming gesture.'
For the next six weeks, Natasha ferried Esme to Cat's home every afternoon for breastfeeding sessions.
The rest of the time, she fed Esme using breast milk donated by a stranger she had met via a Facebook page, where women can offer to donate their milk.
Sought an alternative: Natasha couldn't breastfeed for medical reasons but didn't want her daughter to miss out on the benefits of breast milk
The practice of wet-nursing dates back to ancient times — there are references to it in the Bible — and was traditionally the preserve of well-off families. But it fell out of fashion in the 19th century amid health and moral concerns.
While Natasha and Cat feel their arrangement was simple common-sense, there are a raft of reasons - practical, health-related and emotional — why experts warn the practice can be problematic.
Clare Byam-Cook, author of What to Expect When You're Breast-Feeding . . . And What If You Can't?, says: 'If you live in a developing country where there is no safe alternative to breast milk it's the perfect solution, but in Britain formula milk is so sophisticated that it really is a very safe alternative.
'There was no emotional tug - it was just a practical arrangement'
'I can't understand why any mum would think it is so vitally important to breastfeed that she'd get someone else to do it for her. The mum is missing out on intimate bonding time with her baby, because you can cuddle your baby as you bottle feed, just as you can when you breastfeed.
'Essentially, another woman is giving your baby her bodily fluids, and there is a chance of infection. It's an extreme example, but mothers with Aids are advised not to breastfeed because of the risk of passing on the virus.
'Medications could also be passed onto a baby. If you do it, you really have to trust the other person.'
Mrs Byam-Cook is a breastfeeding advocate who has advised, among many others, actresses Helena Bonham Carter and Kate Winslet. But she is still concerned that zealots are exerting unnecessary pressure on new mums to breastfeed when many are unable.
'We've been brainwashed into believing that breastfeeding is the panacea for perfect infant health. If we formula-feed and something goes wrong, we assume it's because of the bottle-feeding,' she says.
'There's such a huge amount of hype surrounding breastfeeding that mothers feel inadequate when they're unable to do it.'
For Natasha, who is married to Keith, 33, and has an older son Alfie, now three, there was a reason why she could not produce milk herself. She had become perilously ill during Esme's birth in November 2011 with a very rare complication of pregnancy that caused her heart to fail.
Close bond: Natasha didn't worry that Esme would feel attached Cat
She recalls: 'After Esme was born, I spent ten days in coronary care. I had every test imaginable: angiograms, ECGs, and I was advised not to breastfeed because the radioactive dye used in the tests could harm my baby.
'I was also put on strong diuretics to disperse fluid that had gathered in my chest, and I was completely dehydrated. So I was unable to produce milk anyway.'
Many mothers would have considered this adequate reason to formula feed, but Natasha put out a Facebook alert for frozen expressed milk.
'I knew the benefits Esme would get from breast-milk,' she says.
These include a reduced risk of developing chest and ear infections, becoming obese later in life and of developing eczema. In addition, her son, Alfie, was extremely allergic to cow's milk, which is the main component of baby formula, and she feared Esme would have the same reaction.
A mum who lived nearby, Helen Coulson, saw the appeal on Facebook. She had a surplus which she expressed and donated. Natasha didn't know Helen then, but the two have since become friends.
While Helen's spare milk kept them going for a while, Natasha needed a contingency plan and searched constantly for back-up supplies. Then Cat, 27, offered help. For six weeks Natasha and Esme shuttled between their home in Arlesey, Beds, and Cat's in Letchworth, Herts, so that Cat, a trainee midwife, could breastfeed her.
Natasha did not pay for the services of her informal wet nurse, and simply returned her friend's altruism with gratitude.
Cat, who also has a daughter Heidi, four, with her husband Stephen, 30, a technical services manager, insists the arrangement was a pleasure.
'I didn't mind feeding Esme,' she says. 'I'd do it for anyone, even a stranger. I had the milk and as my son, Rory, was seven months old, he was feeding only once or twice a day.
'I knew how important it was for Natasha that Esme should have breast milk. It was never a chore.'
While she insists her husband was fine with the situation, some friends, she concedes, were concerned when she told them about the arrangement. 'They wrinkled their noses,' Cat admits. 'I don't think they understood because a lot of women think it's a very private thing between a mum and baby. They would not want it for themselves. And I can accept some women would feel envious if another woman was feeding their child.
'I know it's unusual to be as dispassionate as Natasha and I were. But I'm a logical, not emotional, person.
'I think it's really sad mothers are being so programmed by breast milk fanatics that they feel it's preferable for their baby to be nursed by someone else than to have formula milk'
'Of course, I felt close to Esme when I fed her. I held her. I winded her. I cuddled her when she dozed off. But I distanced myself emotionally. I wasn't supposed to be bonding.'
Natasha, meanwhile, says she simply felt 'overwhelmed' by Cat's help. 'Esme had been losing weight,' she says. 'I'd had heart failure, a Caesarean section, and I had a demanding toddler. I had no milk. A lot of mums in my position would have given up and bottle fed.
'There was no emotional tug - it was just a practical arrangement. It was nice to sit and chat to Cat as she fed.
'Esme was such a new baby, so unaware. She didn't seek eye contact with Cat. I didn't worry she was forming an attachment that would be difficult to break. I'd formed a very close bond with Esme. We'd slept together, I'd carried her around in a sling practically constantly. I didn't feel that closeness was being eroded.'
Natasha insists she did not feel even a frisson of envy that she was unable to perform this intimate task herself. And she says her husband, Keith, happily accepted the arrangement.
'My main concern was not to impose on Cat,' she says. 'I didn't want to take advantage. I'd just text her each day and ask: "Is it OK if we come over?" Then, after six weeks or so, it stopped as quietly as it had started.'
Esme was, by then, two-and-a-half months old. She had gained weight and was the right size for her age. Natasha had also stopped taking her medication and begun to produce her own milk. So she began to bottle-feed Esme with a mix of donated milk and her own expressed milk.
Wet nursing: Will your baby form a special bond with the stranger who's giving her milk? And could you cope with the jealousy?
'She'd been a fractious baby, but she became contented,' says Natasha. 'I'm so grateful to Cat.'
While such informal arrangements among friends and sisters are becoming more frequent in the UK, in the U.S. wet nurse agencies are commonplace.
Christine Hill, author of Pregnancy Guide and an antenatal teacher, laments this. 'I think it's really sad mothers are being so programmed by breast milk fanatics that they feel it's preferable for their baby to be nursed by someone else than to have formula milk.
'In my view, if a mother can't feed, a bottle is better for both baby and mum.'
For years, too, child psychologists have insisted that a mysterious bond forms between a woman and her suckling infant. Indeed, the actress Isabella Rossellini describes in her autobiography how she and her twin sister, Ingrid, were cared for by a wet nurse in Italy in the Fifties.
Who knew?
The world average length of time that mothers breastfeed is 4.2 years, according to the World Health Organisation
She recounts having an extraordinary emotional response as an adult to a man in a crowd many years later. He turned out to be the son of her wet nurse, her 'milk brother' as she called him, and she had sensed their connection immediately although she had seen him only once, 30 years earlier.
Will a similar kinship persist between Cat and Natasha's families? Despite the intimacy she shared with baby Esme, Cat is doubtful. 'I don't feel any closer to Esme than I did before I breastfed her. It wasn't an extraordinary thing for me to do,' she says.
Esme is now 17 months old and Natasha is pregnant with her third child. She is making back-up plans in case she cannot breast feed again, and two friends have said they will help out.
Clare Byam-Cook, meanwhile, sounds a note of caution. She urges all new mums not to become obsessed by the compulsion to provide mother's milk at any cost.
'I've just visited a mum whose baby has had three operations on her mouth to help her suckle, but she still becomes hysterical every time she's put onto the breast.
'The parents' home looks like a special-care baby unit. They've spent a fortune on a lactation consultant and that hasn't worked either. They haven't left the house for four weeks; everyone is anxious and wretched and the baby isn't thriving.
'Many mothers cannot breastfeed for a multitude of reasons, and I worry that when other mums breastfeed their friends' babies they are just adding to the hype and hysteria and creating more pressure.
'I expect a torrent of criticism for saying it, but I'd advise them that sustaining a relationship with their husband or partner is more important than dashing off to a friend's house so she can breastfeed the baby.
'I'd say: "Just go out as a family for a walk in the park, enjoy the sunshine, sit on a bench — and give your baby a bottle instead." '
Most watched News videos
- 'With my bare hands': chilling moment sex offender boasts of slaying
- Scott Morrison delivers victory speech and returns as PM
- Satisfying moment garden chair is cleaned after ten years
- Quarrel in Balmoral ends in savage brawl
- Holiday-maker completely misjudges water depth before jumping in
- Man mocks motorist for being Muslim after road incident
- Mother elephant attacks locals after new born calf is killed
- Islamophobic Taco Bell employee goes on a rant at Muslim customer
- Surveillance video shows Salem Sabatka's mom forced out of car
- Hammer jammed in man's helmet after London 'hijacking' incident
- Guy takes gender swap filter to next level with Evanescence song
- Theresa May avoids saying Conservatives WILL deliver Brexit
The comments below have been moderated in advance.
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
We are no longer accepting comments on this article.


text:
Here on Earth, we have the moon's gravitational pull to thank for the tides, among other things. But what about moonlight?
The light reflected off the moon has an effect on life on Earth, which isn't surprising, but not every lunar influence is heralded by a wolf's howl.
Looking at a few examples of moonlight's subtler influences reveals how much the moon has shaped life on Earth in unexpected ways.
The moon and animal behavior
Some animals, especially nocturnal species, have adapted their hunting and mating activities to the light of the moon. Some animals simply see better at night or are aided by the light of the moon. In contrast, prey animals know that to be seen means to be eaten, so it's prudent to hide when the moon is bright. And just as moonlight can influence predator-prey schedules, it also can influcence some mating behaviors.
For example, certain species of badgers mark their territory more during the new moon, but during the full moon, they mark territory less. One explanation for the difference is that badger mating rituals are lengthy, so mating in the brightness of a full moon would put copulating badgers in danger. As a result, these badgers lie low during bright nights and are more active during other phases of the moon.
Many species of coral spawn on or near the full moon. While other factors such as weather and water temperature also influence their spawning, the event occurs near a full moon.
Doodlebugs dig bigger holes around the full moon. This could be because of the increased activity of prey when the moon brightens the night sky, causing a greater chance of catching dinner.
Certain owl species become more active during the full moon, both in their mating calls and in showing off their feathers to potential mates. The owls' feathers might be more visible in the light of a brighter moon.
The moon and farming
It was recently discovered that the Ephedra foeminea plant only puts out a sugary residue to attract pollinators during the full moon in July. Researches have yet to understand exactly how the plant "knows" to follow the lunar cycle, but research shows that there appears to be a correlation. There is, however, disagreement among scientists that the shrub's pollination is related to the lunar cycle.
Humans, of course, also rely on moonlight. We did so much more so before the creation of artificial light, but some things haven't changed entirely. Some farmers plant crops based on the lunar schedule. There's a debate among farmers about whether planting by the moon has any positive effect on crops. Even The Old Farmer's Almanac still offers a Gardening by the Moon calendar.
Because the moon is so closely linked to life on Earth, it's difficult to know what's affected solely by the moon's light and what's affected by additional factors, but its influence is undeniable. Why else would there be so many songs about it?


text:
For most people, losing weight is a huge problem from to much time. We try hard to get a fit and sexy physique. But along with eating habits and lifestyles, it is easy to in addition pounds but difficult to stay slim.
Detailed user forensics: This involved viewing users through perspective associated with your (when they post), where they post from (work vs. home), access methods (WiFi vs LAN), Location (Which a part of US), what threads they post on, community competition (what websites vie for their own communities attention) etc.
Women affected by menstrual cramping are provided a relief by this asana. Your lower muscles gets toned and entire muscle structure gets an accurate shape caused by the stress and pressure applied. Your butt which looks extra big due for the fat that's accumulated one other cleared, giving it proper manipulate.
Before consulting a counselor for credit repair, homework research. Many counselors are reputable and exist supply real help, some do have ulterior purposes. Others are outright scams. Surely wise consumer by checking whether not really the credit counselor you are going to handle with is legitimate.
There's question that Cloud is more than a rise. Yet it didn't start just click here several years gone by. The technology may be developing for some years, reality it been recently nicely repackaged, some get more info of this nagging issues still survive. Cloud what is digital marketing is not going away and will grow. Truly will proceed some serious growing pains as increase to mature.
Being up to speed of working day means you are totally comfortable in workplace and in your work working day. You are achieving what you add out to be able to each week and possess to the freedom to leave your office every night, not wondering what you forgot, however rather feeling the peace of mind that only comes when you have taken control of your day.
He should be able to tell you precise meaning of the style you have ideal. This is important because tattoo designs are not just items to beautify your skin. They've also been symbols that carry deeper meanings.
Modelling Profession: Agencies Like Gearmodels Helps It Be Possible
For most people, losing weight is a huge problem from to much time. We try hard to get a fit and sexy physique. But along with eating habits and lifestyles, it is easy to in addition pounds but difficult to stay slim.


text:
- Research
- Open Access
Assessment of physical activity and inactivity in multiple domains of daily life: a comparison between a computerized questionnaire and the SenseWear Armband complemented with an electronic diary
- Tineke Scheers1, 2Email author,
- Renaat Philippaerts3 and
- Johan Lefevre1
© Scheers et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
- Received: 16 October 2011
- Accepted: 30 May 2012
- Published: 12 June 2012
Although differences between paper-and-pencil questionnaires and accelerometers have been reported for overall physical activity and time spent in moderate and vigorous activity, few studies have looked at domain-specific behavior. This study compared estimates of domain-specific physical (in)activity obtained with the Flemish physical activity computerized questionnaire (FPACQ) with those obtained from a combination of the SenseWear Armband and an electronic diary. Furthermore, it was investigated whether the correspondence between the two methods varied with gender and age.
Data were obtained from 442 Flemish adults (41.4±9.8 years). Physical activity was questioned with the FPACQ and measured for seven consecutive days using the SenseWear Armband together with an electronic activity diary (SWD). Analogous variables were calculated from the FPACQ and SWD. Mean differences and associations between FPACQ and SWD outcomes were examined with paired t-tests and Pearson correlations. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess the level of agreement between the two methods. Main effects and interaction of gender and age groups (20–34; 35–49; 50–64 years) on differences between FPACQ and SWD outcomes were analyzed using two-way ANOVAs.
All parameters of the FPACQ were significantly correlated with SWD assessments (r = 0.21 to 0.65). Reported activity was significantly different from SWD-obtained values for all parameters, except screen time. Physical activity level, total energy expenditure and time spent in vigorous activities were significantly higher (+0.14 MET, +25.09 METhours·week-1 and +1.66 hours·week-1, respectively), and moderate activities and sedentary behavior significantly lower (-5.20 and -25.01 hours·week-1, respectively) with the FPACQ compared to SWD. Time and energy expenditure of job activities and active transport were significantly higher, while household chores, motorized transport, eating and sleeping were significantly lower with the FPACQ. Time spent in sports was lower (-0.54 hours·week-1), but energy expenditure higher (+4.18 METhours·week-1) with the FPACQ. The correspondence between methods varied with gender and age, but results differed according to the intensity and domain of activity.
Despite the moderate correlations, significant differences between the two methods were found. In general, physical activity was higher and sedentary behavior lower as calculated from the FPACQ compared to SWD.
- Measurement
- Validity
- Self-report
- Activity monitor
- Activities of daily living
- Sedentary behavior
- Epidemiology
The accurate assessment of physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior in free-living conditions has always been a challenge in epidemiological research [1]. Continued efforts to improve assessment techniques are critical for systematic advancements of the field [2]. The accurate measurement of PA is important to clarify the strength and nature of the dose–response relation between PA and health, to identify current and changing activity levels within populations, to monitor adherence to activity guidelines and to determine the effectiveness of interventions designed to promote PA [3].
Self-report techniques remain the most widely used method to evaluate activity patterns at population level [4]. Although, over the past decade, activity monitors such as accelerometers are being used more frequently to objectively characterize PA behavior [2, 5]. However, both methods have their limitations and when comparing subjective techniques with accelerometry, major discrepancies may emerge.
Significant errors in subjective measures of activity may occur due to several reasons. First, the accuracy of self-reports is often limited by the cognitive demands of recall, social desirability bias and misinterpretation of the questions [6]. Secondly, most questionnaires tend to focus on only one aspect of every day activity, such as work or leisure time. Few have been developed to assess PA and sedentary behavior in all major areas of daily life, namely leisure time, work, household chores and transport [7, 8]. However, since leisure time PA accounts for only a small proportion of time and energy expenditure (EE) [9], it is unlikely that methods that are restricted to leisure time PA provide an accurate assessment of total daily EE. Third, people engage in a variety of lifestyle activities, which are intermittent and spread throughout the day [1]. While subjects can accurately recall structured bouts of vigorous activity, intended specifically for exercise, they are not as good at recalling routine or spontaneous, light to moderate activities [2, 7].
Accelerometers provide objective data about the intensity, frequency and duration of PA, but they cannot assess the type of activity. Furthermore, accelerometers, typically placed on the hip, are unable to detect cycling, isolated arm movements, locomotion on a gradient or the added strain of lifting, carrying or pushing objects. As a result, PA is likely to be underestimated using accelerometry [10, 11].
Thus, due to inaccurate recall, social desirability or omission of lifestyle activities in questionnaires and the inability of accelerometers to detect all activities equally well, both under- and over-reporting of activity in comparison with an accelerometer can occur [4, 12].
To address these limitations, improvements in both subjective and objective measurements of PA are needed. Computerized questionnaires, like the Flemish physical activity computerized questionnaire (FPACQ) [13], have the advantage of a greater feeling of privacy and anonymity, compared to traditional written surveys. This results in a more honest reporting of sensitive information and a reduction of social desirability bias [14]. Nevertheless, the literature reveals few studies on the validity of computerized PA questionnaires. Furthermore, in contrast to most questionnaires, the FPACQ assesses PA and sedentary behavior in all domains of daily life.
Activity monitors like the SenseWear Armband, which combine accelerometry with physiological parameters, can improve the accuracy of measurement [15]. However, no single technique can capture all aspects of activity. Only self-reports can provide information on the type of activity [4, 7]. Therefore, to allow for a more comprehensive investigation of activity patterns, we complemented the objective assessment through the SenseWear with an electronic activity diary. The combination of these two techniques made it possible to generate (in)activity variables in the same domains as derived from the FPACQ. Thus, in contrast to previous studies, which only used an overall PA score or time spent in moderate and vigorous activities, this study was able to compare subjective and objective measures of PA and sedentary behavior in all domains of daily life.
However, neither the FPACQ, nor the SenseWear is a golden standard for measuring PA. Therefore, we are limited to describing correspondence between both measures. Nevertheless, in the absence of a true criterion method, the SenseWear Armband combined with the electronic diary will be used as reference method.
The purpose of the present study was to compare estimates of domain-specific PA and sedentary behavior obtained with the FPACQ with those obtained from a combination of the SenseWear Armband and an electronic diary (SWD). Furthermore, it was investigated whether the correspondence between the two methods varied with gender and age.
Materials and methods
Subjects and study design
Participants were recruited from various companies and different work sectors (private companies, multinationals, education, research, social and welfare services, municipal services and industry) in Flanders, Belgium. Individuals volunteered to participate in the study and provided informed consent prior to participation. The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the KU Leuven. Subjects received an e-mail with a username and password and were asked to fill in the FPACQ at home via an internet platform. One to two weeks later health parameters were measured and PA monitoring devices were explained and provided to the subjects at their workplace. Subjects were asked to wear the devices 24 hours a day except during water-based activities, for the following 7 days. A total of 442 subjects (212 men and 230 women) between 22 and 64 years (mean age: 41.4 ± 9.8 years) participated in the study. To be included in analyses, subjects needed at least six valid monitoring days, including a Saturday and a Sunday [16]. A valid day was considered a day with at least 1368 min of data, which corresponds to 95% of a 24-hour period. Valid SenseWear and SWD data were available from 405 and 383 subjects respectively.
Assessment of physical activity
The Flemish physical activity computerized questionnaire (FPACQ)
The FPACQ is a user-friendly computerized questionnaire that collects detailed information about patterns of PA and sedentary behavior in a usual week [13]. Three different versions of the questionnaire were developed to account for differences in lifestyle of population subgroups: students, employed/unemployed people and pensioners. The FPACQ for the employed/unemployed contains 59 to 103 closed-ended questions on demographic parameters (10 items), bouts of moderate and vigorous PA (3 to 6 items), total sedentary time (2 items), occupation (1 to 22 items), transport in leisure time (6 items), watching TV or playing computer games (2 items), household chores (3 items), eating (1 item), sleeping (1 item) and determinants of PA (29 items). Skip patterns are used to avoid superfluous questions. The web-based version of the questionnaire is available on http://www.FPACQ.be. At present, the FPACQ is only available in Dutch, but in the near future, French, English and Portuguese versions will be developed.
For the present study, 20 parameters were calculated from the FPACQ. Total sedentary time and bouts of moderate and vigorous PA were calculated from questions based on the short, self-administered version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) [17]. Job time represents the time spent on the main and additional occupation. Additionally, percentages of work time doing light, moderate and vigorous activities were questioned. Light activities were assigned a metabolic equivalent (MET) value of 2, moderate activities 3 and vigorous activities 4. Percentages were multiplied by the total job time and the assigned MET-values to calculate EE during work. Furthermore, subjects were asked to select a maximum of three of their most important sports out of a list of 200 specific sports. The weekly hours spent on these sports were summed to calculate time of sports participation. For each sport, the MET-value was determined using the Compendium of Ainsworth [18] and multiplied by the time spent on this sport. The sum of these multiplications resulted in EE during sports. Screen time is the sum of hours spent on watching TV or playing computer games during weekdays and weekend days. Time of household chores includes time spent on light, moderate and vigorous home and garden activities. These activities were assigned a MET-value of 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5, respectively, to calculate household EE. FPACQ queried about transport on foot and by bike for leisure and commuting to and from work. The results of these questions were summed and multiplied by 4 MET to estimate time and EE of active transport. Similarly, motorized transport was calculated from questions about transport with a car, train, tramcar, bus or motorcycle and a MET-value of 1.5. Time eating and time sleeping represent the hours spent eating and sleeping during a typical week. EE of these activities was estimated using a MET-value of 1.8 and 0.9, respectively. Finally, two general variables were calculated. Total EE represents the overall weekly EE and was calculated by summing the EE of all reported activities. Physical activity level (PAL, MET) was subsequently calculated by dividing total EE by 168 (=numbers of hours per week).
The SenseWear Pro 3 Armband
The SenseWear Pro 3 Armband (BodyMedia, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA, USA) is a multisensor body monitor, worn over the triceps muscle of the right arm. It enables continuous collection of various physiological and movement parameters through multiple sensors, including a two-axis accelerometer and sensors measuring heat flux, galvanic skin response, skin temperature and near body ambient temperature. Data from these sensors are combined with gender, age, body weight and height to estimate EE and PA intensity, using algorithms developed by the manufacturer (SenseWear professional software, version 6.1). Anthropometric measurements were obtained in the morning prior to the consecutive seven-day period by trained staff with subjects barefoot and in underwear. Body weight was measured to the nearest 0.1 kg using a digital scale (Seca, Hamburg, Germany). Height was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a portable anthropometer of Martin (GPM anthropological instruments, Zurich, Switzerland).
The electronic activity diary
The activity diary software program was developed at the Department of Kinesiology of the KU Leuven and stored in a Palm Z22 Personal Digital Assistant (Palm, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). The diary consisted of seven main categories: sleeping/resting, personal care, eating/drinking, job, leisure time, transport and household chores. The last three categories were divided into a number of subcategories, to allow subjects to specify their activity in more detail. Subjects were asked to register their activities in the electronic diary, each time a new activity was started, for the entire seven-day period. Dunton et al. [19] have shown that diary-reported activity levels from a similar Palm handheld computer corresponded well to objective indicators of activity. Furthermore, these diaries are thought to minimize errors associated with coding and recall of activity, because they enable subjects to add real-time information directly into an electronic medium [2]. First, information from the diary was used to substitute missing SenseWear data, due to removal of the Armband. Missing values for sleep were imputed with the mean MET-value and EE of observed sleep during all other nights. Missing data of personal care and swimming were substituted with a constant MET-value and associated EE according to the Compendium of Ainsworth (a MET-value of 2 and 6, respectively) [18]. Furthermore, information from the diary was synchronized with data of the SenseWear to obtain minute-by-minute data of physical (in)activity behavior. As a result, information was available for all four activity dimensions (intensity, duration, frequency and type).
Twenty parameters were calculated from SWD data, analogous to those from the FPACQ. Total EE (METhours·week-1) was calculated by summing minute-by-minute MET-values during the entire week, while PAL (MET) was calculated as the average of MET-values. Furthermore, time spent in different intensity levels (hours·week-1) was determined. Periods of at least 10 consecutive minutes with an intensity ≥3 but <6 and ≥6 MET were summed over the entire week to achieve bouts of moderate and vigorous activity, respectively. Total sedentary time was calculated from minutes with a MET-value ≤1.8 minus minutes spent sleeping. Additionally, time and EE of the different activities in the five domains of daily life were calculated. Time spent doing a particular activity (hours·week-1) was based on the information from the diary, while EE was calculated as weekly METhours during those specific activities, using SWD.
For subjects with only six valid monitoring days, a weekly average was estimated using the following formula: ((mean of parameter over 4 weekdays)*5) + parameter on Saturday + parameter on Sunday.
Statistical analyses
Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) were calculated for all variables. Mean differences in activity variables between the FPACQ and SWD were examined with paired t-tests. Associations between FPACQ and SWD variables were analyzed using Pearson product–moment correlation coefficients. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess the level of agreement between the two measurement techniques. Variables used for the Bland-Altman analyses were total EE and EE during job activities, sports, household chores, active transport and motorized transport. Two-way analyses of variance with the difference scores of the FPACQ and SWD outcome (FPACQ outcome – SWD outcome) as dependent variable and gender, age group (20–34; 35–49; 50–64 years) and their interaction as independent variables were performed for each activity parameter. Tukey HSD tests were carried out for post hoc comparisons if significant differences were found. All statistical analyses were performed using the SAS statistical program, version 9.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
Comparison and relationship between FPACQ and SenseWear and/or electronic diary (SWD) parameters (Mean ± SD)
Pearson correlation *
Total physical activity
1.76 ± 0.23
1.62 ± 0.25
Total EE (METhours.week-1)
296.49 ± 38.39
271.40 ± 41.09
Moderate PA (hours.week-1)
2.47 ± 3.02
7.67 ± 7.14
Vigorous PA (hours.week-1)
2.34 ± 2.68
0.68 ± 1.23
Sedentary behavior (hours.week-1)
37.85 ± 16.65
62.86 ± 12.61
Time (hours.week-1)
37.77 ± 10.12
33.08 ± 11.40
EE (METhours.week-1)
89.12 ± 26.70
61.39 ± 25.63
Leisure time
Time sports (hours.week-1)
2.58 ± 3.44
3.12 ± 3.45
EE sports (METhours.week-1)
19.04 ± 29.51
14.86 ± 17.08
Screen time (hours.week-1)
14.65 ± 7.85
14.70 ± 9.02
Household chores
Time (hours.week-1)
10.20 ± 6.33
15.03 ± 9.36
EE (METhours.week-1)
30.14 ± 19.71
36.78 ± 24.03
Time active transport (hours.week-1)
3.81 ± 3.87
2.45 ± 2.61
EE active transport (METhours.week-1)
15.24 ± 15.49
8.21 ± 9.61
Time motorized transport (hours.week-1)
6.33 ± 4.03
8.99 ± 4.31
EE motorized transport (METhours.week-1)
9.50 ± 6.04
17.67 ± 9.03
Personal care
Time eating (hours.week-1)
5.62 ± 2.42
9.42 ± 3.62
EE eating (METhours.week-1)
10.12 ± 4.35
15.86 ± 6.55
Time sleeping (hours.week-1)
48.90 ± 7.01
56.19 ± 9.39
EE sleeping (METhours.week-1)
44.01 ± 6.31
53.88 ± 7.96
Reported activity was significantly different from SWD-determined values for all parameters, except screen time (Table 1). PAL, total EE and time spent in vigorous activity were significantly higher (+0.14 MET, +25.09 METhours·week-1 and +1.66 hours·week-1, respectively), and time spent in moderate activity and sedentary behavior significantly lower (-5.20 and -25.01 hours·week-1, respectively) as calculated from the FPACQ compared to the SenseWear. Time and EE of job activities were significantly higher (+4.69 hours·week-1 and +27.73 METhours·week-1), while household chores (-4.83 hours·week-1 and -6.64 METhours·week-1), eating (-3.80 hours·week-1 and -5.74 METhours·week-1) and sleeping (-7.29 hours·week-1 and -9.87 METhours·week-1) were significantly lower with FPACQ than with SWD. Time spent in sports was lower (-0.54 hours·week-1), but EE higher (+4.18 METhours·week-1) with the FPACQ. With regard to transport, reported time and EE of active transport were higher (+1.36 hours·week-1 and +7.03 METhours·week-1), while those of motorized transport were lower (-2.66 hours·week-1 and -8.17 METhours·week-1), compared to SWD assessments.
Two-way ANOVA for differences between FPACQ and the combination of the SenseWear Armband and electronic diary (FPACQ - SWD outcome) with gender and age
Main effect of gender
Main effect of age
men (n = 196)
women (n = 209)
20-34 years (n = 104)
35-49 years (n = 204)
50-64 years (n = 97)
Total physical activity
0.16 ± 0.27
0.13 ± 0.23
0.08 ± 0.25b,c
0.15 ± 2.26
0.21 ± 0.21
Total EE (METhours.week-1)
27.64 ± 44.48
22.89 ± 38.35
13.98 ± 41.83b,c
26.17 ± 43.19
35.34 ± 34.59
Moderate PA (hours.week-1)
-6.91 ± 7.63a
-3.61 ± 5.87
-7.08 ± 7.68b,c
-4.61 ± 6.72
-4.43 ± 6.34
Vigorous PA (hours.week-1)
1.93 ± 2.98a
1.26 ± 2.17
2.03 ± 2.93b
1.28 ± 2.48
1.76 ± 2.45
Sedentary behavior (hours.week-1)
-23.00 ± 14.08a
-26.92 ± 14.79
-23.45 ± 14.60
-25.52 ± 14.53
-25.64 ± 14.61
Time (hours.week-1)
5.08 ± 10.48
4.41 ± 12.41
5.53 ± 13.38
4.52 ± 11.29
4.32 ± 9.77
EE (METhours.week-1)
30.71 ± 25.23
24.88 ± 28.02
23.66 ± 29.68
30.45 ± 26.32
26.25 ± 24.15
Leisure time
Time sport (hours.week-1)
-0.42 ± 3.85
-0.56 ± 2.46
-0.42 ± 3.05
-0.50 ± 3.02
-0.55 ± 3.75
EE sport (METhours.week-1)
8.59 ± 28.41a
0.48 ± 12.90
6.50 ± 23.38
4.28 ± 21.82
2.26 ± 21.38
Screen time (hours.week-1)
-1.15 ± 7.82a
0.71 ± 7.82
-0.56 ± 8.27
0.60 ± 7.79
-1.49 ± 7.46
Household chores
Time (hours.week-1)
-3.38 ± 8.54a
-6.20 ± 8.33
-4.26 ± 7.95
-5.78 ± 8.80d
-3.44 ± 8.40
EE (METhours.week-1)
-4.72 ± 24.14a
-8.63 ± 24.08
-7.03 ± 22.31
-8.75 ± 23.95
-2.12 ± 26.07
Time active transport (hours.week-1)
1.66 ± 3.90a
1.01 ± 2.94
1.27 ± 3.66
1.01 ± 3.30d
2.07 ± 3.45
EE active transport (METhours.week-1)
8.06 ± 15.17a
5.78 ± 11.49
6.73 ± 14.14
5.68 ± 12.89d
9.62 ± 13.48
Time passive transport (hours.week-1)
-3.00 ± 3.84
-2.84 ± 3.70
-2.79 ± 4.06
-2.92 ± 3.75
-3.06 ± 3.51
EE passive transport (METhours.week-1)
-8.98 ± 9.34
-8.19 ± 7.19
-9.56 ± 8.83
-8.42 ± 7.58
-7.84 ± 6.87
Personal care
Time eating (hours.week-1)
-3.69 ± 3.82
-3.99 ± 3.77
-3.23 ± 3.44
-3.90 ± 3.80
-4.40 ± 4.07
EE eating (METhours.week-1)
-6.11 ± 6.84
-5.57 ± 6.91
-5.57 ± 6.59
-5.73 ± 6.73
-6.33 ± 7.50
Time sleeping (hours.week-1)
-7.20 ± 7.29
-7.50 ± 7.10
-8.09 ± 7.78
-6.83 ± 6.98
-7.71 ± 6.94
EE sleeping (METhours.week-1)
-10.87 ± 7.83a
-9.06 ± 8.61
-13.67 ± 9.40b, c
-9.40 ± 7.39
-7.06 ± 7.43
This study compared estimates of domain-specific PA and sedentary behavior obtained with the FPACQ with those obtained from SWD. Furthermore, it was examined whether the correspondence between the two methods varied with gender and age. All parameters of the FPACQ were significantly and positively correlated with SWD-outcomes. Nevertheless, significant differences between both methods were found. In general, PA was higher and sedentary behavior lower with the FPACQ compared to SWD. These results are similar to those of several other studies, which showed that, when compared to objective data obtained from accelerometers, questionnaires have acceptable validity, but generally overestimate PA [13, 20, 21]. However, previous studies are mostly limited to overall PA or time spent at moderate and vigorous activity, whereas the current study highlights the importance of examining domain-specific activity when investigating agreement between measurement techniques.
Correlations between the two methods varied between 0.21 and 0.65 and are similar to what is typically reported for PA questionnaires evaluated in adults [4, 17, 22]. An important contribution of this study is the comparison between subjective and objective measures of physical (in)activity in different domains of daily life. Correlations were moderate for job, leisure time, household chores and transport, but low for eating and sleeping. To our knowledge, only two studies divided accelerometer output into different domains according to the information obtained from an activity log, similar to what was done in the current study. Measures of occupational activity from Tecumseh and Baecke questionnaires were significantly correlated with Tracmor output during work (r = 0.26 to 0.50), but low or no correlations were found for indices of active leisure time. However, active leisure time included a wide range of activities, such as sports, household and garden activities [23]. Matton et al. [13] showed comparable correlations for active transport (0.49-0.55), but higher correlations for sports (0.47-0.77), TV viewing (0.69-0.83), occupation (0.78-0.88) and eating and sleeping (0.53-0.69). There were, however, subtle differences in the calculation of the FPACQ parameters.
Despite of the significant correlations, PAL and total EE were significantly higher and sedentary time significantly lower with the FPACQ as compared to the SenseWear. These results are consistent with findings from several previous studies [4, 13, 21]. However, it is unclear whether the differences between the two methods are due to errors in the FPACQ or to inherent limitations of the SenseWear. It has been shown that the SenseWear underestimates total EE by 4% compared with doubly labeled water [24, 25]. This could partly explain the observed difference in total EE between FPACQ and SenseWear (9% of the average of FPACQ and SenseWear outcomes).
With regard to intensity of activity, reported duration of vigorous PA was higher, whereas moderate PA was lower than directly measured by the SenseWear. These complex patterns have been seen in several previous studies. It has been reported that people overestimate the amount of vigorous activity, while underestimating time spent in light and moderate activities [26], though some studies also found an over-reporting of moderate activities [21, 27]. The FPACQ questions of time spent in moderate and vigorous PA inquire about overall activity in multiple domains of daily life. These questions are cognitively challenging, because several activities need to be taken into account and summed over the day [28]. Most subjects, asked about PA behavior, seem to think about vigorous or organized activities and not about routine activities like household chores or walking [29]. This underlines the importance of examining domain-specific activity when investigating agreement between measurement techniques. In the current study, time and EE of job activities and active transport were significantly higher and household chores, passive transport, eating and sleeping significantly lower with the FPACQ as compared to SWD. Furthermore, the FPACQ resulted in lower values for duration, but higher values for EE of sports. Few studies have compared self-reported activity in different domains with similar measures obtained from activity monitors. Matton et al. [13] showed that duration of eating and sleeping and watching TV in women were significantly lower and time and EE of sport, time of active transport and EE during occupation significantly higher when calculated from the FPACQ as compared to an accelerometer plus log. Reported duration of active leisure time was higher in men and slightly, but not significantly, lower in women. However, active leisure time included sports participation, active transport and house and garden activities. This could possibly point to an underreporting of household activities in women, analogous to the current study.
The correspondence between FPACQ and SWD varied with gender and age. However, no clear pattern was observed. Trends differed according to the specific intensity and domain of activity. Men over-reported more intense activity significantly more than women, whereas women underreported total sedentary time and household chores to a greater extent. Young adults had smaller differences between FPACQ and SWD for PAL and total EE, but greater differences for time spent at moderate activities than middle-aged and older subjects. Additionally, vigorous activities were more over-reported by young compared to middle-aged adults. The evidence on the role of gender in the agreement between self-report and direct measures of PA has been mixed, with some studies demonstrating better agreement in men [4, 30], while others have reported better agreement in women [21, 31]. Calabro et al. [32] found that for men, the 24-hour recall estimate of total EE was slightly higher than the SenseWear, whereas for women, it was slightly lower. Only a few studies investigated the impact of age in the accuracy of self-reports. It has been reported that PA questionnaires are especially challenging in older adults because of cognitive processes [33]. Furthermore, a substantial component of their PA, namely activities of daily living, is not captured by most self-report instruments [34]. A review of Ferrari et al. [30] showed that the validity of questionnaires varied with age, with lower coefficients observed for subjects older than 50 years. However, results could differ depending on the questionnaire used [21].
Bland-Altman analyses revealed a relatively small mean difference between FPACQ and SenseWear for total EE. However, 95% limits of agreement were large, suggesting that there are large individual differences in estimates from both methods. Most of the previous studies have reported agreement at the group level, but not at the individual level [20, 35]. Calabro et al. [32] found a relatively small (38.5 kcal·day-1), not significant, difference between the 24-hour PA recall and SenseWear for group-level EE. However, differences in individual estimates ranged from -663 to 946 kcal·day-1. In the current study, no systematic bias was observed for total EE. Yet, for sports, a trend towards increased over-reporting by the FPACQ with higher values of EE was found. Other studies also indicated an increased difference with increasing PA. Good agreement existed between IPAQ and ActiGraph up to 1000 min of PA per week. However, as activity levels increased over 1000 min, the IPAQ tended to overestimate total PA [21]. Bland-Altman plots for the 24-hour recall versus the IDEEA and SenseWear illustrated a tendency of the 24-hour recall to underreport total EE in the least active and over-report in the most active subjects [32].
Several reasons could explain the disagreement between both measurement methods. Social desirability may at least partially explain the over-reporting of PA and underreporting of sedentary pursuits [6]. It has been shown that, over a seven-day period, social desirability bias is associated with over-reporting of PA by approximately 4–11 min·day-1 [36].
A higher perceived intensity than objectively measured may also lead to differences [37, 38]. Some questionnaires, including the FPACQ, ask about activities where physiological parameters like increased sweating, heart rate or breathlessness mark the intensity [1]. However, the perception of intensity depends on the age, gender and fitness of the person as well as on duration of activity [1, 2]. Moderate activities could be perceived as vigorous, which may explain the over-reporting of vigorous and underreporting of moderate PA. Likewise, subjects could have overestimated the intensity of their occupational activities, resulting in higher EE in the FPACQ.
A third explanation might be the problems associated with recalling light to moderate activities of daily living. It has been shown that it is difficult to achieve accurate measures of light to moderate PA using self-reports, probably due to their unstructured and intermittent nature [2]. Aadahl et al. [39] have reported that subjects knew quite accurately how much time they slept, worked or watched TV, and how much time they spent on vigorous activities such as sports or heavy gardening. But, the duration of light activities at home was very difficult to remember. This could explain why particularly women underreported the duration of household chores. It is possible that women performed lighter activities, whereas men performed heavier gardening. Additionally, it may be that women accumulated intermittent household chores over the course of the day, whereas chores of men were more structured, making them easier to recall.
Another source of variability may be the result of algorithms used to convert activity data into EE [10, 11, 31]. The SenseWear estimates EE based on physiological and movement parameters, whereas the FPACQ relies on MET-values from a published compendium [18]. Reported activities were converted into an estimate of EE by assigning each activity a specific MET-value. Thus, a single estimate of the energy cost of a certain activity was used for all subjects. This does not allow for individual differences in EE [1, 2, 18]. However, evidence suggests that there is considerable inter- and intra-individual variability in the energy cost of activities, depending on the person's sex, age, body mass, movement efficiency and environmental conditions in which the activity is performed [6, 40]. It is remarkable that EE of sports was highly over-reported for men, but not for women. This could point to a potential overestimation of MET-values of certain sports, perhaps those with a higher intensity or those mainly practiced by men. However, it is also known that the SenseWear underestimates EE during very vigorous activities [41, 42].
It is important to recognize that the disagreement is a result of limitations in both methods. The reported disagreement in literature may be related to limitations in the use of accelerometers. Part of the overestimation of PA in self-reports may be explained by activities that are not detected with accelerometers [37]. In addition, the wear-time of accelerometers varies between studies and is generally low, for example minimum 10 hours per day [20, 34]. However, adults could be awake for up to 16 hours. Thus, during some of the time that the subjects were awake, activities were not registered. It is likely that this produced some bias in the data [12, 43]. The SenseWear can address some of these limitations. By combining accelerometry with physiological sensors, it can detect the increased EE associated with cycling, upper body movement, carrying loads and walking on an incline [15]. Moreover, in this study, the wear time was standardized to 24 hours a day. However, the SenseWear is not without limitations. Similar to other activity monitors, it is known to overestimate EE of moderate activities and underestimate (very) vigorous and total EE [25, 41, 42]. Johannsen et al. [24] have noted that the SenseWear underestimated PA EE by 12.5% compared to estimates derived from doubly labeled water. This may have contributed to the observed differences between FPACQ and SWD for total EE and the EE of sports and active transport. Furthermore, the Armband cannot be worn during water-based activities. However, in this study, a constant MET-value was imputed to account for swimming and showering or bathing. Because of these limitations, under- or overestimation by the FPACQ can neither be confirmed nor refused and real activity levels probably lie between the subjective and objective assessments.
Some results might reflect limitations in the use of the diary. First, participants may forget to record short-during activities, such as active transport, leading to an underreporting of these activities in the diary. Second, contrary to what was expected, screen time was not different between methods. Yet, the pattern is complex, as men underreported and women slightly over-reported screen time. This could be due to the following difference. In the diary, subjects were forced to choose between activities, when several activities were performed simultaneously, whereas in the FPACQ, both activities could be reported. For example, when eating a meal in front of TV, subjects could have inserted eating into the diary, whereas they also counted this period of TV-viewing when answering the screen time question in the FPACQ. Also surprisingly, time spent on sports was lower in the FPACQ, as compared to the diary. Indicated hours of sports participation in the diary might include time devoted to changing, refreshment and socializing [6]. Furthermore, subjects knew they participated in a PA study and were monitored for their activity. Thus, because of a possible Hawthorne effect, participants could have performed more sports than usual, resulting in higher values in the diary. This points to a potential restriction of the study. The FPACQ assessed activity during a usual week, where SWD measured last week activity. This could, at least in part, explain the difference in job time between both methods. Subjects could have been monitored during a week with some vacation days or less work time than usual. However, the interpretation of a usual week is difficult and participants sometimes recall the last 7 days as a usual week [17, 28].
Some other limitations should be considered when evaluating the results of this study. Participants volunteered to take part in the study. This may have led to a selection bias as most participants were highly-educated and had white-collar functions. Accordingly, the generalizability of these findings to the general working population may be restricted. Though, a previous study showed that agreement between self-reported and accelerometer-obtained PA did not differ between educational levels [20].
The current study investigated whether the correspondence between recalled and direct measures of PA varied with gender and age. However, trends in agreement may be influenced by several other characteristics, including BMI and cardiovascular fitness [27, 31, 37]. Additional research is needed to identify whether, and to what extent, these factors are associated with reporting bias.
A major strength of this study is the combination of the SenseWear Armband, a valid activity monitor [24, 25], with the electronic diary. Each minute of SenseWear data was linked to the diary reported type of activity. In this way, activity variables from the questionnaire could be compared with an objective measure generated in the same dimension, thereby moving beyond examinations of overall PA or time spent at moderate and vigorous intensity. In addition, compared to previous studies examining agreement between measurement techniques [8], this study included a relatively large sample of men and women of diverse ages. Furthermore, the compliance for wearing the SenseWear and completing the diary was very high and only subjects with at least six days with a minimum of 22 hours and 48 min (95% of 24 hours) of data were included in the analyses.
The current results show that great care must be taken when interpreting self-reported and objectively measured PA. Clearly, the two assessment techniques are not interchangeable. Both instruments capture different aspects of a complex behavior. Activity monitors like the SenseWear, measure motion or movement, while questionnaires provide a behavioral description of activity patterns. As shown previously, subjective and objective methods are independently associated with health parameters, and in that way, self-reports should be used as an addition to objective indicators of movement [44]. Furthermore, it is important to recognize that the current recommendation to accumulate 30 min of PA on most days, is based on associations between self-reported PA and health outcomes. The magnitude of these associations may be severely attenuated by measurement error [30] and less than 30 min of PA as measured by an accelerometer, may provide significant health benefits [5]. Thus, the benefits of PA may even be greater than what is typically reported.
In conclusion, our results show a moderate correspondence between FPACQ and SWD. Despite the moderate correlations, significant differences between both methods were found. In general, PA was higher and sedentary behavior lower as calculated from the FPACQ, compared to SWD. Furthermore, correspondence varied with gender and age. Though, no clear patterns emerged. Results differed according to the specific intensity and domain of activity. The appendix can be seen in Table 3
Physical (in)activity parameters calculated from the FPACQ and the combination of the SenseWear Armband and electronic diary (SWD)
Questions and responses in the FPACQ
Calculation of FPACQ parameters
Calculation of SWD parameters
Sedentary behavior (hours.week-1)
How much time do you usually spend sitting on a weekday/weekend day? This may include time spent sitting at a desk, visiting friends, reading, studying or watching television.
(Hours spent sitting on a weekday * 5) + (hours spent sitting on a weekend day * 2)
Sum of all minutes with a MET-value ≤1.8 MET minus minutes spent sleeping
→ Response: <30 min.day-1 to ≥10 hours.day-1
Moderate physical activity (hours.week-1)
1) During a usual week, on how many days do you do moderate physical activities? Moderate activities refer to activities that take moderate physical effort and make you breathe somewhat harder than normal, like carrying light loads, bicycling at a regular pace, or doubles tennis. Do not include walking. Think only about those activities that you did for at least 10 min at a time.
Number of days with moderate activities * hours per day spent on moderate activities
Sum of all bouts of at least 10 min with a MET-value ≥3 but <6
→ Response: 0 to 7 days.week-1
2) How much time do you usually spend doing moderate physical activities on one of those days?
→ Response: 10 to ≥120 min.day-1
Vigorous physical activity (hours.week-1)
1) During a usual week, on how many days do you do vigorous physical activities? Vigorous activities refer to activities that take hard physical effort and make you breathe much harder than normal, like heavy lifting, digging, aerobics or fast bicycling. Think only about those activities that you did for at least 10 min at a time.
Number of days with vigorous activities * hours per day spent on vigorous activities
Sum of all bouts of at least 10 min with a MET-value ≥6
→ Response: 0 to 7 days.week-1
2) How much time do you usually spend doing vigorous physical activities on one of those days?
→ Response: 10 to ≥120 min.day-1
Total EE (METhours.week-1)
1) EE of remaining inactive leisure time= (168 - time job - time sports - time household chores - time active transport - time motorized transport - time eating - time sleeping) * 1.5 MET
Sum of min-by-min MET-values over the entire week
2) EE job + EE sports + EE household chores + EE active transport + EE motorized transport + EE eating + EE sleeping + EE remaining inactive leisure time
Total EE/168
Average of min-by-min MET- values over the entire week
Time job (hours.week-1)
How many hours a week do you usually spend doing your main/additional occupation?
Hours per week spent on main occupation + hours per week spent on additional occupation
Sum of all minutes reported as 'job' in the electronic diary
→ Response: 0-5 to >60 hours.week-1
EE job (METhours.week-1)
During a usual week at your main/additional occupation, what percentage of the time do you engage in 1) light activities (sitting, standing without lifting or carrying weights,…), 2) moderate activities (lifting or carrying weights, walking continuously,…), 3) vigorous activities (lifting or carrying moderate to heavy weights, construction worker,…)
(Hours spent on main occupation * % light * 2 MET) + (hours spent on main occupation * % moderate * 3 MET) + (hours spent on main occupation * % vigorous * 4 MET) + (hours spent on additional occupation * % light * 2 MET) + (hours spent on additional occupation * % moderate * 3 MET) + (hours spent on additional occupation * % vigorous * 4 MET)
Sum of min-by-min MET-values where the indicated activity was 'job'
→ Response: 0 to 100% for each of the three intensity levels
Time sports (hours.week-1)
1) What is your most important sport?
1) Conversion of the reported duration of the first, second and third sport into average hours per week over one year
Sum of all minutes reported as 'sports' in the electronic diary (All separately indicated sports were combined)
→ Response: list of 200 different sports
2) How frequently do you perform your most important sport?
2) Hours per week spent on first sport + hours per week spent on second sport + hours per week spent on third sport
→ Response: 1 week.year-1 to >7 times per week
3) How much time do you spend on your most important sport?
→ Response: <7 hours during 1 week.year-1 to >20 hours.week-1
4) How many months a year do you practice your most important sport?
→ Response: 1 to 12 months per year
Same four questions for the second and third most important sport
EE sports (METhours.week-1)
(Hours per week spent on first sport * MET-value first sport) + (hours per week spent on second sport * MET-value second sport) + (hours per week spent on third sport * MET-value third sport)
Sum of min-by-min MET-values where the indicated activity was 'sports'
Screen time (hours.week-1)
How many hours do you usually spend watching TV/video or playing computer games on a weekday/weekend day?
(Hours per day spent on a weekday * 5) + (hours per day spent on a weekend day * 2)
Sum of all minutes reported as 'watching TV/movies' and 'playing or working on the computer for leisure' in the electronic diary
→ Response: 0 to ≥6 hours.day-1
Time household chores (hours.week-1)
How many hours a week do you usually spend doing home or garden activities of 1) light intensity (cooking, ironing, watering flowers,…), 2) moderate intensity (vacuuming, mowing lawn,…), 3) vigorous intensity (scrubbing, digging,…)
Hours per week spent on light household chores + hours per week spent on moderate household chores + hours per week spent on vigorous household chores
Sum of all minutes reported as 'in-house activities' and 'garden activities' in the electronic diary
→ Response: 0 to >14 hours.week-1
EE household chores (METhours.week-1)
(Hours per week spent on light household chores * 2.5 MET) + (hours per week spent on moderate chores * 3.5 MET) + (hours per week spent on vigorous chores * 4.5 MET)
Sum of min-by-min MET-values where the indicated activity was 'in-house activities' or 'garden activities'
Time active transport (hours.week-1)
1) How many days a week do you usually walk to and from your main/additional occupation?
(Number of days * hours per day spent on walking to and from main occupation) + (number of days * hours per day spent on walking to and from additional occupation) + (number of days * hours per day spent on cycling to and from main occupation) + (number of days * hours per day spent on cycling to and from additional occupation) + (hours per weekday spent on transportation on foot in leisure time * 5) + (hours per weekday spent on transportation by bike in leisure time * 5) + (hours per weekend day spent on transportation on foot in leisure time * 2) + (hours per weekend day spent on transportation by bike in leisure time * 2)
Sum of all minutes reported as 'transportation on foot' and 'transportation by bike' in the electronic diary
→ Response: 0 to 7 days.wk-1
2) How many minutes do you usually walk to and from your main/ additional occupation on such days?
→ Response: 0-10 to >120 min.day-1
3) In leisure time, how many minutes do you usually spend on transportation on foot, on a weekday/weekend day?
→ Response: no transportation in this way to >120 min.day-1
Same three questions for transportation by bike
EE active transport (METhours.week-1)
Time active transport *4 MET
Sum of min-by-min MET- values where the indicated activity was 'transportation on foot' or 'transportation by bike'
Time motorized transport (hours.week-1)
1) How many days a week do you usually make use of a car, train, tramcar, bus or motorcycle for commuting to and from your main/ additional occupation?
(Number of days * hours per day spent on motorized transport to and from main occupation) + (number of days * hours per day spent on motorized transport to and from additional occupation) + (hours per weekday spent on motorized transport in leisure time * 5) + (hours per weekend day spent on motorized transport in leisure time *2)
Sum of all minutes reported as 'motorized transport' in the electronic diary
→ Response: 0 to 7 days.week-1
2) How many minutes do you usually spend on transportation by car, train, tramcar, bus or motorcycle to and from your main/additional occupation on such days?
→ Response: 0-10 to >120 min.day-1
3) In leisure time, how many minutes do you usually spend on transportation by car, train, tramcar, bus or motorcycle on a weekday/ weekend day?
→ Response: no transportation in this way to >120 min.day-1
EE motorized transport (METhours.week-1)
Time motorized transport * 1.5 MET
Sum of min-by-min MET- values where the indicated activity was 'motorized transport'
Time eating (hours.week-1)
How many minutes a day to you usually spend eating your daily meals?
Hours per day spent eating *7
Sum of all minutes reported as 'eating/drinking' in the electronic diary
→ Response: 0-10 to >120 min.day-1
EE eating (METhours.week-1)
Time eating * 1.8 MET
Sum of min-by-min MET- values where the indicated activity was 'eating/drinking'
Time sleeping (hours.week-1)
How many hours a night do you usually spend sleeping?
Hours per night spent sleeping * 7
Sum of all minutes reported as 'sleeping/resting' in the electronic diary
→ Response: <5 to >12 hours.night-1
EE sleeping (METhours.week-1)
Time sleeping * 0.9 MET
Sum of min-by-min MET- values where the indicated activity was 'sleeping'
T. Scheers was funded by the Research Foundation - Flanders.
Authors' Affiliations
- Lagerros YT, Lagiou P: Assessment of physical activity and energy expenditure in epidemiological research of chronic diseases. Eur J Epidemiol. 2007, 22: 353-362. 10.1007/s10654-007-9154-x.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Welk GJ: Physical activity assessments for health-related research. 2002, Champaign: Human kineticsGoogle Scholar
- Wareham NJ, Rennie KL: The assessment of physical activity in individuals and populations: why try to be more precise about how physical activity is assessed?. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1998, 22 (Suppl 2): S30-S38.Google Scholar
- Prince SA, Adamo KB, Hamel ME, Hardt J, Gorber SC, Tremblay M: A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008, 5: 56-80. 10.1186/1479-5868-5-56.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, Masse LC, Tilert T, McDowell M: Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008, 40: 181-188.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Shephard RJ: Limits to the measurement of habitual physical activity by questionnaires. Br J Sports Med. 2003, 37: 197-206. 10.1136/bjsm.37.3.197.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sallis JF, Saelens BE: Assessment of physical activity by self-report: status, limitations, and future directions. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2000, 71: S1-S14.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- van Poppel MN, Chinapaw MJ, Mokkink LB, van Mechelen W, Terwee CB: Physical activity questionnaires for adults: a systematic review of measurement properties. Sports Med. 2010, 40: 565-600. 10.2165/11531930-000000000-00000.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dong L, Block G, Mandel S: Activities Contributing to Total Energy Expenditure in the United States: Results from the NHAPS Study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2004, 1: 4-15. 10.1186/1479-5868-1-4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hendelman D, Miller K, Baggett C, Debold E, Freedson P: Validity of accelerometry for the assessment of moderate intensity physical activity in the field. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000, 32: S442-S449. 10.1097/00005768-200009001-00002.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Bassett DR, Ainsworth BE, Swartz AM, Strath SJ, O'Brien WL, King GA: Validity of four motion sensors in measuring moderate intensity physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000, 32: S471-S480. 10.1097/00005768-200009001-00006.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Leenders NY, Sherman WM, Nagaraja HN, Kien CL: Evaluation of methods to assess physical activity in free-living conditions. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001, 33: 1233-1240.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Matton L, Wijndaele K, Duvigneaud N, Duquet W, Philippaerts R, Thomis M, Lefevre J: Reliability and validity of the Flemish Physical Activity Computerized Questionnaire in adults. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2007, 78: 293-306. 10.5641/193250307X13082505157968.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Turner CF, Ku L, Rogers SM, Lindberg LD, Pleck JH, Sonenstein FL: Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: increased reporting with computer survey technology. Science. 1998, 280: 867-873. 10.1126/science.280.5365.867.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Welk GJ, McClain JJ, Eisenmann JC, Wickel EE: Field validation of the MTI Actigraph and BodyMedia armband monitor using the IDEEA monitor. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2007, 15: 918-928. 10.1038/oby.2007.624.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Scheers T, Philippaerts R, Lefevre J: Variability in physical activity patterns as measured by the SenseWear Armband: how many days are needed?. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012, 112: 1653-1662.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, Pratt M, Ekelund U, Yngve A, Sallis JF, et al: International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003, 35: 1381-1395. 10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Whitt MC, Irwin ML, Swartz AM, Strath SJ, O'Brien WL, Bassett DR, Schmitz KH, Emplaincourt PO, et al: Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000, 32: S498-S504. 10.1097/00005768-200009001-00009.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dunton GF, Whalen CK, Jamner LD, Henker B, Floro JN: Using ecologic momentary assessment to measure physical activity during adolescence. Am J Prev Med. 2005, 29: 281-287. 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.07.020.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ekelund U, Sepp H, Brage S, Becker W, Jakes R, Hennings M, Wareham NJ: Criterion-related validity of the last 7-day, short form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire in Swedish adults. Public Health Nutr. 2006, 9: 258-265.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Boon RM, Hamlin MJ, Steel GD, Ross JJ: Validation of the New Zealand Physical Activity Questionnaire (NZPAQ-LF) and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-LF) with accelerometry. Br J Sports Med. 2010, 44: 741-746. 10.1136/bjsm.2008.052167.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Vandelanotte C, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Philippaerts R, Sjöström M, Sallis J: Reliability and validity of a computerized and Dutch version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). J Phys Act Health. 2005, 63-75.Google Scholar
- Philippaerts RM, Westerterp KR, Lefevre J: Comparison of two questionnaires with a tri-axial accelerometer to assess physical activity patterns. Int J Sports Med. 2001, 22: 34-39. 10.1055/s-2001-11359.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Johannsen DL, Calabro MA, Stewart J, Franke W, Rood JC, Welk GJ: Accuracy of armband monitors for measuring daily energy expenditure in healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2010, 42: 2134-2140. 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181e0b3ff.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- St-Onge M, Mignault D, Allison DB, Rabasa-Lhoret R: Evaluation of a portable device to measure daily energy expenditure in free-living adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007, 85: 742-749.Google Scholar
- Besson H, Brage S, Jakes RW, Ekelund U, Wareham NJ: Estimating physical activity energy expenditure, sedentary time, and physical activity intensity by self-report in adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010, 91: 106-114. 10.3945/ajcn.2009.28432.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Timperio A, Salmon J, Crawford D: Validity and reliability of a physical activity recall instrument among overweight and non-overweight men and women. J Sci Med Sport. 2003, 6: 477-491. 10.1016/S1440-2440(03)80273-6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yore MM, Ham SA, Ainsworth BE, Kruger J, Reis JP, Kohl HW, Macera CA: Reliability and validity of the instrument used in BRFSS to assess physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007, 39: 1267-1274. 10.1249/mss.0b013e3180618bbe.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Jacobs DR, Ainsworth BE, Hartman TJ, Leon AS: A simultaneous evaluation of 10 commonly used physical activity questionnaires. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1993, 25: 81-91. 10.1249/00005768-199301000-00012.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ferrari P, Friedenreich C, Matthews CE: The role of measurement error in estimating levels of physical activity. Am J Epidemiol. 2007, 166: 832-840. 10.1093/aje/kwm148.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Washburn RA, Jacobsen DJ, Sonko BJ, Hill JO, Donnelly JE: The validity of the Stanford Seven-Day Physical Activity Recall in young adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003, 35: 1374-1380. 10.1249/01.MSS.0000079081.08476.EA.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Calabro MA, Welk GJ, Carriquiry AL, Nusser SM, Beyler NK, Mathews CE: Validation of a computerized 24-hour physical activity recall (24PAR) instrument with pattern-recognition activity monitors. J Phys Act Health. 2009, 6: 211-220.Google Scholar
- Rikli RE: Reliability, validity, and methodological issues in assessing physical activity in older adults. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2000, 71: S89-S96.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Colbert LH, Matthews CE, Havighurst TC, Kim K, Schoeller DA: Comparative validity of physical activity measures in older adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011, 43: 867-876.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hagstromer M, Oja P, Sjostrom M: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ): a study of concurrent and construct validity. Public Health Nutr. 2006, 9: 755-762.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Adams SA, Matthews CE, Ebbeling CB, Moore CG, Cunningham JE, Fulton J, Hebert JR: The effect of social desirability and social approval on self-reports of physical activity. Am J Epidemiol. 2005, 161: 389-398. 10.1093/aje/kwi054.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Slootmaker SM, Schuit AJ, Chinapaw MJ, Seidell JC, van Mechelen W: Disagreement in physical activity assessed by accelerometer and self-report in subgroups of age, gender, education and weight status. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2009, 6: 17-10.1186/1479-5868-6-17.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Duncan GE, Sydeman SJ, Perri MG, Limacher MC, Martin AD: Can sedentary adults accurately recall the intensity of their physical activity?. Prev Med. 2001, 33: 18-26. 10.1006/pmed.2001.0847.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Aadahl M, Jorgensen T: Validation of a new self-report instrument for measuring physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003, 35: 1196-1202. 10.1249/01.MSS.0000074446.02192.14.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Levine JA: Measurement of energy expenditure. Public Health Nutr. 2005, 8: 1123-1132.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Berntsen S, Hageberg R, Aandstad A, Mowinckel P, Anderssen SA, Carlsen KH, Andersen LB: Validity of physical activity monitors in adults participating in free-living activities. Br J Sports Med. 2010, 44: 657-664. 10.1136/bjsm.2008.048868.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Drenowatz C, Eisenmann JC: Validation of the SenseWear Armband at high intensity exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011, 111: 883-887. 10.1007/s00421-010-1695-0.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Masse LC, Fuemmeler BF, Anderson CB, Matthews CE, Trost SG, Catellier DJ, Treuth M: Accelerometer data reduction: a comparison of four reduction algorithms on select outcome variables. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005, 37: S544-S554. 10.1249/01.mss.0000185674.09066.8a.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Atienza AA, Moser RP, Perna F, Dodd K, Ballard-Barbash R, Troiano RP, Berrigan D: Self-reported and objectively measured activity related to biomarkers using NHANES. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011, 43: 815-821.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


text:
As the title suggests, the past few weeks have been pretty intense! I have finished my psychiatry placement and have had a week of cardiovascular lectures. Having said that, I couldn't tell you anything about said topic. I've been running around helping with events, doing my research project and marking essays. I haven't actually sat down and done any revision at all this week, because every time I try to I either fall asleep or get a headache. I feel bad for complaining about my workload given that many people juggle more balls than I do. Medicine never relents and only gets busier and busier, and you are expected to evolve. I love this challenge, but some days I can't stand it. Some days I want to lie in bed and not feel a sense of dread of all the deadlines looming in the air; all the knowledge I know I require but do not have yet to pass my exams.
On top of that, the US presidential elections happened, and I am trying to decide which hospital to station myself at next year. For us at Liverpool, we do our finals in fourth year, not fifth year. You spend the vast majority of time at your 'base' hospital, pretty much doing 9-5 or 8-4. Therefore, the hospital you choose will be responsible for teaching your core finals knowledge, and getting your practical skills up to scratch in order to pass the LOCAS (Liverpool Objective Clinical Assessment System) exams. Some of the best teaching hospitals are the furthest away from where I live, and so it is a massive decision to weigh up your quality of education and where you're prepared to live or commute to. Many of us feel like we are choosing universities all over again.
I've also got a job, but am now worried how I'm going to manage with that as well! I am looking for a new car that is a bit cheaper but not succeeding.
I am very excited for Christmas, as it's my favourite time of year. But again, there's a nagging feeling that exams are that bit closer and a whole term has nearly gone by. I'm trying to keep calm and carry on, but some days I just want to give up. Other days I am utterly in love with medicine and feel so strongly that this is what I am meant to do. I don't think I've ever worked this hard before, but I think it will be worth it.