Ohio lawmakers propose physical fitness test in schools. How fat, obese are Ohio's kids?
The proposal would require students in grades 1 through 12 to take an annual fitness exam modeled after the test, which started in 1956 under President Dwight D. Eisenhower and was discontinued in 2012.
Ohio lawmakers say today's children need more physical fitness.
"In a time when sedentary lifestyles, screen time, and childhood obesity are on the rise, this legislation sends a clear message: physical fitness is not optional, it is essential," said Elgin Rogers, D-Toledo, one of House Bill 322's sponsors.
So how heavy are Ohio's children? Here's a look at the state's childhood obesity rates.
The rate of obesity in Ohio is 18.3% for children ages 6 to 17, according to the State of Childhood Obesity report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, slightly higher than the national average of 17%. The study uses data from the National Survey of Children's Health in 2022 and 2023.
Ohio ranks No. 17 in the nation for obese children, better than Wisconsin (No. 16) at 18.4% but worse than South Carolina (No. 18) at 18.1%. Topping the list is Mississippi, which has a childhood obesity rate of 25%, according to the report.
Looking at childhood obesity rates for different age groups in the report, Ohio is No. 12 in the nation for obesity among high school students with a rate of 16.8%. The report uses data from 2019 for that statistic. For children ages 10-17, the obesity rate is 16.2%, 27th in the nation, using data from 2022. And for children ages 2-4 that participate in the state's Women, Infants and Children program, the obesity rate is 12.5%, using data from 2020, putting the Buckeye State at No. 42 in the nation in that age group.
According to Harvard Men's Health Watch, a publication of Harvard Medical School, the fitness test has undergone many revisions over the decades. However, the version most people are familiar with consists of a one-mile run, pull-ups or push-ups, sit-ups, shuttle run and sit-and-reach. "The aim was to assess cardiovascular fitness, upper-body and core strength, endurance, flexibility, and agility," Matthew Sloan writes in the article.
The test was discontinued in 2012 by President Barack Obama in favor of a different method, the Presidential Youth Fitness Program. The new program "modernized fitness education" by emphasizing student health, goal setting and personal progress.
This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Ohio lawmakers eye physical fitness test return. Childhood obesity rates
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
5 hours ago
- Medscape
Foundations Rethink Research Dollars as Funding Is Pulled
This spring the notices came without warning: Federal funding for thousands of approved research projects, many already under way, had been delayed or canceled. Among those left in the lurch were grant recipients seeking to do things like reduce vaccine hesitancy, improve access to healthcare for minority populations, or treat an aggressive form of brain cancer. All told, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation withdrew or placed on hold almost $4 billion in funding. And that money may be gone for the foreseeable future because the White House's proposed budget for the next fiscal year slashes support for those agencies themselves by 40% and 56%, respectively. 'So much has been cut by the wrecking-ball, bludgeoning approach that went on at NIH,' said Alonzo Plough, PhD, chief science officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), Princeton, New Jersey. 'They're not just cutting bureaucrats and funding for projects that are not efficient. These are the pipelines that have put American bioscience at the forefront of the world, provided treatments that saved your family members' lives.' Foundations are trying to meet the moment, doling out emergency support to the extent they can. RWJF, for its part, has several such initiatives, including grants for information gathering on climate change and health, tracking AIDS/HIV, and science-based assessments of childhood vaccines. Still, foundations can't replace the government. 'The billions and billions that have been cut are orders of magnitude bigger than anything philanthropy can patch,' Plough said. 'We can keep certain things on life support, but life support is not a good thing to be on.' Private-Public Partnerships Drive Discovery It won't surprise you to hear that medical and health research requires a lot of money — $245.1 billion in 2020 alone. Industry investment accounts for more than half of that, but corporations generally don't step up until a concept is pretty far along, when they're confident it will pay off. Most early-stage research doesn't qualify. 'Basic, fundamental research may not have an obvious application. Some of it may never lead to one,' said Cynthia Friend, PhD, chief executive officer of the Kavli Foundation, Los Angeles, which helps fund early research. 'When those applications do come forth, the time scale is on average 20 years to end up at something useful.' Support for the long haul, beginning at a stage when researchers may not know the usefulness of their findings, is where the federal government has made a big difference. It normally supplies 25.1% of all medical and health research funding. In comparison, foundations, associations, and societies provide just 1.2%. 'All of science philanthropy together, if you add it up, doesn't come close to the amount of support in the federal budget,' Friend said. The government also plays a large role in building and maintaining complex machinery and large-scale facilities where significant discoveries may be made. Case in point: the synchrotron, a sophisticated x-ray machine used, for example, with CRISPR gene editing technology. The one at Brookhaven National Laboratory costs nearly $1 billion. 'An individual could never make these things or have them,' Friend said. 'But individuals can go use them because they've been built for the overall community.' There's a compelling upside to such spending: Economists estimate that for every dollar invested in research, the US gets $5-$20 in benefits. Foundations Seek New Strategies Although they can't match the government's financial clout, philanthropic organizations are looking for ways to address the extraordinary, nationwide funding gap. When the Council on Foundations surveyed its members in March, 80% of respondents said they were making or considering at least one change to their approach. Many indicated that they were open to ideas like collaborating with other funders, reexamining priorities to address the gaps, and increasing their flexibility in grant-making. 'Philanthropies that care about a particular area have an opportunity,' said Shaady Salehi, co-executive director of the Trust-Based Philanthropy Project. 'What's the range of things they fund as an institution — and what is being defunded? They can step in and support the necessary research.' While many science-focused foundations have yet to comment on how they're dealing with the new reality, some have gone public: The Kavli Foundation is offering bridge funding to early-career scientists who've lost federal support, Friend said. Its relatively small, individual grants are good for up to 2 years. The Spencer Foundation — along with the Kapor Foundation, the William T. Grant Foundation, and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation — has also made bridge funding available: $25,000 grants to 'address immediate needs following grant cancellations.' The Prebys Foundation has designated $7 million in emergency support for biomedical research in San Diego. The American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) has created new AACR Trailblazer Cancer Research Grants: $15 million to support early-stage and mid-career researchers. The Breast Cancer Research Foundation has announced new grants for early-career investigators facing delays or disruptions, emergency funding for affected projects, and nine new research grants. Funders Emphasize Coordinated Efforts Even before the current crisis, the Kavli Foundation had invited fellow funders to preliminary discussions. That conversation will continue as the foundation works with scientists to shape the projects that receive its support. 'The idea is that if you have more resources to focus in a particular area that you think is important, that will accelerate progress,' Friend said. 'And it will also accelerate if something doesn't work out. We have to be prepared for things not working.' Other foundations are also looking for fresh ways to work together. More than 170 philanthropic organizations of all kinds have signed on to a pledge from the Trust-Based Philanthropy Project. It calls for them to go beyond business as usual — to collaborate, to pool funds, and to be responsive to grantees in a coordinated way. As Salehi sees it, this is essential. 'I think the next level up is going to be a higher level of coordination among private funders, comparing notes on who they're funding, who's not funding, who's being left behind,' she said. 'Where are the gaps?'
WebMD
3 days ago
- WebMD
Weight Loss Drugs Work – but Only if You Do These 3 Things
July 18, 2025 – You know them by names like Ozempic and Wegovy, and for what they can do – help people lose weight. But if you're among the roughly 1 in 8 Americans who've tried GLP-1 drugs – including newer options like Zepbound and Mounjaro, which target more than one hormone – you could be at risk of nutrient deficiency, muscle loss, and even bone loss, unless you make diet and exercise part of the picture. "Although GLP-1 medications are a major breakthrough in obesity management, lifestyle factors still matter," said JoAnn E. Manson, MD, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. "Outcomes of patients on these medications are much better with attention to adequate protein intake, healthy diet, good hydration, and regular muscle-strengthening exercises to mitigate the loss of lean body mass." Manson is a co-author of new guidelines to help, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, one set for doctors and another for patients. "These represent what we believe are the first systematic tools to implement lifestyle interventions alongside GLP-1 medications," said Farhad Mehrtash, MPH, a co-author of the guidelines and a graduate of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Here's a three-pronged approach to make the most of modern weight loss medications. 1. Maintain Your Muscle With any weight loss, including that with GLP-1s, you don't get to pick where you lose it. "Loss of muscle and lean body mass is common on these medications, on average about 25%," said Manson. Over time, that can lead to bone loss too, especially in older adults or those with sedentary lifestyles. Eat plenty of protein, the guidelines say. Aim for 1 to 1.5 grams per kilogram (or about half a gram per pound) of body weight each day – or 20 to 30 grams per meal. That's slightly higher than the standard 15 to 30 grams per meal recommended for all adults. Exercise is also critical. Start with an evaluation of where you are now, and slowly work up to 150 minutes of cardio (like walking) and two to three 30-minute strength sessions each week, the CDC's recommended activity level. Don't just rely on your doctor to guide you. "Most doctors won't have the time to thoroughly go through your exercise history, current lifestyle, and any hurdles to beginning exercise," said Samuel Klein, MD, a professor of medicine and nutritional science at Washington University in St. Louis. "Work with a trainer or someone who is an expert in how to exercise." Insurance might cover personal training (if a doctor prescribes it as part of a medically necessary treatment plan), but a better bet: Ask your health care provider if it offers a formal weight management program – many qualify for reimbursement. 2. Sidestep Side Effects The right eating strategy can help offset potential digestive side effects, such as constipation, nausea, and heartburn. "I recommend smaller, more frequent meals, decreasing fat and salt intake, and chewing slowly so that you reduce the amount of bulk leaving your stomach," said Klein. That helps your gut better manage the slower-than-usual movement of food into your intestines caused by GLP-1s. Staying hydrated helps keep things moving, too – and dehydration is a risk of these medications, which suppress thirst along with appetite. The guidelines encourage eight to 12 glasses of water a day, along with soups and water-rich fruits and vegetables like cucumbers and watermelon. Keep dehydrating drinks with things like alcohol and caffeine to a minimum. 3. Keep These Habits – Even Post-Meds These medications are intended for long-term use, said Jody Dushay, MD, a co-author of the guidelines and assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. "That said, once people reach a weight loss plateau at the highest tolerated dose, then you move to the weight maintenance phase of treatment." That could mean "lowering the dose, staying on the same dose but extending the number of days between injections, or, least commonly, a trial off medication," Dushay said. In general, keeping weight off is notoriously difficult, but research suggests that the key to success comes down to one thing: consistency. "Weight regain is highly individualized and depends on many factors," said Dushay. Chief among them is an "ongoing engagement in a healthy lifestyle."
Medscape
3 days ago
- Medscape
Volume Fueling Rise in Part D Specialty Derm Drug Spending
Prescription volume for specialty medications, not price hikes, largely seems to be the main factor in the ongoing huge increase in Medicare Part D dermatology drug spending, according to a new study. Harvard Medical School researchers reported that from 2013 to 2022, prices were higher and rose faster for specialty medications, but that 80% of the increase in spending 'was due to increased prescriptions, not prices.' Price increases only accounted for 20% of the total growth in Medicare Part D dermatologic drug spending during the study period, lead author Edward L. Kong, PhD, told Medscape Medical News . Specialty medications — primarily immunomodulators — 'are just very expensive in general,' and are being rapidly adopted by clinicians, which is driving increased spending, said Kong, who is pursuing an MD degree at the Harvard-MIT Health Sciences and Technology program. Kong and Arash Mostaghimi, MD, MPA, MPH, medical director of the dermatology consult service at Brigham and Women's Hospital, and associate professor, Harvard Medical School, both in Boston, published their findings in JAMA Dermatology on July 16. They examined some 95 million prescriptions for Medicare beneficiaries, written by almost 25,000 dermatologists and dermatology-focused advanced practice clinicians. Inflation-adjusted spending increased an average of 16% a year, reaching $2.95 billion in 2022. Over the study time period, specialty drug spending increased just under 30% a year, reaching $2.4 billion in 2022. Spending on nonspecialty medications only grew 0.7% annually during the study period. By 2022, specialty medications accounted for 81% of all dermatology drug spending, having risen from a third of spending in 2013. Even so specialty medications only represented about 3% of all Medicare Part D dermatology prescriptions in 2022. Four of the specialty drugs were introduced before 2013: adalimumab (Humira), etanercept (Enbrel), ustekinumab (Stelara), and vismodegib (Erivedge). Six came on the market after 2013: apremilast (Otezla), secukinumab (Cosentyx), ixekizumab (Taltz), dupilumab (Dupixent), guselkumab (Tremfya), risankizumab-rzaa (Skyrizi), and sonidegib (Odomzo). The older medications had higher price growth than the six newer therapies during the study period. Humira, at the high end, had a 12% price increase per year, while Skyrizi, at the low end, had a 5% yearly decrease. It's possible that biosimilars for Humira and Stelara — introduced in 2023 and this year — might help restrain cost growth, wrote Kong and Mostaghimi. The introduction of generic oral JAK inhibitors such as tofacitinib may also put a dent in spending, they noted. Medicare will also likely achieve cost savings in 2026 on Enbrel and Stelara, which are included as part of a law — the Inflation Reduction Act— that gave the health program the power to negotiate prices of certain medications. Patients for affordable drugs now estimate that list prices for Enbrel will drop from around $7000 to $2355 and for Stelara from $13,836 to $4695. The study did not examine the value of the high-cost specialty drugs, but the rise in prescriptions — indicated by each of the 10 achieving a 1% market share — shows that the medications are being embraced, wrote Kong and Mostaghimi. The authors' work is similar to other studies that have documented major increases in Medicare Part D dermatologic drug spending being driven in part by increased adoption of specialty medications. A 2022 study in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology found that from 2013 to 2019, the price of six dermatology drugs in the top 10 most-prescribed medications decreased, mostly among nonspecialty medications. But in 2013, Enbrel was the most expensive medication in the top 50 most prescribed. Enbrel had been replaced in 2019 by Humira. In 2020, researchers reported in the Journal of Dermatological Treatment that annual spending on immunomodulator medications by Medicare Part D increased 303% from $1.7 billion in 2012 to $6.9 billion in 2018. 'Immunomodulator spending is growing and may be more substantial than previously reported posing significant burden on patients and the health system,' the authors wrote. Kong and Mostaghimi agreed, writing that 'the growing significance of specialty medications will have important implications for healthcare costs and patient affordability.' Kong reported receiving grants from the National Institute on Aging. Mostaghimi reported receiving personal fees from Hims & Hers Health, AbbVie, Sun Pharma, Digital Diagnostics, Eli Lilly, Equillium, ASLAN Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Figure 1, Indomo, Olaplex, Legacy Healthcare, Pelage, Q32 Bio, Astria Therapeutics, ACOM Health, Bioniz, Concert, and Digital Diagnostics; equity from ACOM Health, Figure 1, and Hims & Hers Health; licensing or royalties from Concert and Pfizer; and research funding from Aclaris, Concert, Eli Lilly, and Incyte outside the submitted work.
