Hello Biraj:
~~~~~
On 6/23/02, Incandescent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
I> Hi Ron:
I> A lot of what you say is based on assumptions you seem to draw, for e.g. you say, "
I> I just hate to see OT's fall into the trap of thinking that exercise is the 'only'
I> or even best way to promote health". Who are these OTs who have fallen into this
I> trap??
The only 'evidence' I have for my statements are:
1. My experience
2. The experience of others
3. Readings from professional journals/magazines
4. Reports from students
----
I> Secondly, it is true that exercise and physical activity is a cornerstone of
I> fitness, no matter at what age one undertakes it.
This is an example of the kind of distinction that I was originally trying
to get across. Exercise and physical activity may or may not be synonymous.
Obviously, exercise almost always includes some form of physical activity
(unless of course, you are talking about mental exercise), but physical
activity may not necessarily include exercise. For example, bowling is
obviously a physical activity but very few people would consider it to be a
an exercise.
I seems to me, that as OT's, we ought to be promoting physical activity
(which may or may not include exercise) rather than exercise.
Also, fitness comes in many forms, physical, mental and emotional. What
type of fitness are you referring to?
It seems important that some OT somewhere, do a study on the benefits of
physical activity versus exercise. WOW, talk about evidenced-based practice.
What if some one demonstrated that getting "Granny" in the kitchen to cook
(or bowl, or clean her house, etc) versus doing some type of rote exercise
improved her perceived and actual health related quality of life? That would
be great evidence for OT practice.
----
I> It is a basic health fact.
Define health.
---
I> However, it sounds that if you had your way you would re-label all
I> activities (whether excercise or anything else) formally as "occupation".
I> I don't quite get your perspective, all activities that human beings
I> perform is an "occupation" but it needn't be viewed by everyone from an
I> "occupational" perspective.
I will differ with you here Biraj. According to many sources, all activity
is NOT occupation. In fact, two people can do the exact same activity. For
one person, the activity is an occupation while for the other, the activity
is just that, an activity.
---
I> That is the very reason we are OTs because we have the training and an
I> appreciation of people as occupational beings. Somehow, based on your
I> frequent and formal emphasis on the term "occupation" I am beginning to
I> think that you would like everyone in the world to think like an OT and
I> also hold an OTs worldview. For the sake of argument, if this were to
I> happen, believe me there would be little to no need for trained OT
I> professionals.
Again, I disagree. Generally speaking, the entire world is already pretty
much aware that meaningful activity (i.e. occupation) is the cornerstone of
happiness. Many studies of successful aging point to engagement in life both
physically and mentally and socially as some of the foundations of
successful aging. OT's expertise is NOT in our understanding of this.
Instead, our expertise is in enabling and empowering those people with
impairments, disabilities and handicaps to regain occupational independence.
---
I> At another level, to provide education and a focus on occupation we have
I> what has come to be known as "Occupational Science". Hopefully, at a
I> general level this subject would help students and people at large
I> develop some awareness of the concept of occupation as OTs understand it
I> over time.
While I am unsure of the current status of Occ Sc, it was originally formed
as a basic rather than applied science. In other words, originally, the
occupational scientist were more concerned with the science of understanding
occupation rather than the science of how to facilitate people to regain
their lost occupations. Maybe there are some occ scientists (Phyllis?????)
on the list who are more educated about this subject.
---
I> But even there, (while it would be nice) I don't see the imperative for
I> anyone to formally have to refer to activities as occupation.
You know that I'm going to disagree with this statement. I do think that it
is imperative that the word occupation be used as often as possible.
---
I> My perspective on this larger issue (insistence that everyone use the term
I> "occupation" or be occupation focused in a formal way) is that it really doesn't
I> matter what name something goes by, if it is in essence what a profession or another
I> specialty chooses to call it. As OTs all we need to do is focus on it, make sure
I> our interventions are occupation-based, and that we do what we can to help our
I> clients do what they wish to do, or want to do. Whether they see it as occupation
I> is less important. However, if we can also help them develop an appreciation of our
I> role, then that is a plus. But one cannot be prescriptive, in fact it goes against
I> the grain of being client-centered.
I> Promoting occupation is one thing, but if one overdoes it, it can become
I> counterproductive.
Now, this is an interesting comment. One that I definately need to consider.
Thanks!
---
I> Biraj
I> Ron Carson wrote:
>> Hello Aaron:
>>
>> Thanks for writing back.
>>
>> I really don't think that I'm against exercise as a form for health
>> promotion. I guess I just hate to see OT's fall into the trap of thinking
>> that exercise is the 'only' or even best way to promote health.
>>
>> It seems that our brothers and sister in arms (i.e. PT's) are leading the
>> way on exercise as the great cure-all for a 'sick' society. I believe that
>> occupation (which certainly includes exercise) is probably a better approach
>> to health and I just want to share that opinion with others.
>>
>> Lastly, whether exercise is or isn't an occupation is really dependent on
>> the person doing the exercise. I've seen and probably prescribed, exercise
>> for many people who couldn't give a darn about what it was doing to them or
>> for them. For these people, exercise is NOT an occupation. However, like you
>> say, exercise CAN certainly be an occupation for those people who find
>> meaning, value and a sense of identity by engaging in it.
>>
>> But for everyone who does find such value in exercise, there are many others
>> who don't. So, what do we do for those people who will benefit from
>> increased activity but don't find exercise to be an occupation of choice.
>> Simple, we help them find occupation of choice that involves some form of
>> physical activity.
>>
>> I guess the bottom line is I just believe in promoting occupation.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>> ~~~~~
>> On 6/23/02, aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> ae> Ron,
>>
>> ae> You've been going on a bit here, haven't you.
>>
>> ae> Exercise is a useful occupation in health promotion. It likely does enhance
>> ae> physiological functioning. It likely does promote enhanced mood and
>> ae> self-concept, and such. And I would assert that for many participating in
>> ae> it, it would be a "personally relevant and meaningful (i.e. occupation)".
>>
>> ae> Is exercise in and of itself the nirvana of all occupations? Clearly not,
>> ae> but by this line of thinking neither are collecting, or painting, or growing
>> ae> a business, or raising a child. Many occupations chosen and directed by the
>> ae> individual weave that persons "tapestry of life". One of those chosen
>> ae> occupations may be exersice.
>>
>> ae> I would be interested to know, Ron, why you appear to be so passionate
>> ae> against "exercise" as an occupational form for health promotion.
>>
>> ae> Aaron Eakman
>>
>> ae> ----- Original Message -----
>> ae> From: "Ron Carson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ae> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ae> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2002 5:38 AM
>> ae> Subject: exercise versus occupation
>>
>> >> Hey:
>> >>
>> >> Everywhere I go, I keep hearing the term, "exercise" as a way to
>> ae> promote
>> >> health. I really believe that people are often using the term
>> ae> "exercise"
>> >> when of course they really mean occupation. When someone talks about
>> ae> having
>> >> an active lifestyle, more time than not, they are talking about having
>> ae> an
>> >> occupationally full life. In other words, a life that may include
>> ae> exercise,
>> >> but almost always includes many other forms of non-exercise
>> ae> related
>> >> activities.
>> >>
>> >> Many people exercise and are still mentally and emotionally unhealthy.
>> ae> Where
>> >> as, if these people were to engage in occupation that was challenging
>> ae> and
>> >> successful, they would develop a greater sense of competence and
>> ae> self-worth.
>> >> Putting a client on stationary bicycle and believing that this is
>> ae> someone
>> >> going to improve their health is narrow minded. Of course, OT's often
>> ae> define
>> >> health differently than other health care professions.
>> >>
>> >> >From an OT perspective, health is NOT measured in terms of oxygen
>> ae> uptake,
>> >> heart rate, blood pressure, etc. Health is measured by one's ability
>> ae> to
>> >> SUCCESSFULLY engage in activity that is personally relevant and
>> ae> meaningful
>> >> (i.e. occupation).
>> >>
>> >> However, being able to engage in occupation is infinitely more complex
>> ae> than
>> >> simply increasing physiological function. Too many times, exercise is
>> ae> seen
>> >> as a 'cure all' for our health problems and for some, simple exercise may
>> ae> be
>> >> a great answer. But for many others, health problems (defined as loss
>> ae> of
>> >> occupational performance competence) will not be alleviated nor reduced
>> ae> by
>> >> exercise.
>> >>
>> >> Again, occupation is the name of the game.
>> >>
>> >> Ron
>> >>
>> >> *********��***********
>> >>
>> >> Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>
>> >> In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
>> >>
>> >> ** List messages are archived at:
>> >>
>> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>> >>
>> >> *********��***********
>> >>
>>
>> ae> *********��***********
>>
>> ae> Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> ae> In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
>>
>> ae> ** List messages are archived at:
>>
>> ae> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>>
>> ae> *********��***********
>>
>> *********��***********
>>
>> Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
>>
>> ** List messages are archived at:
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>>
>> *********��***********
I> *********��***********
I> Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I> In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
I> ** List messages are archived at:
I> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
I> *********��***********
*********��***********
Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
** List messages are archived at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
*********��***********
