Where are we now? The intersection of healthy living medicine and social justice within our school systems.

Alongside the tensions brought forth by the pandemic, such as health and safety concerns from transmission and economic insecurity, there was also a rise in racial and social tension, bringing issues of equity and justice to the forefront. Consequently, there has been a call for reform and an urgency for change in legal, political, economic, and healthcare spheres. Change only occurs through change, with a pivotal point to target the beginning stages in life which will have a greater likelihood to subsist throughout the lifecourse. The crossroads of healthy living medicine (HLM) and education are an appropriate context for necessary change. If healthy living medicine is to embody the ideals of social justice, then people need equal access to resources of well-being - physical, social, and emotional - in their school systems. This paper examines the current intersection of health and social justice within the school systems in the United States. It is both a critique of how school systems have not yet provided such an intersection and highlight those efforts that have proven valuable and successful in providing HLM resources to populations that are historically under-resourced and under-served. Ultimately, this paper looks to provide a path forward, providing ideas for sustainable, feasible, actionable change in school systems K-12 and in higher education.

It still takes a village: Advocating healthy living medicine for communities through social justice action.

Countless individuals in the United States continue to experience effects related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, such as job/business instability, the breaking down of school systems, isolation, and negative health consequences. There are, however, certain populations and communities that continue to be disproportionately affected, resulting in severe health outcomes, decreased quality of life, and alarmingly high death rates. These populations typically live in historically excluded communities and identify as persons of color. To advance health equity in these communities, healthy living (HL) strategies are paramount. In fact HL Medicine - getting sufficient physical activity, practicing good nutrition, maintaining a healthy body weight, and not smoking, can be a viable solution. Applying these concepts, particularly the promotion of physical activity, through community collaboration can advance the goals of social justice action.

An Evolving Approach to Assessing Cardiorespiratory Fitness, Muscle Function and Bone and Joint Health in the COVID-19 Era.

Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is now an established vital sign. CRF, along with muscle function and bone and joint health is related to functional independence and a higher quality of life. Wasserman and colleagues proposed a gear model illustrating the integrated role of the respiratory, cardiovascular, and skeletal muscle systems during aerobic exercise; in 2015, a revision to the original model was proposed. Our understanding of the effects and challenges associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are rapidly evolving. Initial evidence indicates higher levels of CRF, and muscle function protect individuals infected with COVID-19 from a complicated medical course. Moreover, for those individuals infected with COVID-19, there are initial signs of a reduction in CRF following the initial phase of recovery. We are also gaining an understanding of long COVID syndrome, where individuals who have recovered from the acute phase of viral infection present with lasting symptoms, which include but are not limited to reduced CRF, shortness of breath, and fatigue. Clearly, these individuals will require rehabilitation to restore and/or improve CRF, muscle function, bone and joint health, functional capacity (ie, the ability to perform activities of daily living), and quality of life. The importance of assessing the synergistic function of systems essential to performing activities that require physical exertion is a health care imperative. This graphical narrative provides an update to the gear model initially proposed by Wasserman and updated to a gear and circuit in 2015. External CRF, muscle function, and bone and joint health influencers and an approach to clinical assessment are also introduced.

Overcoming barriers to physical activity in underserved populations.

There is compelling evidence suggesting underserved populations, including racial/ethnic minorities and individuals with low socioeconomic status, are less likely to partake in sufficient amounts of physical activity (PA) at recommended levels. Communities of color and low-income individuals face institutional, societal, and environmental barriers that may prevent them from achieving adequate levels of PA. However, these communities also possess a wealth of knowledge, assets, and support that can be harnessed to help individuals meet PA guidelines. This paper outlines the barriers to PA and explores how to overcome them, drawing from case studies of successful, evidence-based interventions that use culturally- and linguistically- appropriate approaches to increase PA in underserved populations.

Validity of predicting left ventricular end systolic pressure changes following an acute bout of exercise.

OBJECTIVES: Left ventricular end systolic pressure (LV ESP) is important in assessing left ventricular performance and is usually derived from prediction equations. It is unknown whether these equations are accurate at rest or following exercise in a young, healthy population. DESIGN: Measured LV ESP vs. LV ESP values from the prediction equations were compared at rest, 15 min and 30 min following peak aerobic exercise in 60 participants. METHODS: LV ESP was obtained by applanation tonometry at rest, 15 min post and 30 min post peak cycle exercise. RESULTS: Measured LV ESP was significantly lower (p<0.05) at all time points in comparison to the two calculated values. Measured LV ESP decreased significantly from rest at both the post15 and post30 time points (p<0.05) and changed differently in comparison to the calculated values (significant interaction; p<0.05). The two LV ESP equations were also significantly different from each other (p<0.05) and changed differently over time (significant interaction; p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The two commonly used prediction equations did not accurately predict either resting or post exercise LV ESP in a young, healthy population. Thus, LV ESP needs to be individually determined in young, healthy participants. Non-invasive measurement through applanation tonometry appears to allow for a more accurate determination of LV ESP.