Get access

Cross-sectional comparison of physical activity and inactivity patterns in Chinese and Filipino youth

Authors

  • C. Tudor-Locke,

    Corresponding author
    1. Walking Research Laboratory, Department of Exercise and Wellness, Arizona State University East, Mesa, AZ,
    Search for more papers by this author
  • B. E. Ainsworth,

    1. Prevention Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Exercise Science, Norman J. Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC,
    Search for more papers by this author
  • L. S. Adair,

    1. Carolina Population Center and School of Public Health, Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, and
    Search for more papers by this author
  • S. Du,

    1. Institute of Nutrition and Food Safety, Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • N. Lee,

    1. Carolina Population Center and School of Public Health, Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, and
    Search for more papers by this author
  • B. M. Popkin

    1. Carolina Population Center and School of Public Health, Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, and
    Search for more papers by this author

Catrine Tudor-Locke, PhD, FACSM, Department of Exercise and Wellness, Arizona State University East Campus, 7350 East Unity Ave. Mesa, AZ 85212-0180, USA
E-mail: tudor-locke@asu.edu

Abstract

Background  To compare and contrast youth physical activity (PA) and inactivity patterns in two developing Asian countries: the Philippines and China.

Methods  Comparative analysis of 1997–1999 Cebu Longitudinal Health and Nutrition Survey and the 1997 China Health and Nutrition Survey, large-scale surveys that included questions on type, frequency and duration of: commuting mode to school, sports/exercise in and outside of school, select sedentary activities and chores.

Results  Filipino data included 760 males and 872 females aged 14–16 years. The comparable Chinese sample consisted of 202 males and 197 females. Active commuting is proportionately high in both countries (70–71% in the Philippines vs. 77–90% in China), although commuting by bicycling is rare in the Philippines (<1%) vs. China (≈35%). Patterns of school sport/exercise participation differ between countries by gender; more Filipino males report school sport/exercise than females (63 vs. 49%) vs. China, where more females participate than males (75 vs. 69%). Sport/exercise outside of school is proportionately low (6–12%) for youth from both countries with a single exception: 74% of Filipino males participate in extra-curricular sport/exercise. Although a higher percentage of Filipino youth report watching television >4 h/day (<10%) vs. Chinese youth (<1%), both are lower than comparable US reports.

Conclusion  In the Philippines, continued modernization augurs a decrease in local primary PA sources (chores and active commuting). In China, where youth already are not expected to perform chores, shifts to more passive commuting modes (i.e. increased motorized transportation) are anticipated.

Ancillary