| Autor: |
Chesham RA; Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, FK9 4LA, UK., Booth JN; Institute of Education, Community and Society, Moray House School of Education, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, EH8 8AQ, UK., Sweeney EL; Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, FK9 4LA, UK., Ryde GC; Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, FK9 4LA, UK., Gorely T; Centre for Health Sciences, School of Health, Social Care and Life Sciences, University of the Highlands and Islands, Old Perth Road, Inverness, IV2 3JH, UK., Brooks NE; Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, FK9 4LA, UK., Moran CN; Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, FK9 4LA, UK. colin.moran@stir.ac.uk. |
| Abstrakt: |
We thank Daly-Smith et al. for taking the time to read the results of our pilot research study, describing it as an important and welcome contribution. Nonetheless, the authors argue six points against our conclusion. We contend that we addressed three of these points in our original discussion and disagree with their remaining points. Overall, their Commentary adds little to the topic of research into the Daily Mile™ that we had not already raised in our discussion. Additionally, they attribute statements to us that we did not make and ignore the raising of key issues in our original article. Given this, we stand by our original peer-reviewed conclusion that introducing the Daily Mile™ to the primary school day appears to be an effective intervention for increasing levels of moderate to vigorous physical activity, reducing sedentary time, increasing physical fitness and improving body composition, and that these findings have relevance for teachers, policy-makers, public health practitioners and health researchers. |
