Kids that play sports have a big advantage over those that do not.

They are socially active every day as sports requires interaction with the other players to achieve success. They learn the hierarchy of business world by having it in the sports team. The older and better players are at the top. They learn how to lead. The better the player gets, the more they are looked up to on the team. Sports not only teach kids life lessons but will also keep them out of trouble. If the kid plays sports all year round, are they going to have time for anything else? Probably not. They will have practice every day, sometimes a few times a day. If they are in multiple sports, they may have a different sport to practice for in the same day as another sport. Being active in this type of activity will also keep them fit. They will be in shape from all the running around, unless of course the sport is curling. They will not get fat as they are burning off a whole lot of calories practicing and then playing in the games. They may eat you out of house and home, but they will not be obese. People will respect your child more. They are putting the effort in to be the best they can at the given sport. No one can put done someone for striving to obtain a goal. Your child will be treated differently to. That is just the way it is. Kids that play sports are seen as having a vested interest in the school. Therefore they sometimes get preferential treatment. Having your children in sports not only teaches them life lessons, but also begins the training for when they enter the real world.

next page.. advantages: keeps a person active and in shape, learn more things (like teamwork and sportsmanship), meet new people, and helps a person see other things they are good at disadvantages: The most obvious disadvantage is the fame. Fame can be an advantage or disadvantage depending on how you view it or how famous you are. You are always a role model, one wrong move and the whole world knows it. There is a lot of pressure working long, tough hours. You also have to work on holidays since many games are played. Being a professional athlete is not always fame and glory and has disappointments. Unlike many other careers, you not only disappoint yourself, but all the fans too.

While most people understand the importance of physical activity, the words "keeping fit" are usually associated with exercise programs. Sport participation adds a new dimension to the physical activity spectrum. International organizations, such as the European Commission, the World Health Organization, the Americas Council of Sports and the Commonwealth Advisory Body on Sport have published papers citing the physical, psychological and social advantages of sport participation. Burning Calories Sport provides a means of constant physical activity, and physical activities burn calories. Even sports that are characterized by intermittent activity burn more calories than being sedentary. Winter sports, for example, inspire people to get outdoors when they would normally be staying at home. The Winter Feels Good website lists the caloric expenditure of various winter sports. Depending on your weight, age and the specific sport, you can burn between 213 and 1,208 calories per hour. Right for Malaysian kids Growing up kids need sugar. Optimal sugar levels for your kids growth! Dutchlady.com.my/TruthAboutSugar Sponsored Links Coordination and Balance Sport activity requires balance, coordination and proprioception, which is the body's awareness of its position in space. Aging often causes impaired balance and proprioception, which in turn leads to coordination issues. Sport participation can prevent age-related loss of these important aspects of fitness. Enforces a Healthy Lifestyle A study published in the "British Journal of Sports Medicine" titled "Personal Health Benefits of Masters Athletics Competition" explored the long-term health of older endurance athletes. The researchers studied 551 athletic men and 199 athletic women over a seven year period. Only 1.4 percent of the participants sustained a non-fatal heart attack and only 0.6 percent required bypass surgery over the seven year period. Most of the former smokers indicated that they stopped smoking before they began their training. Increase Bone Mass Research published in the Nov./Dec. 2009 edition of "Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach" evaluated 560 athletes who were participants in the 2005 National Senior Games. The 298 women and 289 men were active in a variety of high-impact sports. Those who took the voluntary bone mineral density test exhibited healthy bone density. It is speculated that high impact sport participation can prevent osteoporosis. Vitamin D and Sunshine While there are some dangers associated with sun exposure, an article in the Sept. 29, 2009 edition of the Wellness section of the "New York Times" suggests that sunshine is still the best source of vitamin D. The article cites studies performed at the Atascadero State Hospital, which found that athletes exposed to vitamin D-producing ultraviolet light had enhanced levels of performance. Vitamin D also enhances bone health and increases the size of fast twitch muscle fibers. Exercise Compliance Training for an athletic event indirectly affects health by helping people stick to their fitness programs. Sports provide measurable, concrete goals, such as improving speed, strength balance and coordination. The person training for an event will be less likely to miss exercise sessions. She may also be more conscious about her nutrition and hydration needs.

glbal warming Global warming From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia CO2 emissions compared to five of IPCC's emissions scenarios. The dips are related to global recessions. Data from IPCC SRES scenarios; Data spreadsheet included with International Energy Agency's "CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion 2010 - Highlights"; and Supplemental IEA data. Image source: Skeptical Science Global warming is the continuing rise in the average temperature of Earth's atmosphere and oceans. Global warming is caused by increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, resulting from human activities such as deforestation and burning of fossil fuels.[2][3] This finding is recognized by the national science academies of all the major industrialized countries and is not disputed by any scientific body of national or international standing. [4][5][A] The instrumental temperature record shows that the average global surface temperature increased by 0.74 C (1.33 F) during the 20th century.[6] Climate model projections are summarized in the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They indicate that during the 21st century the global surface temperature is likely to rise a further 1.5 to 1.9 C (2.7 to 3.4 F) for their lowest emissions scenario and 3.4 to 6.1 C (6.1 to 11 F) for their highest.[7] The ranges of these estimates arise from the use of models with differing sensitivity to greenhouse gas concentrations.[8][9] An increase in global temperature will cause sea levels to rise and will change the amount and pattern of precipitation, and a probable expansion of subtropical deserts.[10] Warming is expected to be strongest in the Arctic and would be associated with continuing retreat of glaciers, permafrost and sea ice. Other likely effects of the warming include more frequent occurrence of extreme weather events including heatwaves, droughts and heavy rainfall events, species extinctions due to shifting temperature regimes, and changes in agricultural yields. Warming and related changes will vary from region to region around the globe, though the nature of these regional changes is uncertain.[11] In a 4 C world, the limits for human adaptation are likely to be exceeded in many parts of the world, while the limits for adaptation for natural systems would largely be exceeded throughout the world. Hence, the ecosystem services upon which human livelihoods depend would not be preserved. [12] Proposed responses to global warming include mitigation to reduce emissions, adaptation to the effects of global warming, and geoengineering to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere or reflect incoming solar radiation back to space. The main international mitigation effort is the Kyoto Protocol, which seeks to stabilize greenhouse gas concentration to prevent a "dangerous anthropogenic interference".[13] As of May 2010, 192 states had ratified the protocol.[14] The only members of the UNFCCC that were asked to sign the treaty but have not yet ratified it are the USA and Afghanistan.

Natural systems Global warming has been detected in a number of systems. Some of these changes, e.g., based on the instrumental temperature record, have been described in the section on temperature changes. Rising sea levels and observed decreases in snow and ice extent are consistent with warming.[17] Most of the increase in global average temperature since the mid-20th century is, with high probability,[D] attributable to human-induced changes in greenhouse gas concentrations.[99] Even with current policies to reduce emissions, global emissions are still expected to continue to grow over the coming decades. [100] Over the course of the 21st century, increases in emissions at or above their current rate would very likely induce changes in the climate system larger than those observed in the 20th century. In the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, across a range of future emission scenarios, model-based estimates of sea level rise for the end of the 21st century (the year 2090-2099, relative to 1980-1999) range from 0.18 to 0.59 m. These estimates, however, were not given a likelihood due to a lack of scientific understanding, nor was an upper bound given for sea level rise. Over the course of centuries to millennia, the melting of ice sheets could result in sea level rise of 46 m or more.[101] Changes in regional climate are expected to include greater warming over land, with most warming at high northern latitudes, and least warming over the Southern Ocean and parts of the North Atlantic Ocean.[100] Snow cover area and sea ice extent are expected to decrease, with the Arctic expected to be largely ice-free in September by 2037.[102] The frequency of hot extremes, heat waves, and heavy precipitation will very likely increase. Ecological systems In terrestrial ecosystems, the earlier timing of spring events, and poleward and upward shifts in plant and animal ranges, have been linked with high confidence to recent warming.[17] Future climate change is expected to particularly affect certain ecosystems, including tundra, mangroves, and coral reefs.[100] It is expected that most ecosystems will be affected by higher atmospheric CO2 levels, combined with higher global temperatures.[103] Overall, it is expected that climate change will result in the extinction of many species and reduced diversity of ecosystems.[104] Species migration In 2010, a gray whale was found in the Mediterranean Sea, even though the species had not been seen in the North Atlantic Ocean since the 18th century. The whale is thought to have migrated from the Pacific Ocean via the Arctic. Climate Change & European Marine Ecosystem Research (CLAMER) has also reported that the Neodenticula seminae alga has been found in the North Atlantic, where it had gone extinct nearly 800,000 years ago. The alga has drifted from the Pacific Ocean through the Arctic, following the reduction in polar ice.[105] In the Siberian sub-arctic, species migration is contributing to another warming albedo-feedback, as needle-shedding larch trees are being replaced with dark-foliage evergreen conifers which can absorb some of the solar radiation that previously reflected off the snowpack beneath the forest canopy.[106][107] Social systems Vulnerability of human societies to climate change mainly lies in the effects of extreme weather events rather than gradual climate change.[108] Impacts of climate change so far include adverse effects on small islands,[109] adverse effects on indigenous populations in high-latitude areas,[110] and small but discernable effects on human health.[111] Over the 21st century, climate change is likely to adversely affect hundreds of millions of people through increased coastal flooding, reductions in water supplies, increased malnutrition and increased health impacts.[112]

Future warming of around 3 C (by 2100, relative to 1990-2000) could result in increased crop yields in mid- and high-latitude areas, but in low-latitude areas, yields could decline, increasing the risk of malnutrition. [109] A similar regional pattern of net benefits and costs could occur for economic (market-sector) effects.[111] Warming above 3 C could result in crop yields falling in temperate regions, leading to a reduction in global food production.[113] Most economic studies suggest losses of world gross domestic product (GDP) for this magnitude of warming.[114][115] Some areas of the world would start to surpass the wet-bulb temperature limit of human survivability with global warming of about 6.7C (12F) while a warming of 11.7C (21F) would put half of the world's population in an uninhabitable environment.[116][117] In practice the survivable limit of global warming in these areas is probably lower and in practice some areas may experience lethal wet bulb tempatures even earlier, because this study conservatively projected the survival limit for persons who are out of the sun, in galeforce winds, doused with water, wearing no clothing, and not working. [117] Responses to global warming Mitigation Main article: Climate change mitigation See also: Fee and dividend Reducing the amount of future climate change is called mitigation of climate change. The IPCC defines mitigation as activities that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, or enhance the capacity of carbon sinks to absorb GHGs from the atmosphere.[118] Many countries, both developing and developed, are aiming to use cleaner, less polluting, technologies.[48]:192 Use of these technologies aids mitigation and could result in substantial reductions in CO2 emissions. Policies include targets for emissions reductions, increased use of renewable energy, and increased energy efficiency. Studies indicate substantial potential for future reductions in emissions. [119] To limit warming to the lower range in the overall IPCC's "Summary Report for Policymakers"[6] means adopting policies that will limit emissions to one of the significantly different scenarios described in the full report. [120] This will become more and more difficult, since each year of high emissions will require even more drastic measures in later years to stabilize at a desired atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, and energy-related carbon-dioxide (CO2) emissions in 2010 were the highest in history, breaking the prior record set in 2008.[121] Since even in the most optimistic scenario, fossil fuels are going to be used for years to come, mitigation may also involve carbon capture and storage, a process that traps CO2 produced by factories and gas or coal power stations and then stores it, usually underground.[122] Public opinion In 20072008 Gallup Polls surveyed 127 countries. Over a third of the world's population was unaware of global warming, with people in developing countries less aware than those in developed, and those in Africa the least aware. Of those aware, Latin America leads in belief that temperature changes are a result of human activities while Africa, parts of Asia and the Middle East, and a few countries from the Former Soviet Union lead in the opposite belief.[138] In the Western world, opinions over the concept and the appropriate responses are divided. Nick Pidgeon of Cardiff University said that "results show the different stages of engagement about global warming on each side of the Atlantic", adding, "The debate in Europe is about what action needs to be taken, while many in the U.S. still debate whether climate change is happening."[139][140] A 2010 poll by the Office of National Statistics found that 75% of UK respondents were at least "fairly convinced" that the world's climate is changing, compared to 87% in a similar survey in 2006.[141] A January 2011 ICM poll in the UK found 83% of respondents viewed climate change as a current or imminent threat, while 14% said it was no threat. Opinion was unchanged from an August 2009 poll asking the same question, though there had been a slight polarisation of opposing views.[142] A survey in October, 2009 by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press showed decreasing public perception in the United States that global warming was a serious problem. All political persuasions showed reduced concern with lowest concern among Republicans, only 35% of whom considered there to be solid evidence of global warming.[143] The cause of this marked difference in public opinion between the United States and the global public is uncertain but the hypothesis has been advanced that clearer communication by scientists both directly and through the media would be helpful in adequately informing the American public of the scientific consensus and the basis for it.[144] The U.S. public appears to be unaware of the extent of scientific consensus regarding the issue, with 59% believing that scientists disagree "significantly" on global warming.[145] On the other hand, in May 2011 a joint poll by Yale and George Mason Universities found that nearly half the people in the USA (47%) attribute global warming to human activities, compared to 36% blaming it on natural causes. Only 5% of the 35% who were "disengaged", "doubtful", or "dismissive" of global warming were aware that 97% of publishing US climate scientists agree global warming is happening and is primarily caused by humans.[148] Researchers at the University of Michigan have found that the public's belief as to the causes of global warming depends on the wording choice used in the polls.[149] In the United States, according to the Public Policy Institute of California's (PPIC) eleventh annual survey on environmental policy issues, 75% said they believe global warming is a very serious or somewhat serious threat to the economy and quality of life in California.