Regions with limited access to fresh foods have been associated with socioeconomic factors such as minority ethnic populations, lower incomes, higher poverty levels, elderly populations, and lower educational attainment. However, much of the previous research on food deserts has overlooked the spatial connection between these factors and limited access to fresh foods, physical activity, and areas where these regions overlap. This paper explores the relationship between these factors, with a special focus on the state of Alabama, and defines areas with poor access to physical activity facilities as physical activity deserts, and areas where food and physical activity deserts overlap as health deserts. Food and physical activity deserts were determined by placing a 10-mile driving distance buffer in rural areas and a 1-mile driving distance buffer in urban areas around fresh grocers, fitness facilities, and public parks. Regions not located within these buffers were mapped and their spatial relationship with a series of socioeconomic factors was analyzed using multiple regression and geographically weighted regression. Multiple regression results indicate a significant relationship between educational attainment, poverty levels, and the percentage of Black residents and limited access to fresh foods, physical activity facilities, and regions where access to both are limited. Geographically weighted regression results reveal significant spatial variation within the strength and direction of these relationships. These findings suggest that socioeconomic status may play a role in improving or diminishing access to healthy foods and physical activity in Alabama; however, the nature of these relationships is highly dependent on location.

The main purposes of this review were to provide a qualitative description of nine investigations in which sweat losses were estimated by participants following exercise and to perform a quantitative analysis of the collective data. Unique estimations (n = 297) were made by 127 men and 116 women after a variety of exercise modalities in moderate to hot environmental conditions. Actual sweat loss exceeded estimated sweat loss (p < 0.001) for women (1.072 ± 0.473 vs. 0.481 ± 0.372 L), men (1.778 ± 0.907 vs. 0.908 ± 0.666 L) and when all data were combined (1.428 ± 0.806 vs. 0.697 ± 0.581 L), respectively. However, estimation accuracy did not differ between women (55.2 ± 51.5%) and men (62.4 ± 54.5%). Underestimation of 50% or more of sweat losses were exhibited in 168 (54%) of estimation scenarios with heavier sweaters displaying a higher prevalence and trend of greater underestimations in general. Most modern guidelines for fluid intake during and between training bouts are based on approximate sweat loss estimation knowledge. These guidelines will likely have minimal efficacy if greater awareness of how to determine sweat losses and accurate recognition of sweat losses is not increased by coaches and athletes.