Sept2001ASEPNewsletter

The ASEPNewsletter is devoted to informative articles and news itmes about exercise physiology. It is a monthly magazine of news, opinions, exercise physiology professionals, and events that shape exercise physiology. While it contains views and opinions of the Editor who oversees the ASEP Internet web pages, visitors can have a voice as well. We welcome interested practitioners, researchers, and academicians to e-mail the Publisher their thoughts and ideas or respond directly online via the ASEP Public Forum.

The 4th ASEP National Meeting

The meeting in Memphis is just weeks away. For an overview of the presenters and their presentations (research, special topics, and professional issues), click here. Schedule of Presentations/Abstracts

What do yo think of the ASEP Standards of Professional Practice? If you would like to make a comment, please use the following email address:

From the Editor:

Dave LaBore, MA, EPC
Director, Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation
St. Lukes Hospital
These Are Exciting Times!

The field of Exercise Physiology has existed as a profession for just a short
while compared to many others. As exercise physiologists, we are on the verge of change in our profession. Our actions or inactions will continue to lay the foundation for our future, what factors will shape us, and how engaged our graduates become in the public sector.

As a clinician in cardiopulmonary rehabilitation, I am dealing with decreases in reimbursement and funding. Also, unsettling is the idea that other allied health professions (such as nursing, physical therapy, and occupational therapy) are working very hard to establish that they are the professionals who should be providing services to cardiac and pulmonary rehab patients. Some believe that they should be doing the stress testing, too. Without legislation on our behalf, their continued involvement in either area could delay advancement in our field.

The loss of this market of jobs will definitely lead to a decrease in the number of prospective students for the field of exercise physiology. It is not hard to see where this could lead, which raises the question: "What can we do to keep this from happening?" Part of the answer is to work hard to secure our place as professionals in all appropriate arenas (including health care, preventative medicine, sports medicine, athletics, research, and training).

We also need to fight within these fields for compensation appropriate to our academic degree, experience, and standards of professional practice. It is not enough to sit on the sidelines and wait for others to do the work. By securing our place, we will help to guarantee that there will be students in our colleges and universities who will pursue exercise physiology as a professional field of study.

Hence, we need to continue our efforts in organizing ourselves. Now that certification and accreditation are in place, we need to place more emphasis on licensure. With licensure, we will be in a much better position to engage other professionals in discussions about working with and rehabilitating cardiopulmonary patients. These are very exciting times. Please think seriously about getting involved with ASEP and its initiatives. We need everyone involved in the professional development of exercise physiology.

From the Past-Editor of ASEPNewsletter

Tommy Boone, PhD, MPH, FASEP, EPC
Professor and Chair
Department of Exercise Physiology
Professional Development of Exercise Physiology is not a Spectator Sport

Exercise physiology leaders have in recent years challenged the exercise physiology community to examine professional issues such as credentials, educational curricula, and economic concerns. The challenge has resulted in the building of a consensus that the American Society of Exercise Physiologists (ASEP) is necessary to the nature of a profession. The consensus is not 100%, however. ASEP does not have the collective efforts of exercise physiologists to solve its problems as quickly as everyone would like. The dichotomy between those who support ASEP and those who do not is expected. Discussion of matters as important as our right to an organization exclusively for exercise physiologists is more than a gray area for individuals linked to sports medicine. But, caring as we may be for their feelings, the discrepancies between what they think and what we think cannot be allowed to guide our thinking.

There are some serious ethical issues of professionals who are integrated into a social-research life of an organization that is non-exclusive. As an example, could you imagine attorneys, architects, and doctors not having their own professional organization? No, of course not. It is not logical. The nature of their individual, professional work would certainly be taken less seriously, along with the fact that they would suffer from lower social esteem, lower salaries, and less independence in the public sector. Does this sound remotely familiar? The idea of exercise physiologists existing outside of their own profession is not just a bad idea, it is does not make sense either. So, why has it taken so long for exercise physiologists to realize that they need to move from an occupation or discipline to a profession with their own professional rights? Also important is the question, “Why have the non-PhD exercise physiologists been excluded from the social group agreed to by sports medicine at large?” Answers to these questions are long overdue.

Part of the answer to the exclusion of non-PhDs to the exercise physiology title and recognition lies with the attitude that surrounds the doctorate degree. Another part is the lack of a regulated academic curriculum across the universities in the United States. Both are problems. Both distract from considering exercise physiology a profession. The answer to both problems is to figure out how to ensure that all exercise physiologists are recognized and that the required four-year college degree is upgraded. Equally important, we must adopt an attitude of being less self-serving. The growth of a profession is directly related to how well it looks after its members. Because ASEP is organized within itself to bring exercise physiologists together, the upcoming meeting in Memphis is a great opportunity for the debate of current issues. However, debates cannot happen very effectively if the deeper meaning of what is important is not shared.

A professional commitment is embodied in opportunities to clarify ambiguities. It is therefore our duty to act and to talk about exercise physiology, including ASEP and such matters that legitimately work in our favor. The commitment that exercise physiologists must make is “participation” in all ASEP matters.

Being a spectator does not cut it.

"NEW" ASEP logo!

Have you noticed the new ASEP logo? Yes, it is the same logo. But, it is an updated version. Take another look. Isn't it wonderful? With a smile.

Wouldn't the logo look great on a polo shirt or a sweatshirt? You bet it would. ASEP, the "professional organization of exercise physiologists".

October 29, "Exercise Physiology Day"

by Steven Jungbauer, MA, MBA, EPC

The Indiana Association of Exercise Physiologists, an affiliate association of the American Society of Exercise Physiologists, is pleased to announce that Indiana Governor Frank O'Bannon has proclaimed October 29th as Exercise Physiology Day. The IAEP would like to invite and encourage other states to recognize Exercise Physiologists on this day. The IAEP plans a substantial marketing campaign with press releases throughout the state. In addition, our members will receive a small gift to recognize this day and their contributions to the field and the public. Take time today to email your governor and request that they proclaim October 29th as Exercise Physiology Day. (This can be done through email.) If you are interested in a copy of this Proclamation please email me with a fax number.

Intellectual Civility
"A commitment to take others seriously as thinkers, to treat them as intellectual equals, to grant respect and full attention to their views -- a commitment to persuade rather than to browbeat. It is distinguished from intellectual rudeness: verbally attacking others, dismissing them, stereotryping their views. Intellectual civility is not a matter of mere courtesy but, instead arises from a sense that communication itself requires honoring others' views and their capacity to reason."