Original:
Analysis of Gretchen Reynolds’ “Can Low-Impact Sports Like Cycling Be Putting Your Bones at Risk?”
While exercising is inherently good for the body, some types of exercise may be better than others. Gretchen Reynold’s article titled “Can Low-Impact Sports Like Cycling Be Putting Your Bones at Risk?”, from January 20th, 2019 in The New York Times, explores research that shows that compared to runners, cyclists have much thinner bones. Overall, Reynolds aims to inform readers of The New York Times that weight-bearing exercise is needed to have healthy bones through her use of a main article titled “Bone health in elite Norwegian endurance cyclists and runners: a cross-sectional study”, as well as information from uncited studies.
Reynold’s article discusses how a recent study of high-level cyclists and runners show the ways in which exercise affects how bones develop. People participating in low-impact sports, the cyclists, showed low bone mineral density, and even osteoporosis. Even though the cyclists in the study participated in more weight training than the runners, they still suffered from lower bone density. It is generally agreed upon by scientists, according to Reynolds, that high-impact activities are essential for healthy bones, as bones become deformed from the impact, but repair themselves with more bone cells. This problem may arise from lack of proper nutrition or from excessive sweating, both of which Reynolds mentions to be linked to thinner bones. Thus, an intervention may be necessary for the population of cyclists. According to Reynolds, previous studies have had contradictory results about whether or not running is high-impact enough to promote healthy bones (Reynolds 2019).
By writing this article, Reynolds communicates new information that affects the lives of the readers of The New York Times. Her reporting is objective and states information from a variety of sources, although she doesn’t name some of them. The science that Reynolds states has been significantly simplified, making it easier to be understood. She organizes her article in such a way that the problem is explained, research is presented, and possible solutions are also presented. The audience, readers of The New York Times, can then work to try and prevent this problem from occurring to themselves through Reynolds’ suggestions of participating in high-impact exercise and proper nutrition.
Final Version:
Analysis of Gretchen Reynolds’ “Can Low-Impact Sports Like Cycling Be Putting Your Bones at Risk?”
While exercising is inherently good for the body, some types of exercise may be better than others. Gretchen Reynolds’ article titled “Can Low-Impact Sports Like Cycling Be Putting Your Bones at Risk?”, from January 20th, 2019 in The New York Times, explores research that shows that compared to runners, cyclists have much thinner bones. Overall, Reynolds aims to inform readers of The New York Times that weight-bearing exercise is needed to have healthy bones, and she does so successfully through her clear summary of the article, “Bone health in elite Norwegian endurance cyclists and runners: a cross-sectional study,” and additional outside information.
Reynolds discusses how a recent study of high-level cyclists and runners show the ways in which exercise affects how bones develop. People participating in low-impact sports, the cyclists, showed low bone mineral density, and even osteoporosis. Even though the cyclists in the study participated in more weight training than the runners, they still suffered from lower bone density. It is generally agreed upon by scientists, according to Reynolds, that high-impact activities are essential for healthy bones, as bones become deformed from the impact, but repair themselves with more bone cells. There is some debate on whether the lower bone density is caused only by a lack of high-impact activity, or as a result of poor nutrition and excessive sweating in conjunction. It has been concluded, however, that an intervention may be necessary for the population of cyclists and possibly the runners as well. Reynolds mentions that previous studies have had contradictory results about whether or not running is high-impact enough to promote healthy bones, but the data shows that it is better for bone density than cycling.
By writing this article, Reynolds communicates new information that affects the lives of the readers of The New York Times. Her reporting is objective and states information from a variety of sources, not citing them directly, however. Although the science that Reynolds states has been significantly simplified, she avoids adding her thoughts in and keeps it to the point. In order to effectively communicate her main point, Reynolds begins by summarizing the main article in her first paragraph and expanding on it in the following paragraphs. After giving the summary, Reynolds gives key background information about the issue researched, and finally goes in depth into the research, outlining the procedure of the researchers. Finally, she discusses the implications of the research and even talks about conflicting studies and information, showing that she is not biased in her goal of educating the audience. The audience, readers of The New York Times, can then work to try and prevent this problem from occurring to themselves through Reynolds’ suggestions of participating in high-impact exercise and proper nutrition. It’s clear that readers of The New York Times are Reynolds’ intended audience, as they are going to be the first people to have access to the article. Overall, she does an effective job of informing readers that low-impact activities are detrimental to overall bone health.
References
Reynolds G. 2019 Jan 30. Can Low-Impact Sports Like Cycling Be Putting Your Bones at Risk? The New York times. [accessed 2019 Feb 12]. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/30/well/move/can-low-impact-sports-like-cycling-be-putting-your-bones-at-risk.html
