[Answered] Having proper nutrition is not an important component of physical fitness. Indicate whether the ...

This topic contains a solution. Click here to go to the answer

Author Question: Having proper nutrition is not an important component of physical fitness. Indicate whether the ... (Read 41 times)

james0929

Hero Member
Posts: 586

on: Aug 21, 2018

Having proper nutrition is not an important component of physical fitness.

Indicate whether the statement is true or false

Question 2

A paradoxical effect of the combination of low income and undernourishment is

A) blindness. B) Alzheimer's disease.
C) obesity. D) physical disability.

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question

Marked as best answer by a Subject Expert

wtf444

Sr. Member
Posts: 314

Reply #1 on: Aug 21, 2018

Answer to Question 1

FALSE

Answer to Question 2

C

james0929

Member
Posts: 586

Reply 2 on: Aug 21, 2018

Excellent

Liamb2179

Member
Posts: 365

Reply 3 on: Yesterday

Gracias!

« previous next »

Did you know?

Alcohol acts as a diuretic. Eight ounces of water is needed to metabolize just 1 ounce of alcohol.

Did you know?

Asthma is the most common chronic childhood disease in the world. Most children who develop asthma have symptoms before they are 5 years old.

Did you know?

All adverse reactions are commonly charted in red ink in the patient's record and usually are noted on the front of the chart. Failure to follow correct documentation procedures may result in malpractice lawsuits.

Did you know?

An identified risk factor for osteoporosis is the intake of excessive amounts of vitamin A. Dietary intake of approximately double the recommended daily amount of vitamin A, by women, has been shown to reduce bone mineral density and increase the chances for hip fractures compared with women who consumed the recommended daily amount (or less) of vitamin A.

Did you know?

Although the Roman numeral for the number 4 has always been taught to have been "IV," according to historians, the ancient Romans probably used "IIII" most of the time. This is partially backed up by the fact that early grandfather clocks displayed IIII for the number 4 instead of IV. Early clockmakers apparently thought that the IIII balanced out the VIII (used for the number 8) on the clock face and that it just looked better.